Eddie Barnes: It's arithmetic, stupid BILL Clinton's masterclass speech at the Democratic National Convention last week, which demonstrated not just his oratory but his policy geekery, included one memorable line on running a government. What new ideas did we bring to Washington? Mr Clinton said, referring back to his eight-year presidency. I always give a one-word answer: Arithmetic. As ever with Mr Clinton, it was a nice line, but not the whole deal. Like any other government, his own had to tip its hat to politics as well as maths. Back in the UK, that is no more so than on the very live question of government pay. The arithmetic is stark. Not yet half-way through the current spending squeeze, UK ministers have indicated they will have to roll out another round of cuts in two years" time as the national debt keeps on growing. A cash freeze is about to become a cash cut. In Scotland, public finance experts are beginning to sound a little like sandwich-board men warning of the coming apocylpse. "Prudently," they argue, the Scottish Government should plan for a £1 billion cash cut from its budget in three years" time. And this at a time when all the government's extra promises to pay for most stuff keep getting more and more costly. It is estimated that, by 2016, there may be a funding gap of £3bn, thanks to these two combined effects. With pay making up way over half of the Scottish Government's kitty, a freeze - or even a cut - in the salaries of doctors, nurses, teachers and council staff would therefore seem inevitable. The politics, though, is more complex. South of the Border, George Osborne is insisting on a sub-inflation 1 per cent increase for next year. In Brighton yesterday, at the Trades Union Congress, Labour's shadow chancellor, Ed Balls, found himself being heckled after he and Ed Miliband urged unions not to strike over the deal. The arithmetic being as it is, Labour argues, it cannot guarantee to reverse some of the spending cuts ministers face. The unions are dusting off the braziers as they prepare for a winter of strikes. It would appear this is a row Labour is keen to have. As Mr Balls said yesterday, unless the party regains its reputation for fiscal prudence, it can forget about winning back power. In pre-referendum Scotland, however, the politics is different. If finance secretary John Swinney backs Mr Osborne's pay policy, when he makes his spending plans clear next week, he will be slammed by unions for being an Osborne mini-me. If he goes beyond it, however, the SNP government will be able to make the point that it is providing an alternative to Westminster austerity... although we could do so much more if, etc, etc... That will be welcomed, especially by the many low-paid workers who will justifiably feel that a pay rise is well overdue. But there can be no doubting that any pay rise at all will mean a loser elsewhere. In the end, the arithmetic, as Clinton said, doesn't lie.