BBC BLOGS - Have Your Say
« Previous | Main | Next »

Spending Review: Your verdict

10:31 UK time, Tuesday, 19 October 2010

Chancellor George Osborne has delivered the government's four-year Spending Review to Parliament. What is your reaction?

Mr Osborne is to slash welfare benefits by a further £7bn.

The pension age will rise sooner than expected, some incapacity benefits will be time limited and other money clawed back through changes to tax credits and housing benefit.

"Today is the day when Britain steps back from the brink," the chancellor said.

Did you watch the chancellor speak? What might the impact of these cuts be? Are there any alternatives to cuts? Do they seem fair?

Read your latest comments

Thank you for your comments. This debate is now closed.

Comments

Page 1 of 21

  • Comment number 1.

    You couldn't make it up..
    A Labour spokesman stated yesterday that he felt that the proposed cuts were 'reckless'...
    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!

  • Comment number 2.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 3.

    Free beer and tanks on the streets.

  • Comment number 4.

    It is MASH-UP TIME, the UK is going to be SEVERELY MASHED UP.

    PAIN is going to be real.

    Lets just hope than no enemy pops their head over the horizon prior to 2019/2020 because we will be EVEN WEAKER than we were pre-WWII.

    Basically, now is a time for others to take a punch, or to prepare to take a punch, as we are very visibly unable to protect ourselves as necessary.

    Its not as if tanks & artilary and planes and aircraft carriers can be built in a day.

    Our army I think will be no more, which is why they are planing ability for aircraft carriers to cope with French planes.

    It will be a pick "n" mix2 military capability, and I think it is now being driven to a EUROPEAN army.

  • Comment number 5.

    What will be the impact of the cuts?

    For most of the non-wealthy I imagine it will be be a bit like a baseball bat to the back of the head.

  • Comment number 6.

    Things we wont be seeing - although he will say his is the only option...
    - Cap on banker bonuses.
    - Pursue Tax Evaders.
    - Tighten rules on Tax Avoidance.
    - Increase top rate of income tax.
    - Cancel trident or replace with vastly cheaper option.
    - Cancel High Speed 2.
    - Abolish civil list.
    - Abolish house of lords.
    - Cut less over a longer period of time.

    All-in-this-together? what a joke...

  • Comment number 7.

    Contractors were still being taken on by IT projects in the Civil Service as recently as two weeks ago ... I know someone taken on for a DWP project ..... so its fairly obvious that many government departments are not acting as though we face any real cuts, certainly not to full time civil servants (the contractors are 'expendable').

    It may be of course, that the idea is to hire extra contractors then simply sack them today and say 'look a 25% reduction in IT development costs' ....

    Until a government tackles the root lack of skills in the Civil service (outside of admin and benefit delivery), then certainly in I.T. at least contractors will still be required to cover functions that they can't perform, or worse we will just continue the outsourcing to India of IT jobs that should be in the UK.

  • Comment number 8.

    In case people do not realise - the cuts are ALREADY happening!
    AND - in the NHS the cuts are happening!
    The NHS was supposedly ring fenced BUT it still has savings and huge reductions in budgets all over.
    It's also true that in the Welfare reforms, for example, people on Incapacity Benefit are already being hit - this is despite the fact that the tests the government planned to start next year after pilots HAS ALREADY STARTED in some places - this is totally unfair(not to say dangerous) in my view and could seriously put people's lives at risk! (there is a very big risk with people with mental health issues and others if they do not implement this properly)
    The Government is in for a very hard time I think!

  • Comment number 9.

    1. At 09:11am on 20 Oct 2010, david wrote:

    You couldn't make it up..
    A Labour spokesman stated yesterday that he felt that the proposed cuts were 'reckless'...
    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!

    ////

    on the other hand, if the bankers had not acted like irresponsible kids - just because the rules say you can does not mean you should - we would not have the current mess.

  • Comment number 10.

    I simply cannot believe the "arrogance" of the Labour Party. They seem to have this "mental blockage" that the over-spending was actually caused by the Labour Party. Ed Miliband is a puppet and that is all he will ever be.

  • Comment number 11.

    Suffering.

    450,000 public jobs lost = + 300,000+ private jobs lost.

    Certain towns and citys will take much more severe hits, hence the effects will NOT be evenly experienced across UK.

    Some towns/Citys will be severely damaged.

    I myself will be ok, my market place for my business is the world, not as confined as local shopping centres etc.

    My concern is the lives this is going to ruin, for NO fault of their own.

    Hence, my feelings for politicians and the financial sector, is basically unprintable, basically, they are scum, especially Labour.

