There are two new polls out tonight. Firstly YouGov’s daily poll for the Sun has topline figures of CON 37%, LAB 41%, LDEM 10%. This is something of a narrowing of the Labour lead, in the last week leads of 8 points or so were becoming pretty standard, but I’ll add my usual caveat about being cautious about any single poll that shows something useful: sure, it could be Labour’s lead falling in what will be the first poll taken since the hacking saga has (temporarily) fallen off the news agenda, but just as likely it’s an outlier and we’ll be back to bigger Labour leads tomorrow.

Tomorrow we’re due the GDP figures, so perhaps it’s also worth a look at the regular YouGov trackers on cuts in today’s tables. The broad picture remains as we’ve seen for much of this year – a majority of people (53%) think the cuts are being carried out too quickly (27% about right and 8% too slowly), 46% think they are too deep (27% about right and 10% too shallow), 48% think they are bad for the economy (36% think they are good). However, despite all this 57% of people think they are necessary, and people are still more likely to blame the last Labour government than the coalition.

Secondly we have the monthly ComRes telephone poll for the Indy. Topline figures with changes since the last ComRes phone poll are CON 34%(-2), LAB 40%(nc), LDEM 13%(+2), Others 13%(-2), so once again the Conservatives taking a small knock from the phone hacking saga.

The other questions are on the phone hacking saga. 65% agreed with a statement that the phone hacking scandal showed News Corp were not a fit and proper organisation to own part of BSkyB. There were also some questions asking if people viewed the party leaders more positively or negatively as a result of the phone hacking saga – these suggest that people view all three more negatively, but I’d suggest that tells us more about the deep uselessness of asking questions in this format! Proper tracker questions asked before and after the phone hacking saga reached its peak, asked by YouGov, MORI and ComRes, all show pretty conclusively that perceptions of Ed Miliband have increased substantially, even if respondents themselves don’t realise it!

UPDATE: There is also a new Angus Reid poll, their first since April (I thought they had faded away!). Topline figures with changes from April are CON 34%(+3), LAB 41%(-1), LDEM 10%(-1). The poll was conducted on Tuesday and Wednesday last week.


183 Responses to “New YouGov and ComRes polls”

1 2 3 4
  1. On the matter of BBC bias I would like to add a bit of balance and say it is right wing.

  2. @Alec

    I nearly choked on my cornflakes! 8-)

  3. @ BT
    Exactly as predictions then. Steady as she goes, not brilliant but VI neutral unless the leftwing BBC/media manage to spin it as a shock/disaster.
    ———————————————————————————-

    On VI – no-one expects a major change in VI. The far more importnat issue is the long-term effect. 15 months into this administration and growth over that period is already 1% lower than the predictions in May 2010.

    The big danger now is that this lost growth compounds over the next few years. That blows apart the deficit reduction plans just like it did in Japan’s Lost Decade.

    More seriously for the Tories, it also blows away their hope of being able to finance big tax cuts in the run-up to 2015.

    So it’s not about step changes in VI. It’s about long term trends. Osbourne’s plan was to take a hit on popularity up front but to reap the reward as we came strongly back into growth. The longer that strong recovery is put off, the greater the VI gap will be and the firmer it will become.

    My take is that he made a serious error of political judgement after the election in continuing the argument that deficit reduction was the be all and end all. That served the Tories well in defeating Labour, but they could have taken a more nuanced stance after the election. He could have downplayed the rhetoric and given himself room for manoeuvre. He could even have said that this was a result of the compromises that coalition brings. That is what an experienced politician would have done.

    Instead, Osbourne remained in Opposition mode still painting the argument as a binary Manichaean struggle. He didn’t seem to realise that he no longer had to win the argument. And moreover, he didn’t seem to realise that he was painting himself into a corner with his TINA approach.

    Now, with growth still not coming, what does he do? Sticking to plan is fraught with the risks outlined above. Modifying his stance give EB all the “We told you” ammunition he needs. Either way, the long term outlook for a recovery in Tory VI are not good.

  4. @BT.

    By the way, your “left-wing media” comment has just helped Q3 growth. I spat my tea out over my trousers when I read that and will now have to pay the dry cleaners.

  5. Mike N, Thanks for keeping the balance.

  6. So, to be clear over last 9 months GDP has ‘grown’ by just under 0.2%.

    Whereas the real growth seen in the first nione months of last yer can be attributed to the Lab gov policies, the shrinkage in growth can be laid firmly with the Cons.

