£30bn in cuts to public services plus £10bn in cuts to welfare. That makes a total of £40bn. Now, yet again, what services and welfare do you expect to be cut.
Tbh, I don't understand why there is an obsession with cutting the deficit. Debt is cheap at the moment, so we should be taking advantage of it to sort out our woeful infrastructure and the lasting damage Tories have done across the board. If the government starts spending and kick starts some serious national economic growth (not bullshit growth which is only really down to house prices increasing) then the deficit and debt will rapidly be reduced as a percentage of GDP. And tax take will almost certainly rocket so within no time the deficit will cut anyway. Labour managed this perfectly happily c.1997-2002, so I'm not sure quite why they are also suggesting we need to carry out cuts now when what we need is some impetus in our stagnating economy. But certainly the Tories' policy is the most stupid - cut rapidly until 2019 and then increase spending again. Er, what? Why not just cut more slowly over a longer period of time and get to the same point if that's your aim you idiots?
Nice Diatribe but the Markets including the IMF have unequivocally backed the Tories plan of direction for the economy both in fiscal terms and in deficit reduction.
I don't think it's quite as literal as that JWM Keynes is inevitably an extreme. My point is that the debt circumstances mean it works in this situation. Though I get that you have to be careful (as a prospective governing party) not to cause borrowing costs to increase as a result of putting forward an extravagant budget. I actually don't believe, whichever party gets in power, will cut the deficit as much as they say. Just like Osborne didn't as much as he said he would for the last five years. It's just posturing.
I get what your saying Rob but it is not as simple as that! We live in an interdependent World where Capital knows no boundaries and ultimately I'm afraid it's the international Bond Markets and the Credit Ratings Agencies that decide. Osbourne has made mistakes like all previous chancellors but his plans carry much credibility with the financial institutions. The Borrowing is gradually coming down so why risk this now! The Markets are crapping themselves that we deliver a weak left wing Government on May 8th! We are crying out for a strong decisive Government because it will be stable and secure and will run a full term. The Markets hate instability and I'm afraid that that's what we will end up with a couple of weeks time.
The cuts should be made to those services that return little financially. Police, Fire, Hospitals and most of all the military. They are hardly on the brink of collapse. The NHS is not going suddenly stop. So what if the wards are not immaculate, so what if you have to wait an 3 months for that knee op. If its not urgent, tough. Then spend any extra borrowing on those infrastructure projects that deliver a return along with education. When the money comes back then the services can be improved. All political parties should be made to publish a set of percentages of money going onto services that they can be held accountable to. How easy would that make things for us all to see their priorities.
Well, this is the most worrying article I have seen to date - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2015-32442151. "SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon has said she would prop up a Labour government, even if the Tories finished the election as the largest party by up to 40 seats. Ms Sturgeon has repeatedly said she would work with Labour to "get rid of the Tories" if the SNP had enough MPs." I find this prospect really disconcerting as we would be heading into unknown territory and I could see nothing but disaster looming unless Ed gives in to most of Nicola's outrageous demands for more devolved powers.
Why are you so concerned about the SNP as if they are some kind of bogeyman? Why not consider some of the positives that could come out of that coalition - like the end of this bullshit austerity for example? Think you've been buying into the right-wing press too much fella, don't believe all the baseless scaremongering bollocks you read. Anyone who can get these bastard Tories out of Westminster is ok by me Would you rather have Sturgeon or Fararge "propping up a coalition"? I know what I would bloody prefer and I know which one I would consider to be a disaster.
It wouldn't be a disaster,just a stalemate,much the same as 2010. The problem in Scotland is that the No vote has now been spread amongst several parties whilst the Yes vote is mostly confined to the SNP. And it will persist because the No's are peeved. Are people really suggesting that the Scots should not have representation in Westminster? If so then you are arguing for Independence.
Whoever is in charge by the end of May, it's becoming increasingly obvious it will be a coalition of some colour and I have to admit that I don't particularly like the idea of any of them. I just feel that whether it's UKIP propping up the Tories, or SNP propping up Labour, I can't see either lasting for the next 5 years, but would envisage a 'messy divorce'. Even Labour has stated that there will be a need for more cuts in government spending in future, I think it's just a case of where the cuts will fall depending on who is in charge. It's not quite so much the 'right-wing press' that is influencing my concerns, but more Ms Sturgeon herself and her beliefs!!! I won't be commenting on this topic any more!!
