The BBC reports:
Nick Clegg has sought to calm fears over the impact of spending cuts, insisting they will be spread over four years and not implemented immediately.
The deputy prime minister told the BBC he understood “people’s anxieties” about October’s spending review, likely to see departmental budgets cut by 25%.
But it was wrong to say a “Sword of Damocles” would fall overnight and cuts would be spread out until 2015.
He said extra financial support would be available to vulnerable areas.
You can listen to Nick’s interview with John Humphrys on BBC Radio 4’s Today Programme here.
If you’re lucky, and listen very carefully, you’ll be able to catch the occasional complete sentence inbetween Mr Humphrys’ interruptions.
18 Comments
so as a nurse at nhs direct does my job goes now or in 4 years ?
Someone needs to have the balls to take Humphreys on; perhaps asking whether he’s paid per word, if he has a question to which he actually wants to hear an answer, or what he feels it adds to the debate or achieves in the public interest to have government ministers hectored and unable to put their point across?
I thought that Nick Clegg did pretty well. If I remember correctly, it got to a point where John Humphrys grumpily asked whether he could now ask his next question….
Nick Clegg got a few reasonable points across, which is almost more than you can reasonably expect from a ten-past-eight interview with John Humphrys!
“But it was wrong to say a “Sword of Damocles” would fall overnight and cuts would be spread out until 2015.”
Surely the whole point of the story of Damocles was that the sword didn’t fall, it hung over his head!
Can anyone explain why when talking about tackling the deficit, the coalition very rarely mention anything of great significance, to do with a growth?
I notice even the Tory-supporting Sunday Telegraph was sounding anxious at the weekend over the prospects for growth and the need for a Plan B. With the constant drumbeat of threats about massive job losses, smaller pensions, axed benefits etc, how on earth does the coalition expect any recovery of consumer confidence? Wasn’t it Keynes who referred to the “paradox of thrift”, whereby individuals, businesses and governments all stop spending money, for perfectly rational reasons, the result being even deeper recession?
and meanwhile in the real world……
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-humber-11244219
paulbee
Of course, under Labour no company ever had to announce redundancies ………
I know libdems don’t really wan’t this but you have tied yourself to a bunch of right wing lunatics peddling toytown Thatcherite economics. Clegg was trying to blame the coming economic disaster on John Humphries. There is no plan B, the North especially will be devastated (again). Some of you seem to be burying your heads in the sand.
And look what George Osborne announces after Nick has done his softening up act. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11250639
Is it really credible to believe that Nick wasn’t aware that this announcement was coming – or has he now become a true believer.
All I can say if there are still any LibDems who believ they are being fair and progressive could you now be unfair and regressive from now onwards. LibDems used to talk about standing up to our American allies as being the sign of a proper partnership – could I suggest that they might wish to demonstrate something of the same attitude to their current partners.
I’ve watched the clip and read the article; what do you think the proposal is exactly?
Humphrys really destroyed the interview; he was carried away by his wish to impose his own views.
Nick hardly got to finish a sentence and sometimes both were talking at the same time so you couldn’t hear a thing!
You could call it the Humphrys Lecture rather than the Nick Clegg interview.
Interesting to read James Forsyth over at the Speccie Coffee House blog, commenting on JH’s thesis on deficits.
Elizabeth
Osbourne’s comments are deeply worrying. I feel there will be many within the Lib Dems getting increasingly twitchy about the rhetoric used. In fact some will be downright angry. This cannot go on without dissent.
Osbornes comments are bordering on the equivilent of homophobia and racism regarding his prejudice and contempt for the unemployed.
@ Mark Pack we were debating in another forum whether the coalition policies will are going down well with party members. How do you think party members will react to this ?
Stating that many unemployed are taking lifestyle choices is the polite way of calling them theiving feckliss scum which is porbibly what Osbourn wants to say. If Clegg and our other ministers do not hit this one on the head before the details come (Workfare ?? ) they should be deeply ashamed of themselves. Somehow I am losing faith that they will and sometimes think that some of our ministers actually agree with these vindictive policies (just a feeling due to their lack of actions at this stage so dont cite me guys).
Im all this farscial neo com debate has nobody remembered that unemployment is so BECAUSE there are very few jobs !!!
All JSA claimants are not created equal; having worked in Welfare to Work I recall a number of occasions where individuals who ‘had been seeking work for years, if not decades’ told me they ‘did not want a job’, ‘thought the state should pay for them as they were British’ or as frequently ‘that they were already working but didn’t want to declare it and pay taxes’.
There are people who are temporarily out of work and eager to get back to it; those who lack skills, have prohibitive circumstances, or who are arguably unemployable; but I don’t think they are who Osborne is talking about.
Lol. It really seems as though you truly are trying to build a Alice In Wonderland world for yourself.
Nick Clegg is a professional communicator: he know all the tricks. One of these is to talk quickly and use a great many words.If he does this he need not give specific answers and he fields fewer questions The interviewer has a problem with this. Viewers want him to be critical and persist. If he just listens to the flow our questions will not be answered or asked at all! Inerviewers have got wise to Nick’s techniques and it will becone progressively more difficult for him – to say nothing of arguing a bad case which he does rather well. All this objectivity is very tiring.
@Andrew
I am fairly sure Osbourne does not cares about or realises the difference. If he did he would not have cut housing benefit for those who had been unemployed over a year regardless of circumstance. The only time to address the one or two workshy that really exist is in a time of near FULL employment as they will otheriwse simply be too dificult to employ.
Lets face it who would choose to live in poverty all their lives if they thought they could really avoid it . Only people that think the unemployed are somehow inferior and unstable could really believe this.
The one interesting thing from the coalition taken at face value is Ian Duncans Smiths belated realisation that those returning to work are taxed at a rat to make sure its not worth their while. If I hear correctly Osborne is trying to stamp on any ideas to rectify this. If he does he is surely beneath contempt.