Labour has accused Danny Alexander, Chief Secretary to the Treasury, of being "thick as thieves" with the Conservatives - despite "pretend" attempts to distance himself from his "consistent record of Tory collaboration".
Shadow treasury minister Chris Leslie asked his opposite number, who was standing in for Chancellor George Osborne in the Commons, whether he remained supportive of last week's Autumn Statement.
During Treasury questions, Mr Leslie asked Mr Alexander whether he stood by the estimated drop in total managed expenditure to 35% of GDP - a level not seen since the 1930s - by 2020.
The Liberal Democrat frontbencher replied: "The way the Autumn Statement is constructed is the Office for Budget Responsibility (OBR) give an assumption about the path of public finances over the course of the whole of the next parliament.
"Post 2017/18 there is a neutral assumption built into the public finances which assumes the public finance spending stays flat in real terms.
"That is something that enables the OBR to construct their forecast. In my view, post 2017/18 when we have finished dealing with the structural deficit, public expenditure can grow faster than that."
Mr Leslie then asked: "Why are you pretending now to distance yourself from your consistent record of Tory collaboration when you have been thick as thieves with them vote after vote, year after year, time and time again?"
Mr Alexander hit back saying it must be a "tough job" being shadow chief secretary to the Treasury as it meant having to deal with shadow chancellor Ed Balls, who Labour former chancellor Alistair Darling has described as a "difficult man".
He went on: "I guess that is what they mean by a zero-zero economy: one Ed has zero influence, the other has zero credibility.
"Let me say to the party opposite and the party behind me - both of them in different ways are advocating relentless austerity for the whole of the next parliament.
"It is only the Liberal Democrats turning round the public finances after 2017/18 that offer any hope of a change in the future."
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article