Skip to main content

A government bereft of ideas abandons the economy for a pint of beer

Budgets come and budgets go; they rarely live up to their headlines. Much of a Chancellor's budget is flim flam, but they can set the tone, and they are often revealing more for what they don't do than for what they do. They are also best judged later rather than in the immediate aftermath of their delivery.

I am impressed by how few of us can recall very much of significance in the last budget. It must stand in history as one of the most frivolous budgets. While the country trundles along in  recession, Osborne takes a penny off a pint of beer. The Tory backbenches cheered, but they must now wonder what it was all about, and where the Chancellor is heading. As the right wing think tank, the Centre for Policy Studies has said, 'Plan A is dead', but the government is bereft of a Plan B.

The government still chants its mantra that there is no alternative. But not only are there alternatives, there are several, the government no longer has a coherent financial strategy. It has lost its way. Its policies have failed in their declared objectives, and yet they still argue that theirs is the only way.

Government ministers still like to peddle the sound bite about getting the deficit down. They claim erroneously to have done so. I have discussed this nonsense in previous articles. I won't rehash the arguments. But whatever their claims once were,  the reality is that the deficit is now rising. Over £600 bn will be added to public sector net debt during the course of this parliament. This is a truly staggering sum given that the government has no plan for growth. It is symptomatic of failure, because they claimed their policies would cut the deficit. The pain would be for the gain of cutting it. We have the pain, but none of the gain.

Another reality check is that, whilst the cuts in benefits are hurting people they are not contributing much to the declared aim of getting the deficit down. The poorest are being hit the most but for very little gain in the country's finances. And far from having a strategy for growth, the government has cut 'investment spending' by a staggering 67%.  It is a flawed and bonkers strategy.

The government, bereft of ideas, has abandoned the economy for the price of a pint of beer.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Ian Duncan-Smith says he wants to make those on benefits 'better people'!

By any account, the government's austerity strategy is utilitarian. It justifies its approach by the presumed potential ends. It's objective is to cut the deficit, but it has also adopted another objective which is specifically targeted. It seeks to drive people off benefits and 'back to work'.  The two together are toxic to the poorest in society. Those least able to cope are the most affected by the cuts in benefits and the loss of services. It is the coupling of these two strategic aims that make their policies ethically questionable. For, by combining the two, slashing the value of benefits to make budget savings while also changing the benefits system, the highest burden falls on a specific group, those dependent on benefits. For the greater good of the majority, a minority group, those on benefits, are being sacrificed; sacrificed on the altar of austerity. And they are being sacrificed in part so that others may be spared. Utilitarian ethics considers the ba

The unethical language of 'welfare dependency'

It is unethical to stigmatise people without foundation. Creating a stereotype, a generalised brand, in order to  demonize a group regardless of the individual and without regard for the potential harm it may do is unfair and prejudicial. It is one reason, and a major one, why racism is unethical; it fails to give a fair consideration of interest to a group of people simply because they are branded in this way. They are not worthy of equal consideration because they are different.  It seeks also to influence the attitudes of others to those stereotyped. If I said 'the Irish are lazy'; you would rightly respond that this is a ridiculous and unfounded stereotype. It brands all Irish on the basis of a prejudice. It is harmful certainly; but it is worse if I intend it to be harmful. If I intend to influence the attitude of others. And so it is with 'the unemployed'. All I need do is substitute 'work-shy' and use it in an injudicious way; to imply that it applies to

The Thin End account of COVID Lockdown