But of a stupid question but .....

PCPhoto

apologies for the lack of knowledge or intellect involved in this question ....

but how can the government give a 4yr proposal for budgets to the EU when its fairly obvious* that they will not be in power when the next general election is held.

Does it mean that whomever is voted in next MUST complete the already agreed proposal or is there going to be room for adjustments.

*=personal opinion

The 4 year proposal is the necessary cuts that any future government must make to get our budget in line with the 3% of GDP limit set by Europe. Mind you that's still a hefty sum we'll be borrowing by the end but at least it's a step in the right direction.

There will of course be room for maneuver, but it will be more a case of "Shall we take another 500m from education or from health?".

Cookie_Monster

any government in the EU could fall tomorrow for whatever number of reasons. if they took the approach that a gov will always cease at a known (or unknown) date nothing would ever get signed off long term. Its easier and more sensible for all involved for all governments to sign off these long term strategies and simply change them suitable if the gov changes at some point.

and after all they are only proposals, with growth being nowhere near their suggested targets* must of it is rubbish anyway and will need to constantly change


*=personal opinion

fricatus

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

any government in the EU could fall tomorrow for whatever number of reasons.

Very true, but I think what the OP is driving at is that no matter what happens, this government has at most, two budgets left, so why should they be deciding the shape of the next four budgets?

Most commentators think the government won't survive much beyond the coming budget, if indeed it does get that far. It also has a historic level of unpopularity, and by all fair measures, it has mismanaged the economy in spectacular fashion. Hence it has little moral authority and should not be putting the next government in a straitjacket.

In my view, it's a fair enough point!

fricatus

fricatus wrote: »

Very true, but I think what the OP is driving at is that no matter what happens, this government has at most, two budgets left, so why should they be deciding the shape of the next four budgets?

Most commentators think the government won't survive much beyond the coming budget, if indeed it does get that far. It also has a historic level of unpopularity, and by all fair measures, it has mismanaged the economy in spectacular fashion. Hence it has little moral authority and should not be putting the next government in a straitjacket.

In my view, it's a fair enough point!

The straitjacket has already been applied. We need the cuts, a change of government won't magically change our dire financial situation. Despite what parties like Labour might say, they will have to cut just as much as FF or FG or even the SWP (God help us) would have to.