It's not a goer for us to continue to spend more per head than we raise in tax: it is contributing partly to our above target inflation and of course to the cost of government borrowing. So need to have a genuine and credible surplus, not the present rounding error.
This is the most important point, regardless of how it is met.
So I see the policy argument, and I think it's the intellectually correct centre-right position, but IMO a broader problem in the United Kingdom and indeed much of the democratic world is that the electoral base for the centre-right seems to be vanishing.
What is missing is a vision from the government. I think people do understand that things need to change. I think the. Wld like a fairer tax system - but where do you start?
Generally we need to have a deficit that is lower than some function of growth, not a surplus. If we don't have growth, we need investment, which also implies a deficit. The only time a surplus is appropriate is when growth is too high.
Inflation is at 3.8 per cent and we are not in a recession.
This is why I think political journalists/commentators need to do a degree level course in macro economics. 3.8% may be politically painful, but it's economically absolutely fine. Arguably a more useful rate in terms of economic control than 2%. Less than 1% growth p/c is the real problem.