UK Coalition Government Comprehensive Spending Review - Oct 20th 2010

PhylPho

Well I suppose when the public sector unions marshal the ranks of the soon-to-be-unemployed in, er, "days of action" from local Town Halls up and down the country, they'll all be saying it ain't a doomfest, either.

Mr_Mumble

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Graham.....

The "cuts" were pathetic.

In fact, there were no cuts overall. The overall budget is actually increasing every year of this parliament, just by a bit less than what inflation is projected to be.

2011-12: £651 bn

2012-13: £665 bn

2013-14: £679 bn

2014-15: £693 bn

There is no doomfest coming, this has turned into yet another big damp squib for all the doomers.

This was the last great hope for the bears, and it was a spectacular failure for them.

It's over. Give in.

Those numbers are for current expenditure only and exclude the slashed capital expenditure budget.

Total managed expenditure is going up by £44bn from 2010/11 to 2014/15 but that's offset by the increases in payments for debt interest (£20bn), public sector pensions (£7bn), overseas aid (£4bn) and the EU (£2bn net - haven't got the higher gross figures at hand). Taxpayers and home buyers will not see any direct benefit from this stealth spending, they will feel worse off unless we have a booming economy.

Rochdale_Pioneers

IFS just on Newsnight. Government claims that the budget is fair - as in it hits the rich hardest - are an utter lie. The reality is that this claim only stands up by factoring in the tax rises put in place by Alastair Darling which the Tories have left in place. The facts are that this CSR - like the Emergency Budget - hit the poorest hardest.

Don't believe the IFS? Why then has Oik appointed its head as the new gaffer of the OBR? Because Chote is a leftist stooge liar?

Wookster

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

IFS just on Newsnight. Government claims that the budget is fair - as in it hits the rich hardest - are an utter lie. The reality is that this claim only stands up by factoring in the tax rises put in place by Alastair Darling which the Tories have left in place. The facts are that this CSR - like the Emergency Budget - hit the poorest hardest.

Don't believe the IFS? Why then has Oik appointed its head as the new gaffer of the OBR? Because Chote is a leftist stooge liar?

Wow I just love how you labour frothers pop up and can only sing one sing, spend spend spend; leverage leverage leverage.

You had your chance and you blew it. Just like you always do.

Hank_Rearden

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

IFS just on Newsnight. Government claims that the budget is fair - as in it hits the rich hardest - are an utter lie. The reality is that this claim only stands up by factoring in the tax rises put in place by Alastair Darling which the Tories have left in place. The facts are that this CSR - like the Emergency Budget - hit the poorest hardest.

Don't believe the IFS? Why then has Oik appointed its head as the new gaffer of the OBR? Because Chote is a leftist stooge liar?

Until Labour tell us what they were going to do to deliver their 20% reduction, then it's pretty cheap to take any of their announced or electoral-gift taxation changes as distinct from the reality of what has been announced today.

WhiteHorse

All politicians to be put on fixed salary, outside employment forbidden. Expenses limited and to be refused unless fully documented and published. Severe penalties for infringement.

*wakes up*

sjaypink

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Graham.....

The "cuts" were pathetic.

? My dept has to cut 33% of its spending..........

Rochdale_Pioneers

Hank_Rearden wrote: »

Until Labour tell us what they were going to do to deliver their 20% reduction, then it's pretty cheap to take any of their announced or electoral-gift taxation changes as distinct from the reality of what has been announced today.

1) The 20% figure comes from the Tories not from Labour
2) You utterly misunderstand what a deficit is. Its spending outstripping income. To close it you either cut spending or increase income. In our case a massive drop in tax receipts caused by the recession created much of the deficit.

So what would Labour cut? Simple - the deficit. Not spending, the actual deficit. Like it was cut by £20bn more than expected back in the Spring when tax receipts started to recover thanks to growth

Sir_Humphrey

Looking at the detail of the CSR, it looks clear that the government were unable to make the 25% departmental cuts they wanted. Departments had been asked to draw up a 40% cuts scenario as well as 25%, so I am sure this is a U-turn rather than a case of managing expectations. Instead, they have made cuts to welfare on top of those announced in the emergency budget; had they planned to do it all along they would have announced at the time to get the bad news out of the way.

However, the "cuts" announced to welfare spending are actually spending estimates based on their assumptions of economic growth. If growth ends up below their predictions (even if recession is avoided) then those cuts will not be achieved (due to higher unemployment). There is plenty of potential for this to go horribly wrong - even if it were the right thing in principle (which of course I do not think).

Wookster

Rochdale_Pioneers wrote: »

So what would Labour cut? Simple - the deficit. Not spending, the actual deficit.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

That must be the funniest (but saddest) thing I have read on this forum for a while.

It just shows why labour just doesn't get it.