  • Comment number 12.

    I expect
    Unemployment to rise
    Strikes amongst public sector workers
    The Govts rating to fall through the floor once the full impact sets in
    The private sector will not fill the void heralding a threat of recession
    The Govt to back track in the light of the above as an export led recovery just won't happen

    By the way how does the Govt think it will avoid civil unrest when public sector workers are on a pay standstill yet bankers/boardroom bonuses remain effectively unchecked

  • Comment number 13.

    I hope these 'cuts' will get people to be honest enough with themselves - to ask the question; - why did LABOUR put this Country in this position?

    As always with LABOUR, we are once again, having to deal with the SYMPTOMS because THEY failed to deal with the CAUSE - via their pathetic, irresponsible financial incompetence and lies...

  • Comment number 14.

    The armed forces are once again being penalised for the failings of our corrupt and inept politicians. The entire country should hang its head in shame and disgust. We are very close to civil disorder similar to France and I would hope that our military will refuse any orders to quell civil unrest. For the record I served in the RAF and if I knew thirty years ago what the country would do to its finest then I would never have enlisted.

  • Comment number 15.

    500,000 jobs to go in the public sector....hmmm sounds about right.
    My wife, brother & several friends have worked for the M.O.D. for twenty years or more, & they could see this coming years ago. Too many personal with too little work to spread around.
    My wife has told me stories of the things that happen at the M.O.D. that quite frankly made my jaw drop. People on 'gardening leave' for over 12 months on full pay. A whole department playing 'Wii tournaments' during the working day. One employee that literally takes one day every week off 'sick' (usually monday) & has been doing so for two years with no comeback. First class rail travel for a party of 8 because just one of them is a higher 'grade'. Training courses held at 4 star country hotels at weekends (plus wives) at the taxpayers expense.......the list goes on.
    If the private sector was run like the public sector, this country would be on an economic par with Albania.

  • Comment number 16.

    The rich bankers and investors will get away without repaying all billions of public money they lost.
    The poor will get kicked from one corner of the room to the other until ever last penny falls from their pockets.

  • Comment number 17.

    I suspect many lower grade civil servants will be thrown on the scrapheap. Sacrificed to political expediency and dogma.
    At every opportunity the blame will be placed on the last lot (although they must have been a very influential Government, as they seem to have wreaked havoc on every economy in the West).

  • Comment number 18.

    We found out yesterday that my husband's job (he works for a council) is at risk and he'll know by Christmas if he has something to come back to. It's not looking good. We're in our early 30's, homeowners for 2 years after scrimping and saving for a deposit, and expecting our first child in January.

    We couldn't care less about all this 'he did it' nonsense the political parties are playing, what matters to us now is making sure we can keep our roof over our heads and that of our unborn child.

    We both work extremely hard for the little we earn, yet apparently the bonuses of bankers and perks of politicians are worth more than our attempts to make a home and have a family. And nothing is more upsetting for my husband than to hear that because he works for a council, he is simply 'waste'.

    The biggest betrayal of all? We voted Lib Dem in the last election. Utterly, utterly betrayed. We were Thatcher's children and our parents suffered when we were born, now our child will suffer in the same way under the ConDems.

  • Comment number 19.

    Its interesting that Labours plans, vague as they are, are almost the same as Tory strategy.
    I think the outcome will be a few tough years followed by a leaner stronger economy.
    Some say the government are using the deficit as an excuse to make some changes. I say about time.
    The economy has been used a tool for political advantage for to long. It needs a reboot.

  • Comment number 20.

    Well everyone, including Labour and Condem supporters seem to think the cuts equate to shrinking the ranks of the civil and public service back to the levels employed in 2003. That does not seem unreasonable to me.

    Leave the bankers out of this one, nothing to do with them. This is all about redressing the spendthrift polices of Mr Clown.

  • Comment number 21.

    we will not support cuts, right mr clegg and co!.these cuts to the public sector work force will be detrimental to the services that the public seem to take for granted.the cuts to the welfare budget is an outragous attack on some of the most vulnerable people in big society. this coalition have stated that the cuts would be fair and just to both rich and poor,but to single out benefit cheats is unfair what about all those millionaires who avoid paying tax should they be highlighted,not by osborne and co, you dont bite the hand that feeds you right?thecoalition state the private sector will absorb the cuts to the public sector workforce.this is privitisation by stealth.i wonder how many of the coalition cabal of untrustworthy misfits have intrests in the private sector

  • Comment number 22.

