Skip to main content

No end of austerity for the poorest

We might feel that with the massive borrowing to spend in the UK chancellor's budget sees the end of austerity.   Not long ago, the Tories were attacking Labour for their spending plans.  Now, this Tory government is set for the biggest spending spree in decades.

Of course, much of this is because of the coronavirus pandemic.   The NHS will get a boost in spending because, without such an injection of new cash, it will be unable to cope.

The government is responding to crises.  At last, it is putting in the much-needed funds to strengthen flood defences.

But does all this mean the end to austerity?  The answer to the poorest is that it does not.   There is little in the budget to address the problem of social care.  There is little to solve the issue of high rents and poor standard of housing.



There is little to address the crisis in children's services, and little to address the crumbling school infrastructure.

It is a spending budget, but it doesn't address the real problems faced by working people who have struggled over the last decade.

This is still, under the skin, an austerity budget.  Yes, it deals with the critical needs of the coronavirus crisis and its economic consequences. It is right that it should.  But once again, it will be the poorest who will pay for it.

The Tories have been forced to break their own wisdom on borrowing.   There will be problems ahead.

There is little to address the problem of chronic underfunding of our local authorities.  Many are facing difficulty meeting their statutory requirements.  Children's services, youth services, social care are all set to continue underfunding.

We needed a budget for the people.  We have a budget that rightly protects businesses, but does little to protect the most impoverished families.  It isn't a budget that levels up.  It is a crisis budget.

There is little of the promised Brexit dividend for the NHS.

The government benches cheered the Chancellor of the Exchequer when he sat down after his speech, but many are concerned that they have abandoned the very principles on which they sought election.   Some have already voiced concerns.



 

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 secret life of Giant Pandas

Giant pandas, Ailuropoda melanoleuca , have usually been regarded as solitary creatures, coming together only to mate; but recent studies have begun to reveal a secret social life for these enigmatic bears.  GPS tracking shows they cross each others path more often than previously thought, and spend time together.  What we don't know is what they are doing when together.  Photo by  Sid Balachandran  on  Unsplash For such large mammals, pandas have relatively small home ranges. Perhaps this is no surprise. Pandas feed almost exclusively on bamboo. The only real threat to pandas has come from humans. No wonder then that the panda is the symbol of the WWF.  Pandas communicate with one another through vocalization and scent marking. They spray urine, claw tree trunks and rub against objects to mark their paths, yet they do not appear to be territorial as individuals.  Pandas are 99% vegetarian, but, oddly, their digestive system is more typical of a carnivore. For the 1% of their diet

Work Capability Assessments cause suffering for the mentally ill

People suffering from mental health problems are often the most vulnerable when seeking help. Mental health can have a major impact on work, housing, relationships and finances. The Work Capability Assessments (WCA) thus present a particular challenge to those suffering mental illness.  The mentally ill also are often the least able to present their case. Staff involved in assessments lack sufficient expertise or training to understand mental health issues and how they affect capability. Because of  concerns that Work Capability Assessments will have a particularly detrimental effect on the mentally ill,  an  e-petition  on the government web site calls on the Department of Work and Pensions to exclude people with complex mental health problems such as paranoid schizophrenia and personality disorders. Problems with the WCA  have been highlighted in general by the fact that up to 78% of 'fit to work' decisions are  being overturned on appeal. It is all to the good that they