Over the last few days a number of commentators have demonstrated beyond reasonable doubt that Osborne’s budget was regressive, attacked the poorest sector of our society and is destined to force another 1 million people out of work. All this at a time when this country is still reeling from the effects of a banker induced recession.
It wasn’t the fault of the poor, the single parents, the people in social housing, students or the low paid that this country went into recession. Nor was it their fault that the structural deficit is now so high. Yet, with typical Tory ambivalence, Osborne has targeted the weakest sectors of society to pay for the indulgences and mistakes of the richest.
And where are the Lib Dems? Apparently nowhere. Last week Simon Hughes indicated that some Liberals would table amendments to the budget to make it fairer – unfortunately, he has now tried to back pedal from this and looks likely to now toe the line. I recently read in Pat McFadden’s blog the following, and I attach it here purely because it describes what is happening so correctly.
The picture of Simon Hughes issuing warnings about the future reminds me of that Monty Python sketch where the knight is having his arms and legs chopped off and after being rendered limbless says something along the lines of , “right, any more of this and I’m going to get really annoyed”.
So where are the Liberals these days? What has happened to their supposed radicalism? Was it really so easily bought? Sixteen years ago the Libs were call for £10 million to be pruned off the civil list; today they support the Conservatives and keep it intact. In the post war years the Liberals called for greater levels of industrial democracy and compulsory profit sharing; but in the budget their direction changed – away from workers and towards the bosses. No doubt their iincrease of the threshold of £2m on which capitalists will pay just 10% capital gains tax, instead of the main rate of 18% was undoubtedly well received by the fat cats in the City.
Remember, this is the party that over the years has fought for penal reform, legalising cannabis, an end to student loans and local taxes. If the Liberal Democrats ever had any ounce of radicalism in their soul (and this now has to be questioned) it died the moment they signed the coalition agreement. Now all we have is real Tories and wannabe Tories ... and sooner or later we will see the two parties either amalgamate, or large numbers of Libs leaving to join their natural home in the Conservative party. The few left will either join Labour or try and sit in the centre ground under the still struggling Liberal party.
Evidence for this was apparent from Ed Miliband’s YouGov survey which now shows only 16% of the electorate support Clegg and his followers. Over the coming months, as the cuts start to bite this downward trend is certain to continue and bring about their demise.
As someone who started their political life in the old Liberal party and then moved to Labour, I will not mourn them.
Showing posts with label Lib-Dems. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lib-Dems. Show all posts
Monday, 28 June 2010
Monday, 7 June 2010
The Con-Dems and our economy
In a speech today David Cameron indicated his proposed cuts in spending would ‘unite rather than divide’ the people of this country. An interesting analysis from our esteemed Prime Minister and a point of view I am confident will come to haunt him for many months to come.
According to Cameron the current National Debt is all the fault of the last Labour government and had little or nothing to do with global recession. By any stretch of imagination this is preposterous. Is he truly expecting us to believe that the collapse of the banks in the UK had no effect of our national finances? Is he honestly expecting us to believe that the consequences and current demise of globalisation had no effect on British industry? Apparently so.
In his speech he indicated the current budget deficit is 11% of GDP, amounting to approximately £770bn and would mean that if left unaddressed, interest on this debt would amount to £70bn – more than we would be spending on climate change, transport and schools. However, let’s break these figures down a little. The last Labour government spent £85bn on education (of which schools was a part and under a Labour Government, real spending on education was due to rise by an average of 2.5 per cent a year from April 2009 to March 2011), just under £25bn on transport and just recently the Department of Energy and Climate Change confirmed that after Osborne’s cuts their budget will be £1.05bn. Now, I am no mathematician ... but when all these figures are added, they do not make £70bn.. so is Cameron trying to con us?
The Lib Dems are not much better. Before the election they were talking about gradual cuts for the next year to allow the economy to grow, but now they are sucking up to the Tories they have changed their mind. Now they are saying things are really bad and we must act immediately. Interestingly, if we take Cameron/ Alexander’s figures reported today of interest repayment being £70bn and a national debt of £770bn, it rather begs the question of why the Con-Dems were so desperate to implement departmental cuts of £6bn. If their figures are to be believed, Osborne’s cuts amount to a minor ripple in a huge lake. In other words – they were a cosmetic political ploy to trash Labour’s economic strategy whilst emphasising how they would solve the economic trials of this country. Cheap by any standard!
