“Adam, are you really suggesting it doesn’t matter WHY we are in the position we are in?”

No, I’m not suggesting that. I am suggesting that we now need to act to sort it out, and that means one of the three options I set out above.

I don’t say Plaid should join any consensus. I don’t even say it should advance cuts. I do say that a failure to do so will likely be interpreted by the electorate as a signal that the party is not especially responsible.

Dunc – I’m aware that Plaid thinks that the block should be maintained. Sadly, Holtham’s was a ceteris paribus recommendation – and we are not in that territory any more. I suspect the magnitude of public spending cuts will be such that the block will be adversely affected. Whether it should be reduced by less than the Barnett formula automatically implies, to make up some or all of the shortfall identified by Holtham is another matter. But if we are talking about 17% cuts in most major departmental spending limits (which, as you rightly note, has not yet been made clear by either Labour or the Conservatives) it is not realistic to expect these to be absorbed by England, Scotland and Northern Ireland but not Wales. That really is the luxury of opposition.

Just got to summon all 23 chief exec’s to the Assembly and say ‘This is all your getting kid, like it or lump it!’. Assembly members and ministers are not too overpaid as they of course are publicly elected, unlike civil service .

Adam, are you really suggesting it doesn’t matter WHY we are in the position we are in? That is an extremely short-termist view to take and completely lets reckless economics off the hook. It matters alot! If peoples’ jobs are disappearing they deserve to know why. If people are losing local services they deserve to know why.

I accepted the reality of public spending cuts in my comment, but said that progressives should refuse to condone them “UNLESS the culpability of the banking sector is clearly explained to the electorate and addressed with regulation and taxation.” After that just step had been taken, then I would support sensible cuts being made. But at present, that step has quite clearly not been taken, and by saying all parties should focus on “restoring the UK’s public finances” without looking at regulation is completely letting Labour off the hook.

You’re essentially arguing that Plaid should converge on a consensus around cuts to be “taken seriously”. That same convergence of all parties being the same is what has led to electoral turnout plummeting in Britain. Plaid should refuse to put forward proposals for cuts until such a time as the cause of the financial crisis has been addressed.

Adam – as far as I’m aware, what Plaid has advocated is no cut to the Welsh settlement, in line with the recommendations of the Holtham Commission. Of course, it sort of follows on that if there is no cut to the Welsh settlement then there is no cut to services in Wales, except Plaid are arguing – in line with the commission’s findings – that we already have a budget that behoves reductions in public spending.

However, it is also worth pointing out that while other parties can attack Plaid for not putting forward any proposals for cuts, what have they themselves put forward? We still don’t know how either Labour or the Tories will address the national debt. We await their manifestos.

“I do not see why Plaid Cymru as a social-democratic or socialist party should have to join the queue to advocate public spending cuts, when the public sector did nothing to cause the financial crisis”.

The state of UK’s public finances need to be restored, either by reductions in public expenditure, increases in revenues or both. We can all roundly criticise the bankers and their regulatory regime, the government and its previous programme of expenditure, and a few other things besides. But, aside from learning important lessons for the future, it really doesn’t matter why we got to this position. What matters is that we are in this position, and that our elected representatives either do something about it, or we all suffer because of their inaction.

You are quite right that Plaid Cymru has no obligation to advance a detailed programme of public spending cuts. This is not because of its political ideology; other social-democratic and/or socialist parties must do so if they wish to be taken seriously and to formulate a programme that will avoid doing more harm than is absolutely essential to public services and people on low incomes. Instead, I’d suggest that Plaid’s Cymru’s lack of obligation stems from the fact that it is most unlikely to form any part of any future UK government. But I think you should be aware that not doing so will rightly be taken as a message by the voters that Plaid is not a serious party with a rounded outlook.

Personally I’d like Welsh Ministers to follow the lead of their SNP counterparts by volunteering for pay cuts. I think a handful of Welsh Ministers have not taken pay rises but a clearer position would be more welcome, to show some solidarity. You don’t have to be on the left to back that as the centre-right Irish government slashed their own pay at some of the highest levels.

Instead of the Assembly championing Pro-act, the Assembly should get council bosses by the scruff of their greedy necks and make them take large wage cuts to them and all mid-higher earners.

This will assuage job losses and unemployment. Those civil servants who don’t like it could leave and try their luck in the real world way from holiday pay and sick pay and so on. It could bring new life into councils with new talent. The high labour turnover of some councils sems to be only in the lower end of wage scales.

The Assembly cross party group should sit down around a grubby table away from the videocam’s and think of how they can avert job losses in civil service and make the bosses take home 25% less.

This is not a ‘normal’ recession. It has been caused by a specific failure of the banking system. The banking system needed the state to step in and rescue it, pretty much in order to avoid social chaos. I reluctantly support the idea that the bailout was necessary, as we would have had an Argentina-style crisis on our hands otherwise.

But now that the rescue has taken place, the British parties are not asking the banking system to make a reasonable contribution to the recovery. Darling’s “tax on bankers bonuses” was a sham that has been torn apart to the extent that Labour are no longer promoting it, and the Tories want a return to business as usual.

I do not see why Plaid Cymru as a social-democratic or socialist party should have to join the queue to advocate public spending cuts, when the public sector did nothing to cause the financial crisis. The reality of cuts having to be made is a bit different, but as a progressive I refuse to condone any public spending cuts UNLESS the culpability of the banking sector is clearly explained to the electorate and addressed with regulation and taxation.

Financier’s points are ironically correct insofar as the future of the Welsh economy will be decided outside of Wales. The best we can hope for is for MPs that will defend Wales’ interests and ensure that the other side of the story gets heard.

A better commenter than myself might ask Financier why Wales’ infrastructure needs should come second to paying for a crisis that Wales did not cause?

Following Alastair Darling’s interview on Newsnight this week, it is apparent that neither he nor the Treasury has or is willing to give the figures for the true state of the UK’s economic deficit. Thus it is very difficult to pre-determine an economic policy without that vital information. The continuing prevarication by Gordon Brown on deciding the date of the election has certainly put the economy in holding pattern, but without urgent reform.

It is certain that both National & Local Government in Wales is going to have to use its scarce financial resources more efficiently and only employ people who vital to the delivery of required services.

Perhaps then, there will be finance left to start to improve the infrastucture of Wales to a level that will attract new business to be based here.

To clarify:
- The piece is about the contradiction in Tory attitudes and inconsistency in spending intent. The criticism would stand if the Plaid Assembly group announced the pension plan and its Westminster MPs disagreed – publicly – with it;
- Plaid aren’t in opposition;
- The pensions policy will be tested at the ballot box.

And finally, as an observation:
- Nice to see we’re all fiscal prudes these days. Shame the same wasn’t true when we shelled out far more to undeserving bankers, who have taken the money and laughed in our faces. Pick your sides, people.