Labour hid ‘scorched earth’ debts

[Tony]

The reality often lies between the semantics though.

 

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/093d2b9e-62b6-11df-b1d1-00144feab49a,dwp_uuid=1ecc838e-849f-11dd-b148-0000779fd18c.html

 

Labour overrode officials to sign off spending

By Alex Barker and Jean Eaglesham

Published: May 18 2010 22:49 | Last updated: May 18 2010 22:49

 

Labour ministers overrode warnings from senior civil servants on 10 occasions during their final year in office, signing off billions of pounds of spending against formal advice from Whitehall.

 

The “letters of direction” from former cabinet ministers instructed senior officials to authorise spending – in spite of value for money concerns – on projects ranging from the car scrappage scheme to compensation for Icelandic trawlermen.

[Rupert_Baehr]

From the article quoted by Tony:

 

David Laws, Treasury chief secretary, is trawling Whitehall for other examples of potentially wasteful spending under a Treasury review of all decisions taken since January.

 

Former ministers have dismissed the exercise as a political show-trial to soften up public opinion for spending cuts. Alistair Darling, former chancellor, said blaming an outgoing administration was the “oldest trick in the book”.

 

What a pity it's limited to a 'Show trial'. It would be nice to see a bit of real accountability- with penalties for incompetence and dishonesty, if proven.

[Number Six]

The outgoing government deliberately structured contracts so they would cost money to cancel - they boasted of doing it with the pointless ID card scheme long before the election they knew they would lose, and knowing the Tories didn't want it. They called this process of putting punitive cancellation clauses in contracts they knew the next government would want to cancel "protecting the public purse" at the time

 

http://rothervalley.wordpress.com/2009/03/24/scrapping-id-cards-would-cost-40m-uk-politics-uk-the-independent/

[grookseo]

thaaaaank u dude

[Vague_Boy]

It's all coming out now:

 

Peter Mandelson on Brown: 'We were in a pit of debt. And we kept on digging'

 

Gordon Brown "repeatedly and often angrily" rejected Treasury growth forecasts, leading his chancellor, Alistair Darling, to complain that the prime minister was being "ludicrously over-optimistic" about future tax receipts.

 

As Brown tried to change the growth forecasts, Darling told him he was being "ludicrously over-optimistic, not only about growth prospects, but also about Britain's ability to support such a large and expanding deficit".

 

Darling's warnings precisely echo the critique made by the coalition government, and also show why Treasury officials urged the incoming government to set up an independent Office of Budget Responsibility to oversee growth forecasts.

 

The argument reappeared at the time of the pre-budget report in December 2009, when Brown said: "By talking about future tax and spending, we would be doing the Tories' jobs for them." Mandelson writes: "We were deep in a pit of debt and still digging."

 

LINK

 

Does anyone still wonder why I call him "Prudence McRuin"?

[I1L2T3]

It's all coming out now:

 

 

 

LINK

 

Does anyone still wonder why I call him "Prudence McRuin"?

 

It's well known that by end 2007 the deficit was much higher than expected because of lower than expected tax receipts (i.e. poor forecasting). Would it have been a problem if the banking crisis hadn't happened? Quite simply no it wouldn't have. The deficit was the same size as what Labour inherited from the Tories in 1997.

 

 

But the forecasting was poor and quite righly Labour should take responsibility for that. But the deficit as it stood on the eve of the banking crisis is not the root cause of the problems we have now.

[Tony]

There's an interesting chat with Mandelson on R4 right now. Apparently Brown was going to make massive financial changes (ie cuts) after the election too, and Darling was effectively beaten up by Brown to lie through his teeth about economic prospects.

 

NOW he tells us. If the Cabinet didn't have the spine to stand up to the bully then on fundamental issue while in power then why should we trust them in future? I get the feeling that they still haven't got it.

[ratrace]

 

 

 

Does anyone still wonder why I call him "Prudence McRuin"?

 

 

 

Not really, yawn!!!

[Rupert_Baehr]

... why should we trust them in future? I get the feeling that they still haven't got it.

 

That would've been a good question in 1997.

 

I expect that unfortunately Labour will get in again at some time in the future - and probably for the same reasons that they did in 1997.

[Tony]

probably for the same reasons that they did in 1997.

 

You are right of course. It's the inevitable conclusion of almost all governments regardless of hue. But the last lot need to work much harder. Blaming Brown simply isn't enough, they were all complicit in the lies, incompetence and deceptions. They need to recognise and underline their own part in their downfall. The rabble expects a bit of contrition from the executioners before they wield the axe on the condemned neck.