I refer to our Chancellor of the Exchequor, the Right Honourable, Mr. George Osborne, or, 'Mr. Smiley' as he looked yesterday in the Commons. Well, for once he had something to smile about as he watched that thick, little thug, Ed Balls, trying to shout his way through a tsunami of boos, whistles and cat calls as he tried to reply to the Chancellor's somewhat smug Autumn statement. Of course, the thing that Mr. Osborne has not done and for which he deserves a modicum of praise is what Ed Balls would have done had he (dread thought!) been in charge, that is, keep on spending and keep on borrowing.
The news the Chancellor brought to us yesterday was good only in so far as it wasn't as bad as it has been! Gradually, very, very gradually, as gradual as painting the Forth Bridge with a toothbrush, he is reducing the amount of national borrowing but he is nowhere near actually balancing the books and so our total national debt continues to rise inexorably - today I see that the yield on 10-year bonds (the price demanded by the moneylenders) is 2.9%. In July 2012 the yield was a mere 1.4% and that means our cost of borrowing has increased by 107% in 15 months! The moneylenders, for obvious reasons, have the most merciless view of any nation's economy and the fact that they are demanding that rate from us when the French are only paying 2.44% tells you louder than words what they think of the British economy. I suspect that not the least of their worries - and therefore mine, too - and yours, if you you have half a brain - is inflation.
Jeremy Warner at The Telegraph takes a similarly hard-eyed look at the statement of affairs issued by our 'cheerful chappie' Chancellor and reckons that the signs of improvement in our economy are "built on sand". In effect, he accuses the Chancellor of fiddling around at the edges instead of carrying out a decisive restructuring of our economy. Modestly, I remember after the last election begging the government to 'do a Maggie' on the back of Labour's catastrophe and if it hurt, which it would have done, then blame it all on Labour. Instead, 'Dim (and gutless) Dave' married the 'Kleggeron' and all chance of anything radical was lost.
So the key question is whether or not 'Dave 'n' George' can keep this bullshit economy looking bright and cheerful long enough to win the next election? In that event they still may not do very much but the prospect of Ed Balls and Len McCluskey running the country is truly a nightmare. What's that you said? 'Surely it's Ed Miliband who runs the Labour party?' Do me a favour!