"FLESH EATING TORY ECONOMIC SUPREMO BACKS ORGANISED CRIME"

Having taken Easter off, I suddenly emerged from the bank holiday to find that the Western Mail had headlined last Monday’s edition with a press release from the Labour Party criticising my view of an Institute of Directors (IOD) report which examined different ways in which the government could potentially save £50 billion.

Unfortunately, no-one from the paper bothered to contact me about the article for a right of reply which, given the fast changing nature of election journalism, isn’t too surprising.

However, it was disappointing that I didn’t get the opportunity to set the record straight and respond directly to the charges from Peter Hain, so I might as well as do it here.

In various press releases, the Secretary of State for Wales has suggested that the IOD document, published over seven months ago, constitute current Conservative Party policy.

As the late Alan Clark would have said, that is being "economical with the actualite".

It should be noted that the report was not published by the Conservative Party but by the IOD and which represents 45,000 business members across the UK.

Therefore, if the Labour Party wishes to attack any organisation over the contents of the report, then he should go after the IOD, of which I am a member, although given the way that they have alienated large parts of the business community during the last few days, that is unlikely.

Indeed, it is noteworthy that not one Labour Minister, including Mr Hain himself, criticised the report when it was first published back in September 2009.

However, it shouldn’t be a shock to anyone who has read my columns in the Western Mail during the last six years that I strongly believe that lower taxes, rather than higher spending, is what will ensure a quick exit from the current recession.

Not surprisingly, such a view is probably shared with the vast majority of the businesses in Wales that actually create wealth and employment in our communities.

Perhaps the most ridiculous aspect of blatant electioneering was that Labour’s flimsy accusations were based solely on my consideration of the IOD report as “excellent” and, as a result, I therefore agreed with everything in the report.

For the record, I also think that the Enterprise Investment Scheme is an “excellent” vehicle for supporting UK enterprise but that does not make me a supporter of the Labour Government.

I am hardly a Liberal for thinking that David Lloyd George was an “excellent” prime minister or a nationalist in rating Dafydd Wigley as an “excellent” politician.

I consider Silence of the Lambs to be an “excellent” book and the “excellent” Godfather is my favourite film, but does that make me a serial killer or a supporter of the Mafia?

Of course not, although I am now expecting the next press release from Welsh Labour stating that “Flesh eating Tory Economic Supremo backs organised crime”.

The IOD report is an independent analysis that demonstrates where any government, Labour or Conservative, could reduce its expenditure if it so chose.

It has not been adopted by any political party but shows where there is potential for savings at a time when we have an annual deficit for 2009-2010 that is currently running at £167 billion or 11 per cent of GDP, roughly the same level as Greece.

However, the IOD is not alone in believing that government expenditure should be reduced to deal with a ballooning deficit that threatens the UK’s financial viability.

The much respected Institute for Fiscal Studies has stated that government spending must fall by £46 billion by 2015 whilst the European Union has told the Government to increase cuts to reduce the deficit or face major problems in the coming years.

Even the Chancellor of the Exchequer recently admitted that his own government, if re-elected, would need to introduce cuts deeper than those experienced in the 1980s.

Does that now make Mr Darling, to use Peter Hain’s own words, an “Uber-Thatcherite”?

There is a grown-up debate to be had about how this nation recovers from the deepest recession in living memory.

Rather than engaging in what can only be best described as ‘student politics’, it would serve the voters of this nation better if Peter Hain addresses the real issues about the current state of the Welsh economy.

He could explain why, after thirteen years of Labour “investment”, we have seen our relative prosperity shrink from 80 per cent of the UK average to 74 per cent, with four of the five poorest areas in the whole of the UK being here in Wales?

He should tell us why, with 133,000 adults out of work, we have the highest unemployment rate out of all the UK nations and why one in four adults in Wales are economically inactive?

Finally, he should give detailed reasons as to why the manufacturing base of Wales, which actually rose to 28 per cent of the nation’s economic output during the last Conservative government, has now declined to 18 per cent since Labour came to power?

Those are the real concerns about the Welsh economy that should be discussed at this election, not the smear, spin and innuendo that has characterised this Labour Government’s time in office. Perhaps the Welsh news media wouldn't mind asking these questions during the next four weeks.

It is the least that the people, and the businesses, of Wales deserve before one of the most momentous general elections of the last thirty years.