    GO and other ministers have blemed just about everything (especuially Lab) and the Chancellor has proceeded on the basis that Plan A is the only way.

    How will this afefct VI I wonder?

  7. On BBC bias.

    Nick Robinson was the chairman of OUCA

  8. Personally, I find the BBC centre/right and ITV centre/left.

    It changes over time though. Under Blair, most of the media supported Labour – Murdoch liked Labour in those days. Now, most of the media is on Cameron’s side.

  9. The problem for the Conservatives is that most of the public think the cuts are too hard and too fast. They also think that they are out of touch with the ‘average person’.

    The problem for Labour is that most of the public blame them for our economic problems (and needing the cuts in the first place).

    It will be interesting to see which party is attributed with the most blame come 2015, and whether the public’s opinion changes over time.

    As for the coming days, it will be interesting to see if the 6% lead across all polls and 8% lead in Yougov changes. I will be watching tonight’s Yougov poll with interest; anything around 7-9% would suggest no change.

  10. Cap’n Scooby @ Joe James B,

    “It is still ‘the economy, stupid’. But the phone-hacking scandal has eroded the trust and benefit-of-the-doubt on which governments rely to get through tough times.”

    I can see why the political right want to say “Nothing to see here, move along now.” but there is no chance that the public will forget it, for there will be a steady flow of events and revelations for years to come. The criminal trials, other investigations compensation cases and commercial aspects are not going to come to fruition in the same week.

    What effect it has on the Conservatives chance of re-election depends on what they do. Business as usual or reluctant half measures will be received cynically. Failed attempts at cover-up will be worse.

    On the other hand, if DC takes the initiative for a robust approach which is also effective, it could improve his personal standing. Free market fundamentalists within his own party would complain.

    That sort of thing has been done before, and perhaps the “heir to Blair” will tackle head on the “conservative forces” in his own party and take “tough decisions”.

    If it does not include taking action against the banks, it would seem inconsistent and opportunistic. Internally in the party he can blame the LibDems.

    He’d also have to work on gravitas but I think he could manage that if he could escape from the PMQ slapstick performances.

  11. Robert C @Tingedfringe

    “It doesn’t matter that reality doesn’t match ideology, we just have to keep the faith.”

    …..

    “Blatantly counterfactual, I know, but ideology often does blind people to the facts.”

    Nonsense.

    Ideology ALWAYS blinds people to the facts. That’s its’ purpose, so that you don’t need to bother acquiring the facts.

    Facts are chiels that winna ding and downa be disputed.

  12. @Lefty Lampton – “Osborne remained in Opposition mode still painting the argument as a binary Manichaean struggle.”

    A perceptive take imo.

    I have commented on how the “Labour’s mess/fault” default explanation has even been deployed on these pages to counter the problems for Cameron wrt Coulson.

    Food inflation as well as energy cost (becoming more apparent 2011/2012) is contributing to the largest living standards drop in decades. A mountain to climb for Tory economic policy.

  13. @AmbivalentSupporter

    “Personally, I find the BBC centre/right and ITV centre/left. ”

    BBC= Unbiased, just giving the facts, with comments on views either side of politics. You can make the comment that certain journalists have certain political leanings, but overal there is a balance. I suppose it depends on whether you support the politician that is being grilled by Paxman for example. But I find that with Paxman, he is hard on most of them. I just think that with Paxman he dislikes most politicians as not many give straight answers or are not as intellectual as he is in his view.

    ITV= Is Tory views or ITN= Is Tory News. I find most of their output to be centre right. Tom Bradby the ITN polictical editor can be a bit of a toady to the government, appearing to report what they have said and give it more credence than alternative views. But on his wiki it says this. “Unusually for a political editor he views himself as apolitical, saying that he does not “have a coherent set of political views”

  14. @ BillyBob

    “Food inflation as well as energy cost (becoming more apparent 2011/2012) is contributing to the largest living standards drop in decades.”

    How are either of these to do with Coalition government (not Conservative) policy?

    Aren’t they to do with the end of a benign period of world commodity prices and the decline in the value of the pound?

  15. Offering a politically balanced view…..I think the 0.2% GDP figure is far from great, but it is certainly not a disaster either. It’s what most people, including economists, expected. I think Osborne and Cameron will at least be relieved that the economy did not contract like some economists predicted, even if it will pose some questions about the direction of future economic policy.

