initial reaction to the #csr

[miss_s_b]

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.

---

Comments

[matgb]

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.

[bagfish]

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.