Cut £25,000,000,000 And Face Shocking Consequences
Posted: 07/01/2014 | Author: The Political Idealist | Filed under: Uncategorized |4 Comments »The advent of the New Year has focused Britain’s politicians’ minds on the General Election that is hurtling towards us, despite the generous 5 year fixed term that the Coalition has awarded itself. The four largest parties are competing with each other to outline the direction that their government would take come victory in 16 months’ time.
Alas, the policy commitments that George Osborne and David Cameron have made in a flurry of interviews on Sunday are unnerving not only in themselves but in the fact that our leaders are seriously contemplating them. The fact that £25 billion of spending cuts will be needed post-2015 is a testament to the flawed economic policy pursued by the Coalition, ensuring that a budget deficit that they planned to be just £35 billion by now remains at £100 billion. But that is the past, and it cannot be undone. What we should consider is the £25 billion of “fiscal consolidation” that will need making in the next parliamentary term.
The Conservative Party wants 100% of this sum to come from spending cuts. They say that the only alternatives are “more borrowing” or heavy tax rises. They want some £12,000,000,000 of these cuts to be made in the social security budget but with the state pensions “triple lock” and pensioners’ perks such as free bus passes and TV licenses protected. So the budget for tax credits and benefits for families, the working poor, the disabled, their carers and the unemployed will be cut by 11% in cash terms. Where do the Conservatives plan to find such money taken from people who have so little? Naturally, no politician would dream of going into an election promising to deprive the thousands who give up work to look after disabled relatives of their £3,500 a year Carers Allowance. They’d shut up about it until the middle of a term, then cut the benefit. Labour seems to be pursing such a policy with all spending cuts.
But to be fair to the Conservatives, they have identified one sixth of the “savings” they will make in welfare. A Conservative government would withdraw Housing Benefit from under 25s (Saving: £2 billion) and evict council housing tenants when their incomes exceed £65,000 (Saving: £0). The former policy is justified on the grounds that there are plenty of hardworking twentysomethings who’d love to have their own home but can’t afford to, but “those on benefits” can get their own flat with the rent paid for them. You’d either have to be very malicious or badly misguided to portray the situation like that. I’m sure that on the planet our millionaire Cabinet inhabit, everybody can stay with a supportive and rich Mum and Dad in their large country house for a couple of years until their income reaches the 6 figures that will support a mortgage on a luxury flat. In the real world, there are some of us who will be unfortunate to have parents who are unable (or unwilling) to accommodate their adult children. Not every member of every family will enjoy comfortable circumstances, and they could do without the state pushing them into homelessness.
This brings us to the second spending “cut”: kicking the few thousand council tenants who reach a high income out of their houses. Any economy made by the marginal reduction in housing waiting lists this could have would be more than offset by the costs of administering the scheme. Like the Bedroom Tax, or the multiplication of tuition fees, this policy will make life harder whilst costing the government money. Exactly nobody will benefit. And besides, I’m uneasy about the idea of forcing people out of their homes for the crime of having good fortune in their career.
Let’s have no more “austerity” for its own sake, please.
