Despite the UK economy recording positive growth in the last quarter of 2009 and emerging from 18 months of gloomy recession, the champagne remains firmly on ice in Westminster. Whatever the frontbench line-up come June, curbing unprecedented levels of public borrowing - around £178bn to date - will both dominate and constrain its agenda. Desperate times call for desperate measures; cuts will be felt wherever they fall, and whoever is wielding the axe.
While both Labour and the Conservatives have committed to halving the budget deficit by 2013/14, Gordon Brown has warned that the economy is too fragile to cease spending until next year: a view shared by Lib Dem sage Vince Cable. David Cameron, meanwhile, aims to get down to business as soon as he can, promising an emergency budget with corollary squeezes within his government's first 50 days.
Under Cameron's plans, all but the lowest paid public sector workers would be subject not just to a salary freeze, but also to working longer for a likely capped pension. A streamlined Whitehall would have to reduce its running costs by one-third over the course of the next parliament; quangos would be pared down or scrapped altogether, with regional development agencies (RDAs) and strategic health authorities (SHAs) among the casualties, although frontline health spending will be protected.
The government has been no less strident in its defence of health and education budgets, albeit having postponed its comprehensive spending review until after the general election. A pledged increase of 0.8% in current spending is mitigated by a sharp planned decline in capital expenditure, making overall projections ambiguous. Labour's 1% public sector pay cap will effect under 10% of the £36bn savings required; scale-backs must reach 17% across all other departments.
The Lib Dems have been similarly light on specifics, though in many respects - culling quangos, RDAs, SHAs and pay - they concur with their Honourable Blue counterparts. Cable, however, warns that no area of spending - not even health - is beyond rationalisation and reduction. He proposes that a post-election public consultation be convened to ascertain budget priorities, and a management cadre established.
It is hardly surprising, in such exceptional circumstances, that party differences are matters of nuance. It is the inherently more palatable tax initiatives, moreover - tax credits, income tax, mansion tax - which have dominated discussion thus far. Cameron's cooperative vision may or may not be the answer; it could nonetheless fuel debate and innovation, before the Commission on 2020 Public Services reports in the summer its tactics for these harder times.
It is encouraging to think that these last grim 18 months might yet prove a catalyst for change.
While both Labour and the Conservatives have committed to halving the budget deficit by 2013/14, Gordon Brown has warned that the economy is too fragile to cease spending until next year: a view shared by Lib Dem sage Vince Cable. David Cameron, meanwhile, aims to get down to business as soon as he can, promising an emergency budget with corollary squeezes within his government's first 50 days.
Under Cameron's plans, all but the lowest paid public sector workers would be subject not just to a salary freeze, but also to working longer for a likely capped pension. A streamlined Whitehall would have to reduce its running costs by one-third over the course of the next parliament; quangos would be pared down or scrapped altogether, with regional development agencies (RDAs) and strategic health authorities (SHAs) among the casualties, although frontline health spending will be protected.
The government has been no less strident in its defence of health and education budgets, albeit having postponed its comprehensive spending review until after the general election. A pledged increase of 0.8% in current spending is mitigated by a sharp planned decline in capital expenditure, making overall projections ambiguous. Labour's 1% public sector pay cap will effect under 10% of the £36bn savings required; scale-backs must reach 17% across all other departments.
The Lib Dems have been similarly light on specifics, though in many respects - culling quangos, RDAs, SHAs and pay - they concur with their Honourable Blue counterparts. Cable, however, warns that no area of spending - not even health - is beyond rationalisation and reduction. He proposes that a post-election public consultation be convened to ascertain budget priorities, and a management cadre established.
It is hardly surprising, in such exceptional circumstances, that party differences are matters of nuance. It is the inherently more palatable tax initiatives, moreover - tax credits, income tax, mansion tax - which have dominated discussion thus far. Cameron's cooperative vision may or may not be the answer; it could nonetheless fuel debate and innovation, before the Commission on 2020 Public Services reports in the summer its tactics for these harder times.
It is encouraging to think that these last grim 18 months might yet prove a catalyst for change.
Comments