    Twenty years ago when large companies were "downsizing" the first jobs to go were in management and "overheads". Layers of management were removed and management "span of control" (the number of employees each manager managed) increased. Jobs that were not directly contributing to the business were radically cut, HR, Finance, IT and other "non-core" tasks centralised and even outsourced. The idea was to preserve the "front line" jobs and even give them more responsibility and accountability as, with fewer managers, this was necessary and improved decision making.

    In all these cuts, where is the strategy to cut such overheads before cutting front line sevices? It would seem that as it is managers who are making the decisiosn of where to cut, they are protecting themselves and their own ahead of the front line workers. Yet sooner or later someone will notice that theese cuts will INCREASE the number of managers per employee, not decrease it. Far better to take the pain now in the overhead as invariably losing it won't be noticed.

  • Comment number 23.

    I think once again the people who willingly work to support themselves will be hit hardest. It appears that the only people ever protected are those shirkers who never work or have no intention of doing so. All the Government will succeed in doing is adding more people to the list of those claiming benefits and since when will that ever help the economy?

  • Comment number 24.

    HYS. How can anyone answer this question. It`s like counting your chickens before they`ve hatched. At least wait untill the cuts have been announced.

  • Comment number 25.

    Typical tory plan; make the rest of us poorer and in fear for our jobs, and at the same time make sure they and their friends will make money out of this "disaster".
    Never forget that this gang are thatcherites. Expect an "easing" of things like employment law, minimum wage, landlord laws, health and safety laws (already started), and greater criminalisation of public order, property crime, and so on.
    As I said last year; expect things to get very, very much worse.

  • Comment number 26.

    Re a previous view:
    "also we were letting in too many foreign nationals that also come to the UK and claim benefits and bring nothing useful to the UK"

    The problem with immigration is not with Commonwealh (and ex Commenwealth) immigrants who generally have a good work ethic but with EC 'labour migrants' who drain all aspects of our economy and state benefits. A staged withdrawal from the EC is the best long term way to deal with UK debt.

  • Comment number 27.

    Me thinks the Labour party did a whole lotta wrecking to our country. Never again please!

  • Comment number 28.

    The priority cuts should be on those who do not contribute to our society. We should always help those who fall on hard times through no fault of their own but not those who do not wish to work or come here expecting money and servixes on demand. The armed forces are of paramount importance to the welfare and safety of this county and as such should be FULLY supported

  • Comment number 29.

    1. At 09:11am on 20 Oct 2010, david wrote:

    You couldn't make it up..
    A Labour spokesman stated yesterday that he felt that the proposed cuts were 'reckless'...
    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!

    --------------------------

    No if the banks hadn't gone on a 'reckless' lending spree to people how had no hope of paying the money back we wouldn't of be in this situation. Labours spending put people in work, they spent money, keeping other people in work.

  • Comment number 30.

    One persons "reckless" spending is another persons stimulous. By the logic some people are using to describe Labour's spending, they would never own a house! A large expenditure for a long term benefit paid off over a number of years.

    Unfortunately the governments attitude to cutting now is akin to renting a council house. Something I fear alot more people will have to do once this lot is over.

  • Comment number 31.

    I cannot understand why this Government is taking it out of the people it should be serving. Why are they not pursuing the American government, banks and companies who brought about the crash through their malfeasance and recoup the lost funds through the courts?


    Should we have voted for parties that where such poor oppersition?

  • Comment number 32.

    What ever the cuts, it is merely a method of sustaining the status quo. Go on George get radical, cap public service pay to 75k, this will oust the egotist and encourage the dedicated. Dissuade investment banks from investing (gambling) on commodity markets with OUR money, putting up prices of raw materials for EVERYONE.
    Stop protecting the housing market with state backed low interest rates, which in turn support a the banks capitaisation program, lower house prices, less bank value and reality sets in for the nation that the housing market in little more than a government backed pyramid scheme. Cuts start at the top, no one in public service is worth more than 3x average pay, what ever any says.

  • Comment number 33.

    On the Daily Mail website it mentioned that Osbourne was pinning his hopes on the private sector to create hundreds of thousands of jobs for the people being cut from the public sector.
    So... hahahahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaaaaaaa

    Yeah, good luck with that. With no manufacturing and nothing produced in the UK anymore this should be a laugh over the next few years and the only jobs going seem to be retail and service, I don't think the minimum wage will cater for the cost of living in the UK.

  • Comment number 34.

    This is the legacy Labour have left us. We face a lifetime of spending cuts and job losses. The prosperity our parents knew is over. Labour have thrown this country into a new age of austerity. It is made worse because they have also divided the country socially and created a huge underclass who have never known work and are not interested in finding it.

