Right-wingers respond: the IFS are socialists!


by Sunny Hundal    
3:11 pm - August 25th 2010

Tweet       Share on Tumblr

The Conservative response to the IFS report today has gone from the hilarious to the absurd.

First, Paul Goodman at ConservativeHome:

After all, this a Coalition Government, not a purely Conservative one. The junior partner is vulnerable, with its poll ratings plummeting and a testing party conference looming. The Liberal Democrats have bet the farm on “fairness”. Nick Clegg has insisted that the budget was fair, and Vince Cable has elevated “fairness” to the test of whether he’ll support the Coalition.

True, but I distinctly recall a Chancellor, whose name escapes me, calling the budget “progressive”. Remember that? Why isn’t it OK to challenge that mischaracterisation?

Then ConHome deputy editor Jonathan Isaby pitched in – this is all Labour’s fault and their dastardly “equality” legislation!

Then Tim Montgomerie threw in his 2 pence, saying that perhaps what Tories needed to do was just re-define what “fairness” actually means:

In an article for The Guardian’s Comment is free I make the case that the Coalition’s key message should be that the route out of poverty is (1) a good education, (2) paid-work and a (3) strong family AND crucially we are not laissez-faire but believe that government has a role in helping people achieve those things.

He goes on to blame Gordon Brown because he “discouraged low-income couples from living together”.

He may want to recall Cameron himself admitting:

Basically I think a strong society benefits from having strong families and I think marriage is a good institution. Of course, you know, nobody gets married for money and nobody stays married for money.

This is all getting very confusing, policy wise. How exactly did Labour “discourage” low income couples from living together?

But the best response to the IFS comes from former TaxPayers’ Alliance employee Mark Wallace: Time for the IFS to come clean – they swing to the Left

What is odd, though, is that the Institute for Fiscal Studies have become Britain’s leading cheerleader for the idea that progressive=good, regressive=bad, promoting the concept that particular types of economic policy are politically better than others.

The IFS’ pitch and reputation is that it is both non-partisan and politically unbiased – that it does not prefer one set of political ideas over another, but it just wants the sums to add up. As they say on their website, “our most cherished asset is a hard-won reputation for objectivity and impartiality”. Given that this status imparts such huge weight to their reports, particularly within the BBC, it is bizarre and misguided that they are increasingly moving beyond bean-counting and into flag-waving.

Wait? The IFS say something that doesn’t agree with us? They must be socialists!

As someone beneath Wallace’s blog post points out: “If you think it’s a fiction that progressive=good and regressive=bad, why does it matter to you that the IFS identified the budget as regressive?”

Quite.

   Tweet   Share on Tumblr   submit to reddit  


About the author
Sunny Hundal is editor of LC. Also: on Twitter, at Pickled Politics and Guardian CIF.
· Other posts by


Story Filed Under: News


Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.


Reader comments


1. Sally

Always fun to see the right wing lie.

It is almost every day.

The rich tax payers alliance would no all about flag waving.

2. Steve M

The tide is turning against the right wing mentality and they sense it.

3. Tim Fenton

Even so soon after the General Election, the Tory part of the blogosphere is having difficulty with anything critical of their side. Just think how Montgomerie, Isaby and co will cope – or not – when the solids really hit the fan.

As for the former Big Cheese of the so-called Taxpayers’ Alliance (representing less than one tenth of one per cent of all taxpayers, and still no full accounts or list of donors), and his pisspoor new blog PlonkFartWally dot com, the least said the better.

4. cjcjc

Of course lefties never disparaged the IFS as “right wing” did they – oh no, heaven forfend!

But I agree, the response has been pathetic.

5. Tim Worstall

I really don’t get what everyone is arguing about.

Well, yes, OK, I get you guys laughing and pointing fingers and I get Osborne et al being very coy and defensive about having called it all progressive.

But as to the actual effects of the budget changes.

They’re cutting welfare and they’re cutting taxes. Of course the effects of this will be concentrated at two ends: those one benefits who don’t pay much or anything in taxes and those at the other end who pay most of the taxes and don’t get much in benefits.

Seriously, who can be surprised if those on benefits lose when benefits are cut and those paying taxes win when taxes are cut?

