Skip to main content

Chancellor cut the price of beer whilst the NHS is in crisis.

I suppose I should comment on the budget. It is to say the least a curious budget for a Chancellor who has spent five years telling us we must cut the deficit. He now tells us that he has £6 billion to spare. Fantastic! Or should I say 'hey we have an election'.  So what has he chosen to? He cut duty on beer. Now that is really what we needed.  It is the little things that say a lot about this government's priorities.  Was this a budget for the poorest? No.  Was it a budget to help the NHS or to help pay for social care? No.  it was an election budget.

 The NHS is facing a crisis and the Chancellor prioritises the price of beer.  It is a very odd priority. He chose to do very little that would help the poorest.  This point was made by a woman interviewed in the street on BBC news.  It is all very well helping people save, she said, but it only helps those who have money to save.  And there you have it. It is a budget directed at those in marginal constituencies whose vote might make a difference in he general election.

What we know is that if the Tory party wins that election we are in for a continued period of cuts. The Tories are bent on doing what they think they have failed to do in the coalition: 'roll back the state'.  The Conservatives came into office saying they would protect the NHS, make people better off and balance the books, yet given the opportunity he cuts the price of beer.

Th tax and benefit changes since 2010 have left families on average £1,127 a year worse off. Yet, his priority is the price of beer.  The Chancellor now says he wants to go far beyond balancing the books: he has a target of a £23 billion budget surplus in 2019/20 and £10 billion of unfunded tax promises. And yet, the NHS is in a funding crisis.

It is no secret that the Tories are now planning even deeper spending cuts in the next four years than during the past five.  This will hit the poorest the most.  Those who have already been hit by five years of austerity.  Now we are told that the pain must continue to 'balance the books', and yet he gives away £10 billion in unfunded tax promises.



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

Keir Starmer has a lot to offer

The Labour Party is in the process of making a decision that will decide whether it can recover from the defeat in 2019 General Election.  All the candidates have much to offer and are making their case well. No doubt for some the decision will be difficult.  Others may well have made up their minds on the simple binary of Left-wing-Right-wing. The choice should be whoever is best placed to pull the party together.  Someone who can form a front bench of all talents and across the spectrum in the party. That is what Harold Wilson did in the 1960s.  His government included Roy Jenkins on the right and Barbar Castle on the left; it included Crossman and Crossland, and Tony Benn with Jim Callaghan.  It presented a formidable team. Keir Starmer brings to the top table a formidable career outside politics, having been a human rights lawyer and then Director of Public Prosecutions.   He is a man of integrity and commitment who believes in a fairer society where opportunities are more

The lion and the wildebeest

Birds flock, fish school, bees swarm, but social being is more than simply sticking together.  Social groups enable specialisation and a sharing of abilities, and enhances ability, learning and creating new tricks. The more a group works together, the more effective they become as a team.  Chimpanzees learn from each other how to use stones to crack nuts, or sticks to get termites.  All around us we see cooperation and learning in nature.  Nature is inherently creative.  Pulling together becomes a rallying cry during a crisis.  We have heard it throughout the coronavirus pandemic.  "We are all in this together", a mantra that encourages people to adopt a common strategy. In an era of 'self-interest' and 'survival of the fittest,'  and 'selfish gene', we lose sight of the obvious conclusion from the evidence all around us.   Sticking together is more often the better approach.  This is valid for the lion as it is also for the wildebeest.   We don't