miss_s_b: initial reaction to the #csr

miss_s_b (

miss_s_b) wrote,
@ 2010-10-20 01:45 pm UTC

Current mood:	cynical
Current music:	Osbourne responding to Johnson's response to the csr
Entry tags:	bloodytories, panic!panic!panic!, politics

initial reaction to the #csr

So, as

matgb and I both predicted, it was bad, but not as bad as it was being spun. Could it be that all the doom-mongering was to make us terrified so we'd be grateful for small crumbs of comfort? You might think that, I couldn't possibly comment. Nor, given his ongoing performance at the moment, could Alan Johnson. I've never seen a man so far out of his depth, even with the crib notes from Balls.

Glad to see science funding frozen, rather than cut (anyone else think that Vince ran this up the flagpole precisely because he knew what the reaction would be and then he could bat for science with the backing of the twitterati? Or am I just too cynical?). Other stuff needs examining in detail before I comment, I think.

If you'd like to examine the statement in detail yourself, it's here.

(7 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Threaded) (Top-level comments only)

	no subject andrewhickey.info 2010-10-20 01:03 pm UTC (link)
	The main thing for me is the cut to housing benefit for under-35s. That's just fucking evil. Worried about cut to DECC funding, the rest seems less bad than I worried. (Reply to this)

no subject

bagfish
2010-10-20 01:41 pm UTC (link)

Really concerned that Defra's been cut 32%. it's a tiny, tiny department doing important work for reducing and mitigating the effects of climate change and maintaining the life support that keeps the environment healthy for humans. When you think it's budget is 20 times less than the banks were bailed out with, it makes me quite certain that people in government have got their priorities utterly wrong.

(Reply to this)

	no subject andrewducker 2010-10-20 01:49 pm UTC (link)
	Yeah - I assumed that Vince put it out there on purpose. You don't make a speech about how you'll try and make sure the cuts are dealt with as well as they can be unless you want people to complain that there will be cuts. (Reply to this)

no subject

matgb
2010-10-20 03:22 pm UTC (link)

While I share your concern about specific cuts, especially for the larger %ages, this point:

When you think it's budget is 20 times less than the banks were bailed out with, it makes me quite certain that people in government have got their priorities utterly wrong.

Is utterly spurious and doesn't help you make your case for two reasons. 1) the banks were bailed out under the previous Govt 2) the banks were bailed out by way of a loan that'll be repaid, a single, one off event in each case, not an ongoing, annual spend.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

no subject

bagfish
2010-10-20 03:37 pm UTC (link)

Of course I understand that it was the last government that bailed out the banks. I still think that the comparison puts into context the tiny budget that the department has which is why I made it. So yes, the banks will pay off the one time loan at some point in the future, but it is money that is currently not in the system at the moment.

Cutting Defra's budget by 38% over four years does not actually save the government much money when compared to other department, but will make an enormous dent in the already extremely small spend on the natural environment.

(Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

no subject

burkesworks
2010-10-20 07:29 pm UTC (link)

From an "I'm all right Jack" point of view, the blows from Gideon's Axe could have been a hell of a lot worse (and indeed they may bite once our next round of Euro-funding runs out in 2013 - thanks Eric). OTOH, there are some real nasties in here, notably the cap on H. Ben for under-35s and the restriction on contributory-based ESA/WRAG claims after a year.

Then again, while you can blame Osborne for many things, the whole clusterfuck that is ESA came to be on "Workhouse" Purnell's watch, not the Tories. Don't forget that Alistair Darling's original back-of-a-fag-packet figures for the cuts were a billion pounds more than Osborne's, and while none of it was costed you can bet where it would have gone. Also, take note of David Blanchflower's comments today; there'll be a lot of poking with a fine toothed comb before any of this makes it to the statute books.

Still don't really have the heart for much political blogging at the moment; but as things stand now that the CSR has sunk in, and doubtless to the chagrin of my many readers who still believe that Ed Miliband's Labour Party is any relation to the pre-Blair entity of that name, I've thought long and hard about my future in the Party and I have decided to stay, and a lot of that is down to Jeanette and David. Still doesn't mean I'm going to be any sort of cheerleader for Clegg, much less Alexander, and if there's going to be any split in the party you can rest assured which side I'll fall on.

And FWIW, I voted for Tim Farron this morning.

(Reply to this)

	no subject andrewhickey.info 2010-10-20 09:53 pm UTC (link)
	Same here. Glad you've decided to stay too. We're still the least-worst party... (Reply to this) (Thread from start) (Parent)

(7 comments) - (Post a new comment)
(Threaded) (Top-level comments only)

Account name:	Log in with OpenID?
Password:	Forget your password?
	Remember me