Search results

no, you were talking about borrowing, which occurs to cover the deficit in the budget. you even mention £91bn which is the deficit. so try harder to remember your own argument.

the deficit (borrowing if you must) has been reduced in every year since 2010. im well aware the debt continues to rise, as it will do until the deficit is 0. nice try to keep shifting away from your earlier false claim.

:nono: no, you save when times are good so can afford to spend when its bad. Brown could have turned the public finances positive, but decided to spend, and spend more than he had coming in even though things were good. what do you think happens when the inevitable happens? nice diversion...

the point is to refute your claim Labour only borrowed in responce to wider economic situation. they were borrowing £36bn 2007, would have borrowed more 2008 and continued to do so irrespective of the events of 2008. its lost in history now but people at the time were already asking, when is...

no, they were already borrowing $36bn in 2007 and this rising and was projected to rise considerably. Brown hadnt run a surplus since 2001, despite the relative strength of the economy, he would happily spend more than he was receiving apparently forever.

is it because there's nothing bad in the budget, so latched on to a ham-fisted attempt to sell one of the most trivial matters?