UK

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 6° London Hi 9°C / Lo 6°C

Osborne: Tories carry torch of progressive politics

By David Hughes, Press Association

The shadow chancellor George Osborne claimed today the Conservatives were the progressive and modernising force in British politics and warned Labour's policies would lead to cuts in frontline public services.

Mr Osborne said Gordon Brown was a "roadblock to reform" and called for sweeping changes to public services to prevent deep cuts as a result of ever-tighter budgets.

He highlighted measures such as the open primary system, which was used to select the Tory candidate in Totnes, and the greater use of technology to help citizens access official information as examples of the party's radical reforms.

In a keynote speech to the Demos think-tank, he also delivered a veiled rebuke to right-wingers in his own party who want to see the leadership abandon key parts of its reformist agenda in order to reduce public spending.

Mr Osborne said: "The torch of progressive politics has been passed to a new generation of politicians - and those politicians are Conservatives.

"By pursuing a course of illiberalism, centralisation, fiscal incontinence and opposition to meaningful public service reform, the current leadership of the Labour Party has abandoned the field of progressive politics.

"In its place, the modern Conservative Party is now the dominant progressive force in British politics.

"Whether it is pioneering open primaries to select our parliamentary candidates, or using new technology to give the public power through access to government information, or our commitment to a radical localisation of power, we are the ones setting the progressive pace in politics."

He warned that unless there was fundamental reform in health and education, budget constraints would mean real cuts in services.

"If we don't reform public services like health and education and make the money that is available go further, the alternative is deep cuts to the frontline services that we need to compete and deliver the dream of a fairer society.

"Frontline cuts not progressive reform - that is the course that the current Labour leadership offer."

On the NHS, Mr Osborne said the Tories would bring productivity gains through "diversity of provision" and payment by results.

Turning to education, Mr Osborne predicted that the "mini baby boom" in the UK, which has seen a 14% increase in the number of births between 2003 and 2008, would mean cuts of up to £800 in spending per pupil under Labour's current system.

"We have to face up to the consequences of what happens when a mini baby boom hits an unreformed education system at a time when money is tight.

"Without reforms to get more of the education budget to the front line and reforms to make that money go further once it gets there, there will be cuts in the classroom," he warned.

In an apparent reference to hardline Tories who have questioned whether the leadership should "roll back" its ambitions in response to deteriorating public finances, Mr Osborne said: "Some now say that the economic problems facing the country, and in particular the ballooning budget deficit, mean that the Conservative Party must put our interest in public service reform, localism and environmental improvement on the back burner.

"They say that the progressive priorities that motivated the Conservative Party in the first couple of years of David Cameron's leadership are luxuries that cannot be afforded in an age of austerity.

"I couldn't disagree more strongly. Indeed, I would argue that our commitment to fiscal responsibility in the face of mounting national debt is not at odds with progressive politics, but fundamentally aligned to it."

Health Secretary Andy Burnham said Mr Osborne's speech was "vacuous" and designed to cover up Conservative plans for "deep, wide and immediate cuts to public services".

He said: "The Conservatives can't get away from the fact they would cut £5 billion from public services right now. George Osborne needs to explain what is progressive about his priority for a £200,000 tax give-away to a few thousand of the richest estates.

"And why he's willing to cut public services to pay for his 'queue' of tax cuts for the highest earners.

"George Osborne can't claim the mantle of reform when the Tories want to drop guarantees for patients on NHS waiting times, oppose tough measures on welfare reform and would reverse all the recent progress on making GPs open at times to suit patients."

Business Secretary Lord Mandelson told BBC News: "I think my old friend George Osborne is involved in a bit of political cross-dressing here and I don't think it's going to fool anyone."

Liberal Democrat leader Nick Clegg's chief of staff Danny Alexander said: "It's not clear if George Osborne developed his understanding of the word progressive with his chums in the Bullingdon Club or on the deck of Oleg Deripaska's yacht, but it seems he has misunderstood the concept.

"A progressive party would not cut taxes for multi-millionaires, stand in the way of reforming Parliament or side with bigots, homophobes and climate change deniers in Europe."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

yep! - that's why
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 05:08 pm (UTC)
they consigned Davis, the only one among them displaying principles instead of the toff's slipperiness, to a back row at the trough
Progressive party who want to still torture wildlife
[info]frigalo wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 06:24 pm (UTC)
Well said Mr Alexander. Nor would a "progressive party" hark back to the Tally ho! days of Tory toffs chasing a terrified animal until it was exhausted and then watch it being to torn to pieces by dozens of starving dogs. If George Osborne and Mr Cameron intend to spend valuable time and energy in Parliament pandering to such nasty, perverted bullies, it will show them in their true light - the very cruel and nasty party of old.
We don't want progress.
[info]living_fossil wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 06:24 pm (UTC)
It's being trendy and progressive that got us in this trouble to start with. A progressive conservative party sounds like a fairly lethal oxymoron to me. Gawd only knows what'll happen once the public's bitten the next worm-infested apple having dumped the red one.
progressive?
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 06:26 pm (UTC)
i'm not frightfully sure i know what progressive means in this context

