BUDGET SPEECHES can bewilder their audience. Any statement which relies on statistics to lend it authority risks overwhelming the listener with a stream of numbers. Gordon Brown is particularly keen on barking out figures in his Budget speeches, hoping, rather like a bingo caller, that announcing number after number will generate a sense of excitement.

But, one week on, the Chancellor’s statement, far from generating excitement, has been widely viewed as a disappointment. It was a buy now, pay later Budget. Behind Mr Brown’s boastful statistics lies a record of predictions missed, opportunities lost and policies which have misfired. The Chancellor’s constant repetition of artfully selective figures now has a weary and hackneyed feel. And the figures the Government uses to defend its record or to attack our policies are now universally seen as discredited. When the Chancellor and the Prime Minister got together, for a characteristically brief meeting, last week they tried to persuade the public that Conservative policies added up to £35 billion worth of cuts. That assertion was comprehensively shredded by the media. As Nick Robinson, political editor of ITN and Times columnist, pointed out, Conservatives aren’t planning to cut public spending. We want to increase it. But only at a rate the country can afford.

That distinction lies at the heart of what the country’s economic debate should be. The real choice at this election is between competing values. I am always happy to meet Mr Brown on his chosen battleground of exchanging statistics. I’m particularly happy to do so when my critical analysis of his record is shared by the objective judges of the International Monetary Fund and the Institute for Fiscal Studies. They’re thinking what I’m thinking. This Chancellor has now spent so much that if Labour wins power again taxes will go up, and the economy will suffer.

But while the figures back our judgment, I believe that choosing a government isn’t a matter of dry calculation. Elections are about distinguishing between sets of values, and deciding which competing vision is right.

Both Tony Blair and his Chancellor want to spend money at a faster rate than we can afford. They both want to continue to allow growth in bureaucracy to outpace growth in the private sector. They’re both committed to imposing higher taxes, borrowing more and thus driving interest rates upward. In all these areas, incidentally, they are backed by the Liberal Democrats.

The Conservatives believe that public spending should grow at an affordable rate, that debt should be paid off to relieve the pressure on interest rates, that hard-working families have a right to keep more of their own money and that the Government has a duty to ensure that people get the best value for money for taxes they pay.

Those basic values have guided our economic strategy. In our drive to get value for money we’ve identified £35 billion from the Government’s budget which has been wasted and could be better used. We have had to take some tough decisions to ensure that taxpayers’ money is spent as effectively as possible. We will freeze Civil Service recruitment, dispense with 235,000 bureaucratic posts, scrap regional assemblies, abolish 168 quangos and deliver leaner government by abolishing the DTI’s Small Business Service, for instance. Our focus on value for money means that we can allocate £23 billion more to frontline services. We will increase spending on the NHS by £1,350 per household and increase spending on schools by £1,200 for every child. We will also spend more than Labour on defence, policing and pensions. To paraphrase Ian Hislop, if those are cuts then I’m a banana.

As well as allocating £23 billion of savings to priority areas we’ll also devote £8 billion to reducing our debt. The Conservatives are determined not to take any risks with economic stability. We want to reduce government borrowing so that we can keep interest rates low. And we are the only major party committed to leaving an independent Bank of England in charge of interest rates. Both Labour and the Lib Dems are committed to endangering our stability by handing over monetary policy to the European Central Bank in Frankfurt.

Securing improvements in frontline services through getting value for money and locking in monetary stability are our priorities. But we have also made room for £4 billion worth of tax cuts. As a matter of principle we believe that individuals should keep more of their own money. Families work hard to raise children. It’s a struggle to balance work and home life. Paying the bills when so much is eaten up in tax is no picnic. Those families who do the right thing deserve to be rewarded with tax relief.

Our first tax rebate has already been announced. It’s targeted at another group in our society neglected by this Government: pensioners. People who have worked so hard and sacrificed so much deserve dignity and respect in their old age. We’re already committed to ending the indignity of mean-testing and increasing the basic state pension. We will also give pensioners a permanent rebate of half their council tax, up to £500.

There are two courses open to the British people in the weeks ahead. To go down the European path of higher taxation, more regulation and wasteful spending. Or to take the upward course, and follow other liberal English-speaking economies which have cut taxes, reformed public services, created growth and equipped themselves for the 21st century. Ultimately this election is a choice between two different paths. And, unlike Tony Blair and Gordon Brown, I’ll take the high road.

Times Recommends

• Treat Africans as part of the human jigsaw
• Too bitter a pill for me to swallow
• This Bill is a panic measure in a tarnished age