    Tories will spin it by saying:

    1) The economy has grown by 0.7% in the first six months of this year. After a brief blip in the 4th Q of 2010, the economy is now growing again, albeit slowly.
    2) If you adjust for one-off events, the second quarter had a GDP figure of 0.7%. If adjusted, this would mean that the economy has grown by 1.2% in the first six months of this year.

    Labour will spin it by saying:

    1) The economy has flatlined. It has barely grown in the past 9 months – just 0.2%. This is a result of government cuts and high inflation.
    2) Looking at typical history data, the economy should be growing much faster at this stage.

    Both are correct. Just shows how stats can be used by both sides to justify economic policy.

  16. @R Huckle,

    I actually find ITV has more of a left-wing bias. Perhaps, it’s just me? I remember when the GDP figure for the first Q of 2011 was reported; the BBC seemed to give it fairly positive headlines, whereas ITV reported it pretty negatively.

    Alistair Stewart was a former Labour correspondent. You can still clearly see his Labour leanings in his newsreading IMO.

  17. @Robert C

    It would be stating the obvious to say that Tory/Coalition policy will need to confront current world economic factors.

    On L/L’s point about “an experienced politician”, the Telegraph covered the brainstorming sessions Osborne held with extant former Tory chancellors prior to the CSR, in an attempt to make up for his percieved lack of expirience. The concensus was that these gentlemen regretted not going further, even Howe’s 1981 budget was considered timid by some.

    Coincidentally this kind of hindsight sentiment of former office holders chimed with the view expressed in Tony Blair’s much-read memoirs.

  18. @ Ambivalent.

    Fair comments on the spin, but that only affects VI this week/month.

    Whichever way you spin it, growth is currently far, far lower than was predicted as recently as 12 months ago. Unless that changes and changes rapidly, there will be a very serious long-term effect on VI that no amount of spin will be able to counter.

    I mentioned Osbourne’s (and Cameron’s) relative immaturity. Osbourne in particular seems to have wanted to model himself on TINA-era Thatcher which is no bad thing when playing to his home crowd of course.

    His problem is that we are in an utterly different political landscape to the one in the early 80s. Thatcher was able to alienate her opponents on the centre & left with TINA because the opponents were so split. As a result, she was able to win collosal majorities in 83 and 87 with vote share that would have led to huge defeats in any pre-mid-70s Election.

    We’re rapidly heading back to pre-schism politics now. It was obvious back in May 2010 that the LD’s support would melt like spring snow after joining the coalition. The centre-left vote is consequently much less split than it was in the 80s.

    The Tories therefore cannot rely on a centre-left schism to give them a free run at implementing unpopular policies. They have to win over some of the centre-Labour voters if they are to win in 2015.

    THAT was why Osbourne should have given himself a more nuanced stance immediately after the Election. He didn’t. He played the hardline instead. And he’ll suffer for it.

  19. I have just paid another visit here and find the storm caused by my earlier post quite bizarre/hilarious.

    I invite everybody to take another read of it, here it is:
    “Q2 0.2%

    Exactly as predictions then. Steady as she goes, not brilliant but VI neutral unless the leftwing BBC/media manage to spin it as a shock/disaster.”

    I did not say that the media is all leftwing.The reference to ‘The leftwing media’ by definition surely implies that there is rightwing media.

    Either the thought police are seriously busy today, or there is a very narrow understanding of the English language round here.

  20. I suspect it’s very hard for politicians to accept the facts. I was very impressed by Mrs Thatcher scrapping the nuclear power programme in the 1980’s when she took a look at the costs.

  21. Reading the posts by Tory supporters saying 0.2% growth is okay, frankly I am astonished.

    0.2% growth with other indicators looking bad e.g. construction at 0.5% (that’s half of one percent!) in the run up to hosting the Olympics – & some are saying 0.5% is good…

    Regardless of Party allegiance, we should all be able to agree: 0.2% is not good; it’s not even acceptable & it is well below the government’s own forecasts & targets.
    8-)

  22. @Leftylampton,

    I see problems for both the Tories and Labour.

