Three views on the Cameron response.

» Three views on the Cameron response.

Three views on the Cameron response.

Cameron was out of his depth and struggling in his reply to the Budget. One of two soundbites - that might have sounded okay yesterday - but no meat.

Submitted by Peter Welch on 21 March 2007 - 7:31pm

Don't take my word for it.

Here's the FT:

Mr Cameron had a good opening line: “One tax down, 99 up.” But the morning headlines – about Brown’s “Stalinism”, and polls that show Prime Minister Brown just about dead-heating with a flu epidemic – must have seemed a long way away. Mr Cameron lost the plot rapidly after that, making at least two or three Stalin jokes too many, and half the time turning to talk off-mike.

"James" left this comment on Liberal Review:

Cameron's response was absolutely cr*p. He plainly had no idea of the implications of what he had heard and had absolutely no idea whether to welcome the changes to income tax (which he unthinkingly called a "tax cut") or not. He just ploughed on with his prepared speech complete with his spin-doctors' Stalin-based "jokes". Lightweight - utterly, irredeemably lightweight.

Compare and contrast Ming. He got the point right away and made the point - this is a tax cut for those of us who earn above the higher rate threshold and get the full benefit of the 2p and a tax increase for those earning well below the top rate threshold who see gains from the 2p more than offset by the end of the 10p band. The poor subsidising the rich as Ming immediately pointed out.

I can see in my minds' eye now David Willetts patiently trying to explain the point to a bored and confused Cameron deep in the bowels of Conservative HQ. They could be there all night!

I thought it deserved more prominence!

On the other hand, the UK Daily Pundit is obviously smarting at Ming's attack on Cameron:

Ming Campbell, with his tongue firmly in his cheek, has just praised the "intellectual rigour" of David Cameron's chippy reply to the budget. Maybe that's why I enjoyed it. And if Cameron showed a bit more passion like that outside of the parliamentary arena I might just warm to him. One off's aren't enough.

Comments

On 22 March 2007 - 10:14am, Joe Otten wrote:

Of course as Nick Robinson reported it - the Conservatives later realised it wasn't a tax cut, and the Lib Dems agree.

Ming was obviously so eager to agree with the Tories that he had exposed the non-tax cut before they had noticed it.

On 22 March 2007 - 11:49am, James. (not verified) wrote:

Indeed - Cameron simply got the initial reaction wrong because he hadn't been listening properly and it passed over his head (no doubt he was too busy putting the final touches to some "hilarious" Punch and Judy quips about Stalinism).

The Conservatives have since put out the spin that the truth was hidden in the small print of Treasury documents and that in any even it all came in the last 30 seconds of Brown's speech - so Dave cannot be blamed. But that's utter balls. Both the elimination of the 10p rate and the realignment of the national insurance threshold were stated in clear terms in Brown's speech - and well before the end (only the 2p cut itself was sprung at the end).

Ming noticed it, Cameron utterly failed. Frankly, Cameron appears to be unable assimilate information quickly and by himself, and that's a major failing from somebody who wants to be PM.

On 22 March 2007 - 6:10pm, Peter Welch wrote:

There is another very good reactin tot he Budget on Hunting for witches - I have added it to the links section on the front page.

James (and Leo if you read this) would you drop me a line on Peter dot Pigeon at gmail dot com

Thanks

Peter

http://pigeon-post.blogspot.com/