Gordon Brown is beginning to realise his tax and spend party is over, says james bartholomew
|
 |
|
|
|
Spot the common factor in these three current news stories. First, Gordon Brown is known to have rejected the Turner report on pensions even before it is published on Wednesday, arguing that it is "unaffordable".
Second, he is reported to want to rip up the deal with the public sector unions allowing all those in public service to retire at 60.
Third, a million people wanting to claim welfare benefits have not been able to get through on the telephone because, so the unions claim, the number of staff at the Department of Work and Pensions has been slashed.
The common theme? In each case, Gordon Brown is trying to save money. He is against Turner because he wants to avoid boosting the state pension and then keeping it in line with earnings. Very expensive. He is against
|
|
 |
 |
|
| For the past five years he has let money flow through the NHS and state schools. Now, though, the Chancellor is getting ready to close the free bar |
|
|
|
the deal with the public sector unions because he does not want the huge liability for their pensions, which already exists, to keep on burgeoning. And he has also been behind the drive to save money by drastically cutting staff at Work and Pensions.
A fourth item brings these and other - apparently unconnected - stories together. According to a leak in yesterday's papers, Mr Brown intends, in his pre-budget report next week, to announce that spending will rise by only 1.9 per cent a year in real terms between 2008/09 and 2010/11 - far less than in recent years. It amounts to putting the brakes on hard.
For the past five years, Mr Brown has let spending flow. He has pumped money into the NHS (an extra seven per cent a year) and set aside plenty for state education (an extra 4.4 per cent a year). Now that is about to 
|