when i'm skint i don't spend ANY money and for why?... because i don't have any


isn't it time for Gobbo and co to say sorry folks, we're borasic, broke wiped out, so no more benefits, wars , pensions and god knows what else till we've saved up some dosh

it's not as if we don't all know that
Re: progressive?
[info]living_fossil wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 06:49 pm (UTC)
The rich have some money let's set progressive tories on the traditionalists and extract the difference with some leverage from the middle ranks in the army?
Re: progressive?
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 06:54 pm (UTC)
depends on what you call rich i suppose but there ain't many of them left
Gobbo has bankrupted the whole damned country
Re: progressive?
[info]living_fossil wrote:
Wednesday, 12 August 2009 at 08:11 am (UTC)
Whatever remains of wealth will be at the top so we might as well take that. Use it to begin again. It's called being progressive like the man says. We need to get rid of those who are stopping wealth creation - the fag-ends of traditionalism who won't budge should be run under with progress. Stop going on about yesterdays battle. Gordons finished. Labours finished. The Tories are next and then we can have something progressive & new. Maybe a wealth generating country in place of a wealth absorbing one? This ain't a battle between classes rather it is a battle between morals.
Re: progressive?
[info]vhawk1951 wrote:
Wednesday, 12 August 2009 at 10:53 am (UTC)
i'm a traditionalist and i don't even like the idea of progressive-it only means go forward but into what? and why?- the old ways were and are best harrumph!! :)
Whie the diagnosis of New Labour's about right as far at it goes ...
[info]john_b_ellis wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 06:37 pm (UTC)
... I just can't take Mr Osborne's main thesis seriously - largely because I'm sure his party won't, and, in his heart of hearts, I can't think that he does either. This is just a blather of windy rhetoric, long on words and short on reality.

Wasn't it the sainted Mrs T who started the most recent process of drawing power to the centre which New Labour has continued. There wouldn't even have been Welsh and Scottish devolution if the Labour party hadn't been so tied to it in the pre-Blair/Brown/Mandelson era that there was no escape. But the Tories opposed it to the very end.

Tories embracing localism and devolving power from the centre - nah, just doesn't ring true ...
'sweeping changes to public services'
[info]cronyblatcher wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 07:03 pm (UTC)
like Channel 4 'news' (just had it on as background noise while doing a boring little job) - truckloads of tax money spent on expensive acres of of comment about the death of "baby p", but nil comment at all about the deaths of these babies : http://www.geocities.com/cronyblatcher/ - needless to say there also a peep from the err... "progressive" HM 'opposition'

Shut up Osborne and pay your £55,000 capital gains tax
[info]robertclondon wrote:
Tuesday, 11 August 2009 at 09:37 pm (UTC)
There, I've said it.
Progressive?
[info]lkdamo wrote:
Wednesday, 12 August 2009 at 03:01 am (UTC)
A progressive party would not join up with the far right in Europe end of story.
I'd like to hear the argument against that.
Idiot!
OSBORNE IS RIGHT:
[info]bgarvie wrote:
Wednesday, 12 August 2009 at 05:08 am (UTC)
There is much talk about 'toffs'. This is absolute rubbish. Look at Lord muck Mandleson, Lord Sugar, a couple of unelected politicians brought in to service the socialist agenda of a dying Government. I wouldn't employ them to clean my shoes. There isn't one good idea between them and the other coterie of Labour's champagne socialists. This country is in dire need of a quick change of Government with progressive, positive ideas. It is going to take 60 years of higher taxation to sort out the utter financial disaster this Government has created.
Progresive Conservatism
[info]billedmunds wrote:
Wednesday, 12 August 2009 at 02:49 pm (UTC)
How can anybody who has spoken in favour of flat-rate income tax or increasing VAT rather than income tax be described as progressive? It seems Mr Osborne is in favour of heavy taxes on the majority while the richest and smallest minority pay less tax and amass more savings or possessions.
The 'Progressive' Tories
[info]6259mike wrote:
Thursday, 13 August 2009 at 10:30 am (UTC)
It's easy to say anything in opposition. We can all look good when we don't have to prove anything. I am long in the tooth about these sorts of statements and promises. Making such statements without opportunity makes them virtually worthless. Doing them when the oppotunity arises is a completely different 'ball game'. How can the words 'Conservative' and 'Progressive' be bedfellows? They mean different things.

Most popular in UK News



Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date