    1) The drop in Lib support helps the Tories in many ways more than it does Labour. The problem for Labour is that most of the currently held Lib seats (via Lib collapse) would turn blue and not red. I remember a report by AW about a month ago suggesting as much.
    2) The problem for the Tories is trying to reach the magic 40%+ to get a majority. In recent years, they have found it difficult to get beyond the late 30s. It is by no means inconceivable that they could be in the 40s come 2015, but given recent polling history there is still a question mark over whether this is achievable IMO.
    3) Looking at a breakdown of Yougov voting intention (and taking the local elections) it seems that Labour is piling up votes in the north but failing to make significant inroads in the south (or London). This would make it much harder for Labour to get a majority in 2015.
    4) Conversely, the Tories seem to be maintaining significant support in the south (and London), but are losing support in the already Labour heartlands of Wales, Scotland and Northern England. This would make it difficult for the Tories to get a majority.

    I can foresee problems for both parties.

  23. @AmbivalentSupporter

    “Alistair Stewart was a former Labour correspondent. You can still clearly see his Labour leanings in his newsreading IMO.”

    I have the total opposite view, which must mean that he is straight down the middle in terms of perceived political bias.

  24. @Amber,

    I’d agree that 0.2% is very disappointing. It’s certainly not a disaster, but it’s certainly below what we’d want to be achieving at this stage.

    Labour’s real problem is that they went with the narrative that the Tories would ‘tip us back into a double dip recession’. As this has yet to happen, low growth figures are not necessarily interpreted by the (mainly) economically ignorant general public as being a disaster. It’s all about expectations in politics. After all, nearly half, according to Yougov, now believe that the economic situation will WORSEN in the next 12 months, meaning a probable double dip. So the public already don’t consider strong economic as at all likely.

  25. @ Amberstar

    “Regardless of Party allegiance, we should all be able to agree: 0.2% is not good; it’s not even acceptable & it is well below the government’s own forecasts & targets.”

    I think we’re all agreed that it’s not good. What we are not agreed about is:

    1) How much is it due to government policy and how much to factors beyond its control? e.g. existing consumer indebtedness, higher food and energy prices, tsunami effects etc.
    2) Whether there is any credible, soundly based alternative that actually stacks up in terms of concrete figures and policies.

    As a Lib Dem COALITION (NOT Tory, underscored twice) supporter, my difference with you lies on those two crucial questions.

  26. @R Huckle,

    Well, I guess generally speaking:-

    1) Centre/right voters are more likely to perceive a left-wing bias in the BBC and ITV.
    2) Centre/left voters are more likely to perceive a right-wing bias in the BBC and ITV.

    Personally, I find the BBC more right-wing (relatively speaking), and the ITV more left at the mo. That’s just me.

  27. @Robert C

    The main problem is that Osborne has made it politically impossible to say that the economy is being influenced more by global events than domestic policy. The entire “Blame Labour” strategy is based on denying that Global issues had more influence on the economy and deficit than government policy.

  28. @JayBlanc,

    I agree. Conversely, it is difficult for Labour to do the same in the face of external economic factors. We are part of a wider global network which caused the recession and which continues to suppress economic growth.

  29. @BT.
    0.2% is steady eh?

    Maybe in one quarter, sandwiched between stronger performances either side. But we actually have 0.2% growth in the last 9 months which is grim by any definition.

    Did you read Peter Jay’s piece in The Times yesterday, about how the “official” definition of a recession (two consecutive quarters of negative growth) was scribbled down on the back of a fag packet by LBJ’s adviser?

    With that background, we ought to accept that we are in de facto double-dip land. A place we haven’t been since the mid 70s. Trouble.

    By the way, I am the male me. I’m not sure that implies that somewhere there is a female me.

  30. BBC bias varies from program to channel. Radio 4 is right wing, Five Live very left. Newsnight seems to be right, Question Time left. Generally the Beeb is left wing, they are a largely unionised public sector group after all who oppose Tory reform.
    0.2% is disappointing – sadly the coalition is being very cautious as it observes our credit rating but is not being strong enough yet on the reforms they promised to help the private sector. But they will float on as no-one is listening to [snip… welcome, but read the comments policy! AW] Milliband and Balls.

  31. @LeftyLampton

    You said “…With that background, we ought to accept that we are in de facto double-dip land…”

    No, we are not. You can say that the growth is negligible, pathetic, nondescript or just plain tiny. But it is *not* a double-dip, and it is *not* negative growth. “Small but more than zero” is not the same as “less than zero”.

