28/11/2019
The Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS) have criticised Labour and the Conservatives, saying that their election manifestos were not credible.
Paul Johnson, Director of the IFS, said that the Tories are highly likely to have to spend more than shown in their manifest and that the Labour Party would be unable to deliver its spending increases as it has promised. He also said that both parties were being dishonest.
The Liberal Democrats' manifesto requires lower levels of borrowing than either Labour or the Conservatives. However, their proposals would normally be seen as 'radical'.
The Liberal Democrats have also said that there has to be a cost to their bold plans; a 1% increase in all income tax rates.
So, the IFS have deemed the main two parties to be misleading the electorate, a charge they are not levelling at the other parties.
According to Paul Johnson, spending on public services apart from healthcare would still be 14% lower by 2023/24 than it was in 2010/11, under the plans outlined in the Conservative manifesto. However, they are continuing to pretend that tax rises will never be needed to secure decent public services and Mr Johnson said that their pledge not to raise income tax, national insurance or VAT over the next five years was 'ill-advised'. He further said that, "It is highly likely that the Conservatives would end up spending more than their manifesto implies, and thus taxing or borrowing more."
Looking at Labour's manifesto, Mr Johnson said it was "highly likely" they would need to raise taxes beyond what it is proposing to pay for the promised £80bn a year in extra spending. He also said Labour's claims their plans would see taxes rise for only the richest 5% of taxpayers was clearly untrue. Labour's plans to scrap a tax break for married couples and change taxes on company dividends will affect people who aren't in that upper earnings bracket.
The IFS also stressed that the party's planned rise in corporation tax would be passed on to workers in the form of lower wages, and to consumers in the form of higher prices. Mr Johnson explained, "In reality, a change in the scale and the scope of the state that they propose would require more broad-based tax increases at some point." He also said Labour's manifesto pledge to abolish poverty for people in work over the next five years was "not achievable", and a plan to scrap the universal credit benefits payment scheme would be "expensive, disruptive and unnecessary".
So, what should we take from the IFS statements?
Quite honestly, both Labour and the Conservatives are continuing to knowingly and deliberately mislead the British electorate. They will carry on with the lies, because they know many people will simply trust them; or more significantly they will believe the biased media outlets which are distributing misinformation out more abundantly than wedding guests throwing confetti (or rice) towards the bride and groom on a sunny Saturday in August.
Neither party can be trusted to be honest.
It seems, to me at least, that all of the other mainstream parties are being open and truthful about their policies; you may agree or disagree with their message, but they have a clear and honest message.
Many people are criticising the Liberal Democrats for two main things; the fact that they did not deliver on their promise to get rid of university fees and are proposing to cancel Brexit if they win a majority in the December 12th general election.
University fees - the Liberal Democrats, with Nick Clegg as leader, were the junior partner in the 2010-2015 coalition government. Saying that they betrayed their voters by failing to implement their manifest pledge on tuition fees is extremely disingenuous, when they were not the ones welding power.
Revoking Article 50 - Jo Swinson and her colleagues have faced accusations of being undemocratic by declaring that they would revoke article 50 if they are returned as the governing party and Jo Swinson becomes Prime Minister. They ignore the fact that for this to happen would require a monumental swing from Labour and the Conservatives towards a party that has never led a government. The last Liberal government ended in 1923, when the last December general election in the UK saw the appointment of the first ever Labour government. If the news on the morning of 13th December was that Jo Swinson was to be our new Prime Minister, surely it would be evidence that the British electorate was showing that the 'will of the people' was to remain in the EU.
Why not join those of us that want a fresh approach to politics?
Vote for one of the pro-Remain parties; one of the parties that isn't focused on lies and disinformation.
Comments