Conference diary - George Osborne's speech
I was impressed by George Osborne's speech today.
It was interesting that the usual role of governments and oppositions has been reversed - it was the Prime Minister who was making vast numbers of unnfunded spending pledges when the governnment is already borrowing £6,000 a second and the Shadown Chancellor who was left to ask how he is going to pay for it.
Particularly powerful were his comments about government borrowing:
He pointed out that Britain is now spending more on the interest payments required to service government debt than on educating our children or defending our country.
Britain is drowning in a sea of debt, he said, and we cannot go on like this.
He also explained that one of the tough decisions which an incoming Conservative government would make concerned pensions. It has already been agreed with all-partyu support that the age at which people can claim a pension will eventually have to go up to 66: this is currently scheduled for 2026. However, to cope with the government's financial position and rising life expectancy, this change will need to be brought forward.
Life expectancy has already increased significantly since the Turner Report, on which the decision to increase retimrement age to 66 was based. It is clearly necessary to review the date when plans to increase the age at which the state pension can be claimed to 66 are implemented. Indeed, the Turner Report recommended such a review.
However, in order to avoid the situation where the retirement age suddenly went up by more than a year at a time for men or women, this could not be implemented until after the next parliament. In effect the earliest date that the retirement age for men could be increased to 66 is about 2016, and the earliest date for women would be about 2020.
The media got themselves into some slight confusion this morning about exactly what was being proposed and in particular they seem to have swallowed a suggestion from some Labour spin-doctor that it would mean the pension age for women jumping by three years at once. Both David Cameron and George Osborne were absolutely clear that this will not happen.
It was interesting that the usual role of governments and oppositions has been reversed - it was the Prime Minister who was making vast numbers of unnfunded spending pledges when the governnment is already borrowing £6,000 a second and the Shadown Chancellor who was left to ask how he is going to pay for it.
Particularly powerful were his comments about government borrowing:
He pointed out that Britain is now spending more on the interest payments required to service government debt than on educating our children or defending our country.
Britain is drowning in a sea of debt, he said, and we cannot go on like this.
He also explained that one of the tough decisions which an incoming Conservative government would make concerned pensions. It has already been agreed with all-partyu support that the age at which people can claim a pension will eventually have to go up to 66: this is currently scheduled for 2026. However, to cope with the government's financial position and rising life expectancy, this change will need to be brought forward.
Life expectancy has already increased significantly since the Turner Report, on which the decision to increase retimrement age to 66 was based. It is clearly necessary to review the date when plans to increase the age at which the state pension can be claimed to 66 are implemented. Indeed, the Turner Report recommended such a review.
However, in order to avoid the situation where the retirement age suddenly went up by more than a year at a time for men or women, this could not be implemented until after the next parliament. In effect the earliest date that the retirement age for men could be increased to 66 is about 2016, and the earliest date for women would be about 2020.
The media got themselves into some slight confusion this morning about exactly what was being proposed and in particular they seem to have swallowed a suggestion from some Labour spin-doctor that it would mean the pension age for women jumping by three years at once. Both David Cameron and George Osborne were absolutely clear that this will not happen.
Comments