Are you sure it's not the right-wing press and the way it is reporting her so called "beliefs" that are skewing your thinking? As far as I can see, some of her main beliefs involve scrapping the £100billion nuclear deterrent that we will never use in favour of spending that money on people in society who really need it. Not that despicable if you ask me
I am glad I am well out of it now. The thought of the SNP in a position of power is a worrisome one. The basis of their beliefs is they want nothing to do with England, Wales and N. Ireland, but by allying themselves with Labour would be in a position of power over us. My son-in-law is Scottish and he wants nothing to do with them. Labour could do themselves long term harm if they allow a union.
Let me tell you my own story. Just before Christmas I suddenly collapsed. Fortunately I was in the company of a senior nurse who finding no sign of a pulse or heartbeat started the required procedures and got everything working again before the paramedic arrived. As he examined me I went again and once more I was brought round. The same thing happened again for a 3rd time in the ambulance. I arrived at the A&E where my wife informed all the family. One of my daughters, who lives in Crawley, got her things together and drove up to the N&N. When she arrived I was still in the corridor waiting for a cubicle to be available. I was being watched over by a nurse so that the ambulance crew could be released but had not seen a doctor. I was kept in and saw a heart consultant who advised that I needed a pacemaker fitted to prevent it happening again and that I had already been put on the waiting list which was approx 3 months although I was told that due to emergency pressures it was likely that the procedure would be cancelled a couple of times suggesting that I should be prepared for a 6 month wait. Terrified that it might happen again when I was on my own and to my shame, bearing in mind my strong political beliefs, I paid for it to be done privately and had a pacemaker fitted a fortnight later. How much worse do you want the NHS to get?
That's a dreadful tale 1950 no question, but tell me, was the NHS any better under the last Labour Government ? Nope it wasn't, fact is no matter how much money is thrown at it the NHS will always struggle to cope such is the high demand.
From what I know from limited experience I think it was getting better under the last Labour Government. We didn't have this non-stop A&E crisis 5 years ago. If I wanted to see my own designated GP 5 years ago I only had to wait 2 days. Last week I tried to book an appointment with her and there was no appointments available to see her in the next 3 weeks and I couldn't see any GP in the practice for the following 3 days unless I joined the scrum after surgery hours. People are stuck in hospital beds because they can't go home as, due to cuts, there aren't enough district nurses or care facilities available in the community. That was not such a problem 5 years ago. A family friend runs a local small NHS rehabilitation unit which was set up to deal with the transition stage between Hospital care and going home. She openly admits that in the last 5 years it has become less of a rehabilitation centre and more a care home for hospital bed blockers and reckons that whereas originally 100% of her patients went home, now, 50% of her patients die in her unit. All of these cuts will continue if the Tories get back and so the situation will only get worse. The NHS can be a bottomless pit as far as money is concerned but to my mind to suggest, as the Tories are doing, that the NHS has got to find £20bn of efficiency savings - an impossible task according to all independent experts - and at the same time deal with an increasing work load for no increase in funding in real terms when cuts in other areas are going to make care provision etc even worse, is sheer lunacy. The Labour plan to amalgamate care within the NHS would be a positive start and the Labour plan to reinstate Nursing training places, slashed by the Tories, to previous levels and more will also help especially if levels of nursing in the community are restored. At the end of the day more money will be needed. Do I trust the Tories to try and find the money - No! Do I trust a Labour Government to try and find the money - Yes! To me that is more important than a headlong dash to cut Public spending in the shortest time possible which is why I, as usual, will be voting Labour.
HSBC considering moving HQ out of London - partly from fear of UK voting to leave EU HSBC has announced that it is considering moving its HQ out of the UK - and at the same time it is worried about the possibility of Britain leaving the EU. Excerpt from a speech by HSBC Chairman Dougla Flint: "The board has therefore now asked management to commence work to look at where the best place is for HSBC to be headquartered in this new environment ... As we look forward, it is impossible not to reflect on the very broad range of uncertainties and challenges to be addressed in 2015 and beyond. Many of these are outside our control, particularly against a backdrop of patchy economic recovery and limited monetary and fiscal policy ammunition. They include: • unexpected outcomes arising from current geopolitical tensions; • eurozone membership uncertainties; • political changes, currency and commodity price realignments; • and interest rate moves and the effectiveness of central banks’ unconventional policies. to name but a few. All could materially affect economic conditions and confidence around investment and consumption decisions. One economic uncertainty stands out, that of continuing UK membership of the EU. In February we published a major research study which concluded that working to complete the Single Market in services and reforming the EU to make it more competitive were far less risky than going it alone, given the importance of EU markets to British trade."
