The Autumn Statement: what the press says about Lib Dem influence

We are hearing many rumours about the climb-downs to be expected in Osborne’s Autumn Statement, which is due tomorrow, and how the Liberal Democrats are positioning themselves.

In the Guardian we learn the welcome news: George Osborne set to drop plan to end housing benefit for under-25s. “Lib Dems revolt against David Cameron’s ‘unjust’ move in runup to chancellor’s autumn statement”

The Guardian also devotes a whole article to Matthew Oakeshott’s comments: Lib Dems urge Nick Clegg to stand up to Tories over spending plans. He said “he wanted Clegg to show the same vigour and forthrightness as he had demonstrated over his response to the Leveson report.”

Elsewhere in the same paper, Patrick Wintour previewed the Autumn Statement under the headline: George Osborne prepares for climbdown on missed fiscal targets. “Chancellor must admit he cannot meet second target of reducing debt as proportion of national income by end of parliament”. He then goes on to quote from a statement from the Social Liberal Forum:

The Social Liberal Forum would not support a Government that takes regressive spending decisions, on the welfare budget in particular, that will go beyond the term of this Parliament. … If the state of the economy leaves the Coalition with a choice between investing in future growth by easing the deficit reduction programme and cutting support to the most vulnerable people in society, it can only choose the former.

The Social Liberal Forum crops up  again in the Huffington Post which claims: Nick Clegg Under Pressure From Lib Dems To Resist Benefit Cuts (which you must go to if only to check out the photo of Nick Clegg holding Osborne in an arm lock). Prateek Buch, SLF Director, is quoted as saying that the Social Liberal Forum was keeping Lib Dem ministers “aware of feelings in the party” in an attempt to win the “battle” against benefit cuts with just two days to go until the statement.

In the Independent quotes a letter from some 50 charities under the headline: Cutting benefits to poorest ‘a tragedy’, then goes on to say “Liberal Democrat sources said they believed that they had negotiated a “balanced package” which would be seen as fair.”

Even the Mail has a quote that sounds pretty authentic:

Osborne wants to demonstrate that fairness means both the rich paying their fair share and ending ‘the something-for-nothing’ culture.

The Liberal Democrats take a different approach. Their concern is, as one of them puts it, to prove that ‘when we ask people to tighten their belts, the people we begin with are those with the biggest waistbands’.

 

* Mary Reid is the Tuesday Editor on Lib Dem Voice.

Read more by .
This entry was posted in News.
Bookmark the web address for this page or use the short url http://ldv.org.uk/31939 for Twitter and emails.

One Comment

Post a Comment

Lib Dem Voice welcomes comments from everyone but we ask you to be polite, to be on topic and to be who you say you are. You can read our comments policy in full here. Please respect it and all readers of the site.

If you are a member of the party, you can have the Lib Dem Logo appear next to your comments to show this. You must be registered for our forum and can then login on this public site with the same username and password.

Your email is never published. Required fields are marked *

*
*
Please complete the name of this site, Liberal Democrat ...?




Recent Comments

  • User AvatarTim Oliver 30th Jul - 8:04pm
    Green Voter - you seem to be alarmed to discover that companies can go bankrupt when they run out of cash. What would you suggest...
  • User AvatarEnerglyn Churchill 30th Jul - 8:03pm
    I also recently wrote about so-called 'intergenerational theft' and made reference to Vince's 'politicians are scared of pensioners' quip. Whilst I don't resent those older...
  • User AvatarGreen Voter 30th Jul - 7:54pm
    @Simon My point was simply that companies can go under, leaving others to pay the environmental cost. I do not see that the UK fracking...
  • User AvatarRichard Wingfield 30th Jul - 7:50pm
    The real question, as many here have pointed out, is who should have the final say on questions of human rights: judges or Parliament? There...
  • User AvatarPaul in Wokingham 30th Jul - 7:50pm
    @Nich Starling - perhaps I misunderstand something in your comment, or perhaps the rules have changed, but the 2002 World Cup was a joint bid...
  • User AvatarSimon 30th Jul - 7:28pm
    @greenvoter The Freedom Industries spill in the US had nothing to do with fracking. http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_Elk_River_chemical_spill