Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Politics

George Osborne's every blow falls on those with less not more

87 replies

ttosca · 30/11/2011 22:17

With his autumn statement, the chancellor has declared class war: a Tory assault on the public sector and the poor

Class war, generation war, war against women, war between the regions: George Osborne's autumn statement blatantly declares itself for the few against the many. Gloves are off and gauntlets down, and the nasty party bares its teeth. Here is the re-toxified Tory party, the final curtain on David Cameron's electoral charade. No more crocodile tears for the poor, no more cant about social mobility or "the most family-friendly government" or "we're all in this together". Forget "vote blue go green", with this mockery of husky-hugging. Let the planet fry.

Exposed was the extent of pain for no gain, exactly as Keynesian economists predicted, a textbook case. Things are "proving harder than anyone envisaged", says Cameron. But precisely this was envisaged by Nobel-winning economists. Extreme austerity is causing £100bn extra borrowing, not less, while everything else shrinks ? most incomes (the poorest most of all), employment, order books and exports. Pre-Christmas shopping ? already discounted ? heralds more imminent company collapses, and the only high street growth is in pawnbrokers, charity shops and Poundlands filling up the black gaps. For all the flurry of small announcements to kickstart business, infrastructure doesn't create jobs fast enough to replace the 710,000 more public jobs to go. The iron envelope of public spending is unchanged. Osborne learns nothing from experience.

What was missing from his list? Not one penny more was taken from the top 10% of earners. Every hit fell upon those with less not more. Fat plums ripe for the plucking stayed on the tree as the poorest bore 16% of the brunt of new cuts and the richest only 3%, according to the Resolution Foundation. Over £7bn could be harvested with 40% tax relief on higher pensions, while most earners only get 20% tax relief; £2bn should be nipped from taxing bankers' bonuses, but the bank levy announced was nothing extra. There was no mansion tax on high-value properties, though owners don't even pay their fair share of council tax, and property is greatly undertaxed compared with other countries.

Worse still, two-thirds of properties worth over £1m now change hands while avoiding all their 5% stamp duty, by using offshore company accounts. But not a word passed Osborne's lips on tax avoidance and evasion. Another 12,000 tax collectors are losing their jobs while some £25bn is evaded and £70bn avoided. In a time of national emergency, Osborne had no breath of rebuke about the responsibility of the rich not to dodge taxes, no threat to curb the culture of avoidance. Despite the High Pay Commission report on out-of-control boardroom pay ? which even the Institute of Directors has called "unsustainable" ? the chancellor said nothing. How adamantly he ruled out the Tobin tax on financial transactions, called for by those dangerous lefties Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel.

Instead came the great attack on public sector employees on the eve of the biggest strike in memory. This was a declaration of open class war ? and war on the pay of women, 73% of the public workforce. After a three-year freeze, public pay rises are pegged at 1% for two years, whatever the inflation rate. That means this government will take at least 16% from their incomes overall. But the plan to abolish Tupe ? the rule that ensures public workers are not paid less if their service is privatised ? is outrageously unjust, and will lead to mighty resistance to all privatisation from senior as well as junior staff.

As bad is the plan for reduced public pay rates in poorer regions. What draws good teachers and doctors to work in hard places is the same pay with a lower cost of living. Cut public pay in the north-east or the most impoverished places and their economies will plummet, making them poorer still. This will drive a yet deeper divide between north and south.

But the direct assault on the poor is almost beyond belief. Watch how the big, powerful charities on Tuesday expressed uncharacteristic outrage. Along with the Children's Society, Save the Children is fiercer than I can ever recall, calling this "dire news for the poorest families ? both in and out of work"; "A major blow", says 4Children; while Barnardo's calls it "a desperate state of affairs when the government's own analysis shows that a further 100,000 children will be pushed into poverty as a result of tax and benefits changes announced today".

That 100,000 is added to the 300,000 that the Institute for Fiscal Studies already expected to join the numbers of poor children from Osborne's previous cuts. The increase in the number of two-year-olds getting nursery schooling is excellent, but why pay for it by taking from the tax credits of those families supposed to benefit? Households that gain are commuters, higher up the scale: few in the bottom 25% have cars or use trains. Meanwhile, the young are hit, the cut in the education maintenance allowance causing fewer to attend college at 16, and there are signs of a serious fall in university applications.

Politically, how will this feel? The outrage of respected charities is telling: worms are turning. The government has deliberately and unjustly provoked the whole public sector ? from headteachers to hospital cleaners. Cameron and Osborne's record for serious miscalculation is formidable ? from the economic effect of their austerity to their unravelling NHS debacle and the precarious work programme.