  • Comment number 35.

    The 'cuts' will ensure that we maximise the 'bang' for every tax pound we spend. I want every working person in the UK to be truly accountable for what they are paid, just as I have been for all my working life. It will make the country efficient, and force it to become competitive. The UK has been living-off the easy buck for too long. It's time to actually work, now.

  • Comment number 36.

    Don't know how they expect the tax payers to fund all these 500 000+ who will end up on the dole?

    I don't think they have done their sums correctly at all.

    And where are the people going to live if a council house is not for life? on the street.....?

    They had better get it right or there is going to be a massive backlash, all those people will be needing cheaper housing if out of work and there just isn't enough for them and they have more right to it than those who haven't bothered to work.

    They had better keep the interest rates the same or there is going to be even more pressure on cheaper housing.

    Somehow i think this is going to be a catastrophe.

  • Comment number 37.

    Im sure the cuts wont hurt George or Dave, and no doubt their friends will continue to avoid tax!!

    However, the great fear is the housing market may collapse entirely - prices are still too high and need to fall, but a collapse will lead to a very deep recession.

  • Comment number 38.

    " 1. At 09:11am on 20 Oct 2010, david wrote:

    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!"

    Err

    1) Refianancing banks - avoids Depression
    2) Car Scrapage scheme - helps car industry
    3) Kickstart - helps building industry
    4) VAT Cut - Helps retailers

    This resulted in an unprecedented 1.1% growth last Quarter!!!

    Hardly a wild spending spree, sounds like sound fianancial stimulus to help ordinary working people, unlike the Tories who were shown to be tax dodgers in Dispatches this week! Including our beloved Gideon Osborne!!

  • Comment number 39.

    Going back to the Question!

    What will be the impact of the cuts?

    These cuts will definitely cause a double dip.

    We only have to hark back to the last time we had a coalition in the 20's and their lack of vision beyond the need for cuts and not concentrating on stimulus destroyed the British Economy. Had it not been for the 2nd World War, and intensive borrowing on armaments and infrastructure around defence, Britain would never have recovered.

    In the meantime, in America, President Hoover approved a stimulus programme which meant borrowing to invest. Great projects like the Hoover Dam.

    That is why America is a Super Power, and we are a middle of the road developed nation.

    The Tories have no vision, no stimulus, and present no hope!

    Election NOW, to get rid of this horrid Millionaire Tory Rabble!

  • Comment number 40.

    Broken Britain ?

    Yes, Dave - you really have now broken this once great country.

    General election NOW please.

  • Comment number 41.

    Hopefully there will be some measures to reduce public sector pay to ameliorate the number of job cuts.

    One of the features of Labour's public sector boom was an unsustainable and unjustifiable rise in pay for more senior people in the public services. I think the justification was that the public sector had to pay at least as good as if not better than the private sector to get the best people.

    The general public are justified in asking, have we received more efficient public services by employing these highly paid managers? More efficient means more output for the same or less cost. I think history has proven this is not the case all we have done is create overpaid, overmanned bureaucracies.

  • Comment number 42.

    millions out of work .old people perishing from fear of heating bills and loss of winter payments, strikes from thos einfear of losing jobs,
    return to slump .

  • Comment number 43.

    Going back to the Question!



    These cuts will definitely cause a double dip.

    We only have to hark back to the last time we had a coalition in the 20's and their lack of vision beyond the need for cuts and not concentrating on stimulus destroyed the British Economy. Had it not been for the 2nd World War, and intensive borrowing on armaments and infrastructure around defence, Britain would never have recovered.

    In the meantime, in America, President Hoover approved a stimulus programme which meant borrowing to invest. Great projects like the Hoover Dam.

    That is why America is a Super Power, and we are a middle of the road developed nation.

    The Tories have no vision, no stimulus, and present no hope!

    Election NOW, to get rid of this horrid Millionaire Tory Rabble!

  • Comment number 44.

    Reasonable. Well lets see. The object is to reduce spending. So lets build 2 aircraft carriers - sell one cheap and use the other one without planes?
    Lets give married people tax breaks. Why? Do they pay back the money if they separate/divorce? Why not breaks for single people with no kids, who use less resources?

    Impact and Alternatives. Let's make at least 500,000 pulic service workers unemployed. That will cut welfare spending. Let's cut social housing and force people to rent privately, because private landlords will do this much more cost effectively (NOT!!!), so that should save some more money from the benefits bill, shouldn't it?

    Is this a government or an episode of Monty Python!!!