    You then said “…A place we haven’t been since the mid 70s. Trouble…”

    This is defensible. What we are experiencing (and some are predicting to continue) is closer to stagflation (negligible growth plus increasing inflation) than recession (negative growth).

    However, given the fact that ~4% inflation isn’t really that high, and we have a Mexican standoff in the housing market, I’d argue that we’re closer to Japan in the 00’s than Britain in the 70’s.

    Regards, Martyn.

  32. 1) How much is it due to government policy and how much to factors beyond its control? e.g. existing consumer indebtedness, higher food and energy prices, tsunami effects etc.
    —————————————————
    Too much snow – now too much sunshine. At least the chancellor knows how to give us a LOL :-) when the figures are bad. But the bond markets aren’t laughing. Were it not for the shenanigans in the US, failure to accurately forecast (lack of) growth would be putting Uk AAA status at risk. You can read about it in the Telegraph & FT.
    —————————————————
    2) Whether there is any credible, soundly based alternative that actually stacks up in terms of concrete figures and policies.
    —————————————————
    There was; & there’s growing consensus that the Darling plan struck the right balance in terms of tax, spend, growth, deficit reduction etc.
    8-)

  33. @Jayblanc

    If your government policy makes you more vulnerable to global problems by e.g. by basing all your growth/government revenue on financial services and consumer spending, which is what the previous government did, then it is quite right to blame government policy.

  34. I don’t think either Government or opposition has a clue what to do next.

  35. In my previous post I looked at growth over the last nine months. Another poster looked at growth since the start of the [calendar] year.

    We should also be looking at growth in this fiscal year. To start at 0.2% leaves an enormous shortfall between GO’s forecast and reality, IMO.

    By any measure this 0.2% is grim news.

    The rate of growth has slowed.

    In its reports the OBR said there was a 50/50 chance that the Chancellor’s forecasts would be achieved. Iirc it commented that no account had been allwed for anything significant occurring which could affect the forecasts.

    I expect the forecasts and economic plans of GO and the gov to be severely scrutinised in the next week.

    One thing the hacking scandal may have achieved is the evaporation of any residual goodwill and confidence in the gov’s line(s).

  36. @Amber,

    “There was; & there’s growing consensus that the Darling plan struck the right balance in terms of tax, spend, growth, deficit reduction etc.”

    If you read the small print, there was actually very little difference between Darling’s plans and that of the Tories. I seem to remember him saying that if Labour won the general election we would have seen bigger cuts than under Thatcher.

  37. Well, 0.2 is better than nothing or a shrinkage (imagine the storm if that had come to pass) and we have to consider the global situation, which is very uncertain. People won’t be wanting to take unnecessary borrowing risks with the Greece default bombshell being talked about and possibly blowing up soon. Without this or some other impetus growth is going to be hard to find.

    It’s just that it is usually expected of governments that they fit their economic policies and direction into the situation they find themselves, rather than trying to do something that cannot work because they have misread the situation. Increasingly I am wondering if the government is relying on growth that isn’t going to happen. GO cannot afford to get this wrong, having stated that fast debt reduction is the best way ahead, simply because he needs a strong, growing economy to help pay it all off. Feeble growth like this won’t do the job he trying to achieve.

  38. Nick Poole

    Is “quantative easing” any different at all to “printing money”?

    Of course, QE is printing money & the Weimar Republic in Germany discovered the result in 1926!

    We do not want money printing, we do not want even higher taxes. We do want everyone to pay what they should and we do want benefit cheats reported & prosecuted. If that doesn’t balance the books then the only other option is to stop kidding ourselves we can pay such generous benefits in the first place.

    This is basically the argument in the US. The Democrats just want to tax, tax, tax (like Labour here) & the Republicans want to encourage enterprise & cut benefits instead.

    Of course the BBC is biased, it isn’t just some newsreaders (Flanders, Mason, Huw Edwards), it is endemic in the editor/researching depts. If they can be anti tory in a news report, they will be.

  39. @ Ambivalent

    I seem to remember him saying that if Labour won the general election we would have seen bigger cuts than under Thatcher.
    ——————————————-
    That’s why my ‘Darling plan’ comment was as non-partisan as I’m capable of being.

    I still believe – & have said a boringly often on these boards – it was Darling, not Gordon Brown – who cost Labour the 2010 GE. His ‘cuts worse than Thatcher’ was a ridiculous comment, IMO – it completely ignored the impact of cuts in the then nationalised industries e.g. Mines, railways etc. which happened during the Thatcher era.
    8-)

  40. @Amber,

    Yes, I agree that it was very unwise. I also think that Balls and Miliband would have taken Labour in a different direction economically to Darling.

