Chancellors' debate

Overall I thought that the programme went very well. It was controlled exceptionally well by the presenter and the panellists largely behaved themselves. However, Mr Cable seemed to be more acerbic than the other two, and I thought over-the-top on one or two occasions eg his reference to 'funding'. I would say that the Unions have got more political mileage over the years from the Labour party for their millions, than all Tory donors put together. He didn't mention the Unions - and so in my opinion was unbalanced on that point. Typical Liberal approach. Mr Darling keeps pedalling half-truths and insists on referring back to 'the 80s' and '90's' recessions as if they compare with the current one. Did he remind us that in 1997 they took over a vibrant economy that the then chancellor accepted (nominally)as just that? It is a pity that since 1997 Brown then began to lay the foundations for our current economic position being worse than most of our European partners. We now have a pensions industry in disarray, an eductaional system that constantly rewards under-achievement,and a health service that fails to deliver the standards that should be expected for the vast amount of money consumed. Mr Osborne was put on the back foot at times but kept his cool. I suspect that his references to Mr Cameron reflected the fact that the Conservatives' leader is an asset to his party; not so, Mr Brown and (less so) Mr Clegg to theirs! Adrian Ford

Posted by: Adrian Ford