No one with a passing interest in politics will ever forget Theresa May's "nothing has changed" rant during the last General Election. It was the cry of a desparate politician conducting a real time U-Turn and contradicting the publication of her own manifesto. I'm sure for many it was the moment that May lost her majority.I included the GIF above not just because it's fun, it is, but because you can see in the eyes the desperation of someone that has been publicly caught out and way off balance.
Her manifesto upset a huge swathe of her natural constituency and she was bleeding support. Something had to be done.
But how ridiculous it was to take to media and contradict a party document within hours of publication.
Come on you've all guessed where this is going...
The Growth Commission : Nothing has changed
I'm guessing that about 48 hours after the publication of the Wilson Report Sturgeon's eyes were about the same.
The SNP's carefully planned and tightly held coalition of nationalists was fracturing from left to right, suddenly many on the nationalist left were realising that they were indeed "useful idiots".
Campaigning for independence to deliver social justice is much harder to take when you realise you are arguing for public service cuts.
I can't emphasise enough the work done by Kevin Hague to expose this fact. Slowly but surely the troops started to notice, indeed some even admitted through gritted teeth that the Growth Commission was the validation of the Hague's tireless efforts on this matter.
Ian Macwhiter in the Herald (above) went so far as to call the Wilson Commission a call back to Osborne.
The sands were shifting, the report was printed and in the public domain. What else could Nicola Sturgeon do to plaster over the fracture?
She took to twitter and said "Nothing has changed"
Austerity? Not much call for it around here sir
In a series of tweets Sturgeon tried to steady the troops. The key tweet (above) stated that the Growth Commission was actually not about Austerity and that it recommends "above inflation spending growth each year".
The message went out, it's OK the Growth Commission actually says that public spending will always increase so this isn't Austerity and we'll still get the deficit down. Back to your barracks, we're still progressives after all.
The trouble is, as Kevin Hague has been pointing out again and again that the two positions are not necessarily compatible:
1 Wilson is arguing that the deficit will be closed through a fiscal rule that will mean spending will be 1% below GDP. (The fiscal rule)
2 The SNP are arguing that spending will always increase at least by inflation. (The spending recommendation)
For example if growth is 0.8% (as it has been) then following the fiscal rule spending must fall by 0.2%, but that contradicts the spending recommendation.
How can this be, how did no one notice this flat contradiction in the 'peer review' process.
Spinning out of control again
It's simple. The report doesn't say what the SNP have claimed about spending, the report is quite clear when it talks about spending increases. Spending will only increase at the trend rate of GDP growth that they have assumed (1.5%). Note this typical passage in 3.187:
Each time the increases in public spending above inflation are nothing more than a consequence of the assumptions they have used, it's not a hard and fast rule. Indeed in the report it's not a rule at all. It is a recommendation (as Sturgeon said) but it's not a rule in any way shape or form.
So there we have it. Sturgeon took to social media to try to "do a May" and rewrite the policy and hope no one would bother to go and check. Sorry Nicola we did.
The on air rewrite
Had it all been left there then it might have all ended up with a petty debate over the word "recommends". Trouble is the fracture was so severe that the SNP were forced to go further and actually rewrite the rule 'live on air'.
To clarify, using the terms above that Wilson, Forbes and Sturgeon are arguing - if the spending recommendation had been applied then austerity would not have occurred. This has all been covered in tremendous detail by Kevin Hague.
To clarify, using the terms above, the Wilson, Forbes and Sturgeon are arguing that if The spending recommendation had applied then Austerity would not have occurred.
The trouble is to achieve that then the fiscal rule would have been abandoned.
Therefore it's clear that the SNP have rewritten the Growth Commission report. They have literally switched the positions of the rule and the recommendation.
Suddenly the rule seems to be be real increases in spending and the recommendation is 1% below GDP growth.
Rewriting your manifesto after a few months work is embarrassing, but rewriting a 2 year million pound document after 48 hours and effectively dumping it's central 'peer reviewed' recommendation is beyond incredible.
Nothing has changed... the SNP will still get away with it.
No comments:
Post a Comment