  41. @ Ambivalent

    If you read the small print, there was actually very little difference between Darling’s plans and that of the Tories.
    ————————————————–
    Well then, Osborne can defuse the growing Darling plan consensus by simply saying: “That’s what I’m doing already.” Is he likely to do that, do you think? ;-)

    Probably not; therefore, the majority of voters will remain blissfully unaware that they are comparing apples & … almost identical apples.
    8-)

  42. @ Amber

    “Regardless of Party allegiance, we should all be able to agree: 0.2% is not good; it’s not even acceptable & it is well below the government’s own forecasts & targets.”

    You may not be surprised to learn that I disagree, respectfully.

    A major economy is akin to an ocean liner (cue Titanic jokes) – it takes a long time to turn it around, certainly more than 12 months. It took around 3 years after each of the last two recessions for the economy to start picking up properly.

    So I think it would be fair to say that if there are still no signs of a sustainable recovery by 2013, criticism may justly be levelled at Osborne: right now I genuinely (and hope non-partisanly) think it’s too early for either brickbats or bouquets.

  43. @Amber,

    Right again. On one hand, the Tories want to paint the picture that massive cuts would have still happened under Labour, but on the other, they will be keen to show how their policy differences have/will help to bring about positive results. It’s a bit of an impossible dilemma for them really.

  44. @ Ambivalent

    It’s nice to have somebody agree with me :-)

  45. @ Sergio

    A major economy is akin to an ocean liner (cue Titanic jokes) – it takes a long time to turn it around, certainly more than 12 months. It took around 3 years after each of the last two recessions for the economy to start picking up properly.
    ————————————–
    One assumes the British electorate are not as savvy as you; they appear to have believed the Chancellor when he said the 2010 Q2 & Q3 growth figures confirmed his plan was working & he’d already turned the ship around….
    8-)

  46. Amber

    I don’t remember those comments because I probably dismissed them as premature.

  47. @ Sergio

    I don’t remember those comments because I probably dismissed them as premature.
    —————————————-
    Yes, well informed people generally did.

    But I can assure you, the Chancellor did make such remarks. I won’t insult your intelligence by posting links; I’m sure you are as capable as I of Googling, if you want to check it out.
    8-)

  48. Amber, I’ll take your word for it – it was silly and opportunistic of him to do so, which is a common failing among politicians of all sides. Obviously I am more concerned about the future, however.

  49. @AmbivalentSupporter

    The problem for the Tories is trying to reach the magic 40%+ to get a majority. In recent years, they have found it difficult to get beyond the late 30s.

    —-

    Very true.

    And, under the current system, that will not change.

    At the last election 53% of the electorate voted Labour or LibDem. And nearly 10% voted Other. Leaving the 37% that voted Conservative.

    The Conservative problem is that there is no reason to suspect that the first of these figures will greatly change in their favour. (At every election, bar one, since WW2, that figure has been 50% or higher).

    And, looking back at recent GE’s and at current polls, there is little evidence to suggest that the ‘Other’ vote will drop very much below 10%. It may even climb higher.

    It’s not all bad news, however…

    Given a hypothetical division of the Conservative party – into a more centrist side (perhaps uniting with the Orange bookers) and a more rightist side (perhaps uniting with UKIP) – they would be able to achieve 40%+ and more besides.

    And so govern with a strong majority in a much more consensual – and yet still Conservatve – manner.

    The question is: are they prepared to grasp this particular nettle?

    For my own part I do believe that have yet realised that it is even there to grasp.

    But in ten years time it will have happened.

  50. Can I just add, on the issue of Cuts v Spending..

    It really is a bit of a red herring.

    And I’m surprised the debate has not moved on.

    Economists on both sides would agree – in private – that either approach would ultimately ‘work’.

    i. An economy can “spend” it’s way out of debt and achieve growth. The preferred option of the “left”

    ii. Or it can “cut” it’s way out of debt and achieve growth. The preferred option of the “right”.

    The difference lies rather in what you end up with: via the “left” appraoch, you would end up with a large public sector. Via the “right” approach, you would end up with a very small public sector.

    So it really is an ideological battle rather than an econmic one.

1 2 3 4