Mehdi Hasan

Mehdi Hasan’s polemical take on politics, economics and foreign affairs

RSS

The assault on the poor

The Spending Review is reckless, unnecessary and unfair.

By Mehdi Hasan Published 20 October 2010 19:27

Here are four key points that stand out from George Osborne's Spending Review:

1) £7bn squeezed from the welfare budget, on top of the £11bn already announced.

2) 28 per cent cut in local council budgets over four years.

3) 60 per cent sliced off the affordable housing budget.

4) 490,000 jobs gone in the public sector over the next four years.

Special Offer: Get 12 issues of New Statesman magazine for just £12

Tags: budget deficit George Osborne

More from Mehdi Hasan

View the discussion thread.

23 comments

Wed, 2010-10-20 19:44 — ang (not verified)

'These types don't fight back George', no wonder you picked on them. BULLY!

Wed, 2010-10-20 19:48 — triedeinsursE

Jump on the bandwagon Mehdi. Everyone else is.

Wed, 2010-10-20 19:49 — Arthur Williamson (not verified)

2 questions:

(i) The £11 billion reduction in welfare, does that stem from the emergency budget back in June? If that results in a total of £18 billion being slashed, how much is that in percentage terms?

(ii) Back in June, Mr Osbourne announced a 25% reduction in the Education budget, over the next 4 years (IF MY MEMORY SERVES ME CORRECTLY). Does today`s announcement overrule the June announcement about the Education budget, or is today`s announcement mean there are no further Education cuts in addition to the 25% reduction?

Can anyone clarify these 2 matters.

Wed, 2010-10-20 21:05 — Andy (not verified)

Why don't you admit it Mehdi.

It wasn't as bad as you thought it was gonna be was it?

They took your ammunition away from you didn't they.

Why don't you go and sulk and regroup somewhere else?

Wed, 2010-10-20 21:15 — Nick (not verified)

Why do people still live in cloud cuckoo land and pretend that these cuts won't hit the people who need the most help. Why didn't we hear anything about the 16 billion which could be saved by high earners using every loophole in the HMRC tax avoidance rule book?

Those that heave a sigh of relief over these cuts are those that won't be affected, have a thought for someone other than yourself!

Wed, 2010-10-20 21:18 — Dark Heart of Toryland (not verified)

'It wasn't as bad as you thought it was gonna be'??

Presumably 'Andy' is one of the minority who are sufficiently enough well off to be confident that they need never, ever rely on the state to look after them. If you are not one of that small minority, then it's actually even worse than we thought it would be.

Wed, 2010-10-20 21:29 — jeremiah

We are all in this together, my arse!

Osbourne has done exactly the same thing that the Tories used to accuse Gordon Brown of doing, namely hiding the $hit in the big book.

These cuts will not just cost jobs but also lives. People will die because of these cuts. I hope you are proud Gideon! But hey as long as those b'stards in the square mile who caused this swamp are happy so be it.

Mr Clegg and Mr Cable you have an appointment with the people in 2015. We'll be waiting for you...

Wed, 2010-10-20 21:40 — Lou (not verified)

Arthur Williamson

i) 18 billion is just under 22% of the 83 billion that the spending review wants to save

ii) Re education, well it's not that straight forward either. The budget for schools has risen from 35 billion to 39, however, universities face a 40% cut in their teaching budget and further education for eighteens and over face a 25% cut. As schools are also funded by the local authority,which will be facing 7% cuts this year on average,in real terms they reckon that the actual increase in budget for schools will make no difference and there will actually be cuts of about 3% overall by 2014. Capital spending on building for schools will be reduced by 60% re the building school's for the future programme.

Wed, 2010-10-20 21:46 — thinkov

what bandwwagon's that then we're not exactlt tearing down walls like we should be are we?

The french and greeks are showing us how why aren't we doing the same aas them

This is vicious ideologically wanton destruction
Ed and Brendan show some bottle please

Being abandoned to our fate like this is disgusting .

Wed, 2010-10-20 21:50 — Lou (not verified)

p.s. Arthur,

It depends who you read and who gives what figures out. On the welfare question, more people say cuts of 20 billion is more accurate regarding welfare which is 24% of the spending review aims.

Re education, again colleges have already seen a 14% decrease in funding this last year which George conveniently doesn't mention, Add that on to the 25% announced today and you start to see more realistic representations of cuts across the public sector in general.

It's still going to be about the end of November before the reality of today's announcements start to materialise and really be known, for anyone who thinks this isn't as bad as you thought it was going to be - think again

It's hardly evidence of fairness or us all being in it together.