The gap between what they say and do is now exposed. The injustice of how the pain has been shared is breath-taking. A windfall taking just one year's bank bonuses would pay for all the cuts in youth services and the EMA for the next 23 years. That's just one example. Osborne is fatally wrong on the economy, as his deficit target slips by two years in just the past eight months. But even if his straitjacket were necessary, the pain would be politically acceptable only if justly shared. The Bullingdon budget tears the last veil of deceit, leaving the nasty party naked for all to see. But every school will get its King James Bible with Michael Gove's presumptuous foreword: is prayer all that's left?

www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/nov/29/osborne-class-war-autumn-statement

OP posts:
AnnieLobeseder · 03/12/2011 12:03

anotherglass - The poor are in charge of their own destiny? Tell that to the mother with the disabled child whose husband walked out on her leaving, her with no maintenance and a child the government pays her a pittance to care for, and a fight for every drop of medication, wheelchair and even hour of respite care. Of course, her troubles are of her own making. Hmm

I am full of righteous anger for the previous government who made the country so dependent on handouts that people are better of on benefits than working, and the current government who is pulling the rug out from under these people without bothering to enable them to take care of themselves first. They care nothing about the suffering they're inflicting on the needy and vulnerable and I am baffled as to why you seem to think I should just shrug it off with a 'meh'.

Of course not everyone is deserving of my righteous anger. What a bizarre comment. And yes, this extra childcare will help a small proportion of poor people. But not many. So forgive me if I turn my attention to the huge pile of crap being dumped on the poor and vulnerable who don't happen to have a 2 year old in need of a couple of hours of childcare.

Disputandum · 03/12/2011 10:31

The Bureau of Investigative Journalism claims here that the public sector wage bill rose by 29% 2005-2010 (and the top 3% saw their wages rise by 64% over a decade).

Local government spending increased by 53% over the decade from 1998 - hilariously this led to very little improvement in services with 10% of councils performing at lower standards in 2008 than they had been previously.

So the poor may not have 'spent the huge amounts in the good times' but we all pushed for (or turned a blind eye) to huge increases in spending that served little purpose I would say.

breadandbutterfly · 03/12/2011 09:18

Increased public spending by 50% in 5 years - source for that rather unlikely claim, please, youngermother?

As has often been said, it was not the poor that spent the huge amounts in the good times - our debt levels now are down to bailing out the banks. Personally, I didn't benefit at all in the 'good' years from the banks' gambling - see no reason why I should be paying for it now while the uber-rich get huge bonuses, pay no stamp duty on their million-pound plus properties etc etc.

youngermother1 · 03/12/2011 01:34

What about the fact that the previous government got us into this mess? They ran a deficit, borrowing from the future, during the longest boom we have ever had. If they had not increased public sector spending by 50% in 5 years and paid down the debt, then we would have a lot of extra money to play with.
After a party, cleaning up is needed - the longer and more drunken the party, the worse the mess. Nobody likes cleaning up, but necessary.

anotherglass · 03/12/2011 01:17

There are tossers in all walks of life spend your energy not on the good fight but the savvy fight.

anotherglass · 03/12/2011 01:16

Do you think that everyone is deserving of your righteous anger?

anotherglass · 03/12/2011 01:13

Fat cats? Mind your language. You might give the impression that actually putting a lot of effort into a project either as an employee or self employee and building yourself up is an affront to society? Wastrels, tossers and the morally vacant are not exclusive to any one class. I object to your paternalistic tone that the poor are suffering passively, that individuals are not in charge of their own destiny.

AnnieLobeseder · 03/12/2011 01:02

Sorry anotherglass, this one tiny good thing amidst so many crushing blows is too little, too late and of no help to the vast majority of people who are being made redundant/losing DLA/losing their pension etc while the fat cats carry on regardless. It's one drop of good in an tidal wave of bad, so I fail to see why I should get remotely excited about it.

anotherglass · 03/12/2011 00:22

Spare me your sweat soaked kerchief please Annie. 3k extra for childcare support is a pretty bloody good deal, especially for those on very low incomes with families. It doesn't go through the tax system so is a clean saving. Yes, it is not fair that we all have to pick up the tab for the excess of the fin serv industry and a weak and ineffectual regulatory system, which allowed risky behaviour to go unchecked, but give this initiative its due.

AnnieLobeseder · 03/12/2011 00:17

anotherglass - that's a feeble crumb tossed to the poor to say that the government 'cares about them' while their lives are ripped to shreds around them.

I feel so impotent and so full of rage. Seriously, what can the average prole do about any of this?

anotherglass · 03/12/2011 00:12

Eh, wot about the extension of free childcare places for 2 year-olds to poorer families. Must be worth about £3k a year. Still an assault on the poor?

breadandbutterfly · 03/12/2011 00:02

Great article; thanks ttosca.

Esp this bit:

"the poorest bore 16% of the brunt of new cuts and the richest only 3%" - despicable.

Swipe left for the next trending thread