George Osborne rallies support for austerity

George Osborne's planned public consultation over spending cuts is the latest stage in a strategy aimed at winning support for his deficit reduction plans.

Already, the coalition appears to have won a greater acceptance that deep cuts will be necessary. Now it must get voters to buy into the detail. Hence the consultation on which services government should provide and which might come from the private or voluntary sectors.

Politically this is astute, even if, like Labour's much-derided "Big Conversation" of 2003, it ends up being little more than window dressing. David Cameron and Mr Osborne need to give the impression of the cuts being part of a widely shared agenda. Yet while many people might feel that money is wasted, for example in council bureaucracy, if councils make cuts that mean they have to wait longer for housing benefit, or their library is shut, their support for the Government's approach may not last long. Ministers will have to find ways of targeting waste efficiently.

In the meantime, Mr Osborne will set out the framework for decisions on cuts, along with a warning that ministers will have to justify spending claims before a "Star Chamber" of senior figures. In practice, however, it is the Treasury — and Mr Osborne — that must prepare for battles to assert their will over ministers. For there is no way of avoiding the truth: whatever the debate about the "role of government", government will be able to do less. Convincing ministers and MPs of that fact may prove as hard as persuading the public.

Tomorrow's deadline is fast approaching for the Labour leadership's six hopefuls to win the 33 nominations necessary to get on the ballot paper. Ed and David Miliband and Ed Balls have reach that milestone; Left-wingers John McDonnell and Diane Abbott look unlikely to do so; Andy Burnham is still struggling although he seems likely to get the numbers. Yet the bigger battle — over what Labour should stand for under the new leader — has hardly begun.

Inevitably, as former Cabinet ministers, the leading contenders have a problem in simultaneously defending their records while showing how they would represent change and fresh thinking. Ed Miliband is perhaps best favoured in this respect: as Energy and Climate Change secretary, he was less at the heart of government than the other three heavyweights — although he can hardly claim to represent a complete break with the past, having been heavily responsible for Labour's election manifesto.

What none has yet done is made clear how they would respond to the austere new political landscape. Their approach is largely that of the previous Chancellor: modest cuts combined with a reliance on the return of growth, and with it the high spending of the Brown years. Yet Mr Brown's spending failed to create breakthroughs in the areas it was supposed to, such as school standards or reducing poverty. Until the Labour contenders make clear how they would rethink the party's approach, they are all in danger of simply refighting the last election.

Boris Johnson's expansion of his Mayor's Fund is an example of what can be done when the public and private sectors work together. Already the Fund has helped 6,400 vulnerable London children; now Mr Johnson has secured £7 million in funding from philanthropists. As government re-evaluates its priorities, we will need more of such fresh thinking.