Wed, 2010-10-20 22:06 — ang (not verified)

One Man has allowed the Tories back in. Nick Clegg!

The Tories could not have done any of this without this stupid man.

Cameron pretends to be his friend, but will discard him, the minute he is no longer required.

Most people would feel deeply ashamed in his position, he obviously doesn't give a damn about his party or the people of this country.

Still, only a few more years of looking at his stupid smurk and sycophantic nodding, then he will fade into the wilderness, taking his party with him.

Wed, 2010-10-20 22:09 — Lou (not verified)

Also, Osborne said in his speech that "the welfare measures he had outlined would save the country 7 billion each year" so the real figure is 28 billion from welfare which is a whopping 33.7% of the spending review cuts.

George's speech in full on the link below

http://www.direct.gov.uk/prod_consum_dg/groups/dg_digitalassets/@dg/@en/...

Wed, 2010-10-20 23:14 — Stuart John Thomas (not verified)

Clegg will be on his way to a top job in Europe because that is what he really believes in. We in this country do not matter to him. The man is a disgrace

Wed, 2010-10-20 23:21 — Lou (not verified)

"And in the massive public consultation we conducted over the summer, the overwhelming message we received was that British people think it's fair to cut welfare bills in order to protect important public services"

The consultation that Nigel Lawson called a PR ploy that no minister would take any notice of anyway?

The same public that voted for parties that were offering restrained and not immediate cuts on the whole as opposed to the Tory's fast and deep ones?

I thought the overwhelming message they received in the consultation had been about penalising the banks?

How dare Osborne use the wider British public as justification for his ideological dirty work.

Wed, 2010-10-20 23:54 — Neil (not verified)

There were so many lies in Gideon's speech.

"We want the banks to pay not just by the letter of the tax law, but by its spirit. And a year ago, the previous government announced in a fanfare that it would require banks to sign up by the Code of Practice on Taxation.

Mr Speaker, I have asked the Revenue how many of our leading 15 banks actually signed up. The answer is four. Four out of fifteen.

That's what happened when they were in office. All talk and no action."

Number of banks signing up since the General Election: 0.

Thu, 2010-10-21 17:07 — Lou (not verified)

I can't believe what I've just heard, in a rerun of Cameron and Clegg's Q & A session earlier, David Cameron talking of how difficult it was filling in the DLA forms for his son. I'm speechless.

Whilst I realise this is not a means tested benefit, is it really ethical or moral for a millionaire and his multi millionaire wife to even claim this?

I know if I was that well off, entitlement or not, I would never claim it.

Thu, 2010-10-21 01:34 — GayJ (not verified)

If one half of a marriage is disabled, when the universal credit is introduced it will be means tested. This means that the disabled person will be likely to lose their benefit entirely because it will be based on household income, despite the extra costs of having to cope with disabilty. Very frightening.

Thu, 2010-10-21 03:35 — Wais

Couldn't agree with Mehdi more...good interview on Al-Jazeera news earlier. Well done for siding with the poor when Osborne and his cronies couldn't care less! Wais, London

Thu, 2010-10-21 04:25 — Greg Dyke (not verified)

"The poor", is the new buzzword then! What about the workers and San Bushman who only have an Ostrich's egg of alkaline water to their name!
Hope fully the US. will default on it's debt soon and solve the probelm of the poor permanently.

Thu, 2010-10-21 07:48 — Nick (not verified)

Neil: Another thing Osborne omits to mention is that the HMRC code of practice on tax avoidance wasn't launched in June 2009 at all, it was still open to consultation up until the 25th September 2009, so there was very little time for any one to have signed up to it when Labour was in. At least Labour signed up 4, which is 4 more than this lot who have had longer!

Let's see how Osborne gets on with the other 11 by his November 2010 deadline shall we?

This lot are all talk and no action!

Thu, 2010-10-21 10:36 — writeoff (not verified)

Council tax is going to explode. Another way to hit the poor hardest. Even the Institute of Fiscal Bstrds admits that. It could have been worse is what they say, but that's because they've been pumping out apocalypse rhetoric to prepare the ground for wanton destruction and the theft of public assets. The Housing benefit cuts to single people are downright evil.

Thu, 2010-10-21 13:37 — Abelian (not verified)

Any your solution is?

Thu, 2010-10-21 13:45 — steven green (not verified)

never have voted conservatives and never will, they think all poor people are scum you should have seen the big grins on their faces as they were announcing the cuts...