6. donpaskini

“Seriously, who can be surprised if those on benefits lose when benefits are cut and those paying taxes win when taxes are cut?”

The Liberal Democrats.

7. Sally

Funny how the rich tax payers alliance used to attack the Brown govt every week, now they want to play defence for this tory govt,

Can’t understand it, thought they were an idependent group……..Oh look over there…….. pig flying through the air.

8. Sally

Just to recap how this is all playing with those nice Lib Dems. Here is a selection from Liberal Voice today……………….

“maybe best to let the Tories defend their budget instead of pretending that it is ours. Collective responsibility does not extend beyond ministers to entire parties.”

“there’s no pretending this isn’t a largely Tory budget, but there *are* progressive measures in there – which very well may not be in there otherwise.”

“That was almost as pitiful a defence as mounted by the minister on Today this morning.”

“How is it that our party analysed the Tory budget before the election and realised that wholesale public sector job cuts would harm recovery, then after the election, suddenly that’s no longer true? “

“Are you suggesting that no matter what the Tories propose, Liberal Democrat MPs should support it? What happens if David Cameron was Joseph Stalin and wanted to send everyone to the Gulag?”

Cameron as Uncle Joe,, you can’t make it up.

9. Margin4eror

Ridiculous stuff really. The Tories even had the IFS audit their manifesto (so did the Lib Dems) to gain credibility as a fair and progressive manifesto. So apparently they trusted them then.

Of course the real problem for the tories was to use the term progressive. That is a term with quite clear meaning and is something that labour prioritise (a focus on improving the lot of the poorest, and redistributing through benefits, taxes and public spending to support that focus)

The Tories should have avoided using the term. The Lib Dems avoided using the term for the most part as it was something they simply don’t believe in. But the Tories failed to realise that by borrowing the language of the left they would open themselves up to that scrutiny.

Better off sticking to LibDem language about fairness – after all – fair could be that the rich work really hard and the poor are lazy, so it is fair to let the rich keep more of their money and leave the lazy poor with nothing.

which is what they both sort of believe.


Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Liberal Conspiracy

    Conservatives respond to report: The IFS are socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  2. sunny hundal

    Right-wingers respond to IFS report: they're socialists! Who cares about 'progressive'? http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  3. House Of Twits

    RT @sunny_hundal Right-wingers respond to IFS report: they're socialists! Who cares about 'progressive'? http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  4. Paul Williams

    RT @houseoftwits: RT @sunny_hundal Right-wingers respond to IFS report: they're socialists! Who cares about 'progressive'? http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  5. Ian Scarbro

    RT @libcon: Conservatives respond to report: The IFS are socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  6. Dave Howard

    Got to see the funny side: http://bit.ly/9vdRxZ No really. If I didn't laugh I'd slit my wrists!

  7. tony hatfield

    RT @sunny_hundal: Right-wingers respond to IFS report: they're socialists! Who cares about 'progressive'? http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  8. Greg Eden

    RT @sunny_hundal: Right-wingers respond to IFS report: they're socialists! Who cares about 'progressive'? http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  9. Sarah Stanbridge

    RT @sunny_hundal: Right-wingers respond to IFS report: they're socialists! Who cares about 'progressive'? http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  10. Ralph Ferrett

    RT @libcon: Conservatives respond to report: The IFS are socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1 > the old fox news maneuver.

  11. Graham Williamson

    Shorter Tim Montgomerie: we're not laissez-faire when we're trying to crush single parents. http://bit.ly/bp6dM1 (h/t @sunny_hundal)

  12. B Latif

    We're all #Communists now!
    RT @libcon: #Conservatives respond to report: The #IFS are #socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  13. tamsinchan

    RT @libcon: Conservatives respond to report: The IFS are socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  14. B Latif

    We're all #Communist now. What say you #Clegg?
    RT @libcon: #Conservatives respond to report: The #IFS are #socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  15. Melissa Nicole Harry

    RT @libcon: Conservatives respond to report: The IFS are socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  16. Pucci Dellanno

    RT @libcon: Conservatives respond to report: The IFS are socialists! http://bit.ly/bp6dM1

  17. Digital Chocolate sues Zynga over Mafia Wars name | lawyer

    [...] Right-wingers respond: the IFS are socialists! | Liberal Conspiracy [...]





Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.