Danny Finkelstein has a must-read column today on the Tory tax row, which has already prompted response over at Conservativehome. Quite apart from his formidable intellect, Danny has something which most of those commenting on the pros and cons of tax cuts don’t, which is scars on his back. As a close adviser to William Hague when he was leader, he saw at first hand how this argument worked in practice rather than theory. He knows of what he speaks.
The least persuasive argument for the Tories to embrace radical tax cuts is that previous proposals have been timid or unclear. The fact is that Labour made sure that the public knew in 2001 and 2005 that the Opposition was proposing cuts and the electorate delivered its verdict unambiguously. More convincing is the claim that public opinion has shifted during the New Labour era: that voters are now less inclined to believe Labour’s scare stories about Tory spending cuts, and are angrier about tax rises.
Comments
Join the debate for just $5 for 3 months
Be part of the conversation with other Spectator readers by getting your first three months for $5.
UNLOCK ACCESS Just $5 for 3 monthsAlready a subscriber? Log in