George Osborne has constantly justified his austerity programme on backing received from international financial agencies, but the honeymoon is over.
Let's be clear, both he and they were wrong on strategy from the off.
There was never a coherent case for slashing public services and working people's living standards to pay for the crisis created by financial adventurism and inadequate regulation of the banks.
Those who created the crisis and benefited enormously from the rewards delivered by casino capitalism ought to have paid the price of their decisions.
But such is the parliamentary deference to big business, especially banks, that this wasn't considered by either front bench.
Osborne felt secure when political debate centred simply on whether cuts in jobs, services, pensions, pay and conditions were being implemented at a necessary rate or, as Labour maintained, too quickly and too deeply.
But the Chancellor now has to contend with the view of the International Monetary Fund that full-blooded austerity is self-defeating, especially at a time when other major capitalist centres, including Britain's major export zone the EU, are doing likewise.
Economic growth is essential to boost employment and tax revenues and Britain's economy is going in the opposite direction.
If this is finally clear to the IMF, it has been abundantly obvious to the trade union movement for a long time, but the Treasury insists that it's too soon to tell, which indicates the intention to stick with the cuts-at-all-cost approach.
The government's austerity programme has already resulted in hundreds of thousands of workers losing their jobs, with millions suffering a decline in their living standards, and yet it is less than a quarter complete.
As difficult as it may be to imagine, the worst of the cuts are yet to come.
United, militant resistance is essential, with a huge turnout necessary on October 20 in support of the TUC A Future that Works national demonstration as the first step.
Progressive people in Wales and further afield, irrespective of party affiliation, celebrated when socialist Leanne Wood was elected Plaid Cymru leader in March.
But a combination of bad luck and poor decisions have conspired to marginalise the Welsh nationalists since their coalition with Labour in the One Wales government ended in April last year.
It might be seen as bad luck that Labour leader Carwyn Jones has been able to market Welsh Labour as more progressive than its English and Scottish variants and identified his party with resistance to the Westminster conservative coalition.
But Plaid's party political broadcast in this year's local elections telling voters that, if they were proud to be Welsh, they should vote Plaid Cymru, exemplified a lack-lustre campaign.
If that was embarrassing, what word can describe the mess created over the suspension of former leader Dafydd Elis-Thomas?
Plaid AMs may resent being referred to as "lapdogs" for playing along with a petty-political Tory motion of confidence in Health Minister Lesley Griffiths, but the answer is in their own hands.
Elis-Thomas is correct to say that Plaid should be proud of its achievements in coalition with Labour and should rethink its confused and confusing position of being Tory opposition allies.
If Plaid's disciplinary panel votes to withdraw the whip from Elis-Thomas, it will damage the party more than it harms the assembly's former presiding officer.
If you appreciated this article then please consider donating to the Morning Star's Fighting Fund to ensure we can keep developing your paper.