Stability, stability, stability. If he says it often enough, the Chancellor thinks people will believe it.
The stability mantra comes from the same stable that gave us the whopper about making the Bank of England independent. They meant they were dismantling the Bankâ€™s role in the debt and money markets by nationalising the issue of government obligations and transferring daily supervision of the banksâ€™ financial operations to the FSA.
It comes from the team that sold great quantities of the nationâ€™s gold reserves at the bottom of the gold market.
It comes from a government that has presided over a huge rise in the numbers of civil servants, quango staff and regulators of all kinds who spend large sums on private sector consultants to advise them on how to do their jobs.
It comes from a government which married Prudence for their first couple of years and did relatively well on the back of it, but divorced her in the new century in favour of an avalanche of public spending.
It comes from a government that slid Â£16 billion of supplementary estimates through on Monday â€“ admitting their financial controls and budgets had broken down again this year â€“ only to stage manage media interest in a few hundred million of more desirable expenditure presented as the important crux of the budget.
This is a budget of the spinners, by the spinners, for the spinners.
David Cameronâ€™s response was hard hitting and down to earth. He drew attention to the high taxes, the surging borrowing, and the unpleasant inflation that the budget encompasses. He said Labour should have put something aside in the good times for the not so good times. They should have mended the roof when the sun was shining, for now it is blowing a gale.
So what would mending the roof entail? Above all, it should entail getting the public sector into the way of thinking that it has to do more with less, or in the case of health and education to raise standards by more than the increase in cash.
Mending the roof means controlling the massive overheads. Why do we need regional unelected regional government in England? Its unpopularity in the North East referendum should be proof enough to alert politicians that it would be best swept away.
Why do we need a huge national identity bank and ID cards? Letâ€™s stop the spending on that doomed project now.
Why do we need 750,000 civil servants, when previous governments could run things perfectly well with 200,000 fewer? Shouldnâ€™t we impose a staff freeze immediately, so natural wastage can start to get the administration back into shape?
Why is the absentee rate so much higher in the public sector than in many private companies? Shouldnâ€™t Ministers start managing this, and motivating their staff better so more turn up?
Why wonâ€™t the government produce a plan to get the Â£25 billion it has lent Northern Rock back to an agreed timetable?
Why has the public sector taken so little action to improve building insulation, install heating and lighting sensors and controls so they only operate when needed, and to put in more fuel efficient lighting?
Why canâ€™t the government curb the inefficiencies of its nationalised industry, Network Rail? Why canâ€™t it find new revenue streams to avoid the closures and the costs at the Post Office?
Wherever you look at this governmentâ€™s public sector you see the same lack of leadership from Ministers, and the same casual approach to taxpayers money. Senior executives receive large bonuses and substantial incomes for performance which many service users think is inadequate.
It is indeed time to mend the roof â€“ and to fix the rest of the building â€“ as the storms sweep in. This credit crunch is not just about some dubious mortgages in Florida or the illiquidity of some US banks. This is also about overborrowing here in the UK, about a run on a UK mortgage bank, and about a government struggling to control its finances with an urge to put its taxes and charges up to pay some of the bills.