The simple realities are clear and have been stated in other entries in this blog, but let me briefly reiterate. In 1945, the national debt stood at 216% of GDP and in 5 years the Labour government built a welfare state, established a National Health Service, free at the point of demand and established a major rebuilding problem to address the chronic housing shortage as a result of several years of bombing. Conversely, today the national debt stands at 11% of GDP and yet Cameron wants to implement harsh savings in government spending.
These cuts will bring back the austerity years of the Thatcher era (a point obviously recognised by some Lib-Dems) and will result in substantial increases in the number of people unemployed, along with more houses being repossessed, more individuals and businesses forced into bankruptcy and a significant decline in front-line services.
The Labour Party must be at the forefront of the fightback to defend these services and should work co-operatively with the trade union movement to develop a clear strategy to support public service workers in their defence of our services. In parliament we should expect that Labour MPs resist every attempt by this reactionary government to cut hard-earned services offering critical support to the weak, the needy, the sick, the old and the unemployed.
At the same time, activists should join together to lobby MPs, match on demonstrations, support the People’s Charter and the Right to Work campaigns and petition Cameron to end these savage cuts.
The question is – have we become so apathetic that we sit and watch the Tories savagely decimate our services, or will we stand and fight?
According to Cameron the current National Debt is all the fault of the last Labour government and had little or nothing to do with global recession. By any stretch of imagination this is preposterous. Is he truly expecting us to believe that the collapse of the banks in the UK had no effect of our national finances? Is he honestly expecting us to believe that the consequences and current demise of globalisation had no effect on British industry? Apparently so.
In his speech he indicated the current budget deficit is 11% of GDP, amounting to approximately £770bn and would mean that if left unaddressed, interest on this debt would amount to £70bn – more than we would be spending on climate change, transport and schools. However, let’s break these figures down a little. The last Labour government spent £85bn on education (of which schools was a part and under a Labour Government, real spending on education was due to rise by an average of 2.5 per cent a year from April 2009 to March 2011), just under £25bn on transport and just recently the Department of Energy and Climate Change confirmed that after Osborne’s cuts their budget will be £1.05bn. Now, I am no mathematician ... but when all these figures are added, they do not make £70bn.. so is Cameron trying to con us?
The Lib Dems are not much better. Before the election they were talking about gradual cuts for the next year to allow the economy to grow, but now they are sucking up to the Tories they have changed their mind. Now they are saying things are really bad and we must act immediately. Interestingly, if we take Cameron/ Alexander’s figures reported today of interest repayment being £70bn and a national debt of £770bn, it rather begs the question of why the Con-Dems were so desperate to implement departmental cuts of £6bn. If their figures are to be believed, Osborne’s cuts amount to a minor ripple in a huge lake. In other words – they were a cosmetic political ploy to trash Labour’s economic strategy whilst emphasising how they would solve the economic trials of this country. Cheap by any standard!
The simple realities are clear and have been stated in other entries in this blog, but let me briefly reiterate. In 1945, the national debt stood at 216% of GDP and in 5 years the Labour government built a welfare state, established a National Health Service, free at the point of demand and established a major rebuilding problem to address the chronic housing shortage as a result of several years of bombing. Conversely, today the national debt stands at 11% of GDP and yet Cameron wants to implement harsh savings in government spending.
These cuts will bring back the austerity years of the Thatcher era (a point obviously recognised by some Lib-Dems) and will result in substantial increases in the number of people unemployed, along with more houses being repossessed, more individuals and businesses forced into bankruptcy and a significant decline in front-line services.
The Labour Party must be at the forefront of the fightback to defend these services and should work co-operatively with the trade union movement to develop a clear strategy to support public service workers in their defence of our services. In parliament we should expect that Labour MPs resist every attempt by this reactionary government to cut hard-earned services offering critical support to the weak, the needy, the sick, the old and the unemployed.
At the same time, activists should join together to lobby MPs, match on demonstrations, support the People’s Charter and the Right to Work campaigns and petition Cameron to end these savage cuts.
The question is – have we become so apathetic that we sit and watch the Tories savagely decimate our services, or will we stand and fight?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
