Well, someone's telling porkies? If the cuts are really necessary just to balance the books and not ideological then why don't the ConDems promise to reverse at least some of the cuts when (if) the "good times return"?
Question to Tory blogger Iain Dale on Stephen Nolan Radio show (22 Oct:)"If these cuts are not ideological? why will the Coalition not state that when the economy improves, they will put the money cut back into public services?"
Answer: "That's a given".
Daily Bile: "Yesterday Mr Cameron suggested cuts may become permanent when asked to pledge spending would be reinstated when finances recovered. He said: ‘I think we should try to avoid that approach.’
Guardian (1.44pm 3 Aug)"Cameron has been asked a question about fire service cuts. A woman is worried because she says the local fire brigade had already suffered cuts, and now the government has plans for more. She cites casualties of the cuts and asks Cameron whether, once the austere times are over, the government will review the cuts it imposed and, where necessary, reinstate some of the resources that have been withdrawn. Cameron says this isn't the way he sees it. He says it's going to be tough to implement cuts, but he thinks there is scope to find more efficient and cost-effective ways to deliver services, notably back-office functions. He seems to be confident that there will be no going back..."
The real reason: "It's about ideology, stupid"
Hat-tip Col. Roi
|
---|