    I'd scrap every banker's bonus until the deficit is no more. I would scrap all tax credits and child benefits - PAY A LIVING WAGE to workers and these are not needed or the people to sit and work them out (usually wrongly). No one needs more than a 100K a year to live on, take every penny over this until the deficit is paid - what, you don't like spreading the pain evenly - then don't spout ridiculous soundbites at me about universal suffering and big societies. It's insulting that this government think we've all got IQ's of under 50 and believe a word of this drivel.

    Why is the foreign aid budget protected, legal aid for immigrants to sue us so they can avoid deportation, why are people able to claim for children who don't even live in this country? Are we really to believe that they are left abroad wandering the streets?

    Instead of these ill-thought out measures, (see paragraph 1) take a little time to understand the consequences. Cuts on a scale such as this are going set this country reeling into an even worse economic mess. Look at the Irish economy. I dread to think what nonsense will be spouted this afternoon, but of course there's nothing we can do but grin and bear it. Or is there? Maybe the French have the right answer.

  • Comment number 45.

    hopefully THIS DAY will signal the end of Public Sector Greed and featherbedding.
    Hopefully with the Burden of the public sector expenditure now being put back on a lease Business will once again take up the opportunity to create Jobs and Wealth
    Jobs and wealth that were suppressed by in those dark days of increased spending by New Labour
    just think Before Moaning abut the cuts,
    26% of all works in London are in the public sector that equates to aound 1 in 4
    Further in Wales, the Average is a staggering 57%. THAT IS the MAJORITY of the Worker.
    As a result Any business in Wales Will once business rates are devolved have to pay for the public sector ..
    That in reality means if you employ one person. The business MUST also pay for ONE public sector worker as well Usually on better pay and conditions..
    It is that,that is making Wales into an industrial wasteland .. and Wales dependent on Euro hand outs The same argument implies to many parts of the UK may be to a lesser extent ..
    It is time to reverse the situation for the generations to come
    So stop moaning and get on with the job in hand ,
    Lastly I note that both Brown and Blair aren't saying much these days

  • Comment number 46.

    The astronomical level of debt has to be repaid, that is a priority. It is also a priority to get out of the situation where daily interest payments on this debt are larger than area budgets in total !

    With the cuts must come a clearly defined plan to revitalise UK Manufacturing & Service Industries, so that we can both reduce unemployment, and alsoo earn income to pay our way !

    It is nonsensical to think that with cuts at this level, and impending rises in unemployment as a result - We can continue without a strong Industrial Manufacturing Base,competing on a level playing field in both Home and Export markets !

    We must stop selling off our Companies and Skills to the highest bidders, who then close them down ! - This is nonsense !

    Without a strong, credible, viable income earning capability we as a nation cannot survive !!

  • Comment number 47.

    · 1. At 09:11am on 20 Oct 2010, david wrote:
    You couldn't make it up..
    A Labour spokesman stated yesterday that he felt that the proposed cuts were 'reckless'...
    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!

    #######################################

    If the greed of the Banking sector hadn’t nearly bankrupted the country we wouldn’t be in the situation we are now.

    Pot Black yes except comeing from your avarage Tory lemming

    its Pot Kettel White

  • Comment number 48.

    Tying it in to another thread - we might get some decent songs in the charts now!

  • Comment number 49.

    We're All In This Together

    Right!!!!

    Do these pampered fat-cats at the top of the political tree really believe that those earning over £44K losing a couple of grand from Child Benefit equates to the loss experienced by the half million public sector workers soon to be unemployed being reduced to living on benefits? Not to forget the other (at least) half million private sector workers who'll be going the same way because those on benefits can't afford the products they make or the services they provide.

    Perhaps Cameron, Clegg and Osborne can explain in what sense they will be 'together' with the estimated 1.2 million they're going to dump on the scrapheap.

    No? Thought not!


    They must be living on some other planet.

  • Comment number 50.

    Labour leader Ed Miliband said the government were taking "an irresponsible gamble with our economy".

    HAHAHAHAHA, the irony! Labour all but destroyed our economy and put us in this situation. No more boom and bust, oh Gordon, your legacy in history has been set haha

  • Comment number 51.

    I don't blame the coalition for what they have to do. There are lots of people doing what they can to protect their own special interests, but a balance has to be struck somewhere. Yes its going to hurt but as a younger member of society I don't want a big defecit hanging around my neck and my childrens necks.
    We need a strong private sector, ultimately the private sector makes the money that pays for everything else.This feels like blasphemy but we dont actually need a huge public sector, and it is paying over the odds.
    In the UK we have forgotten that life is hard, it is not meant to be easy. The average person on this planet will probably work a very long day and never have a weeks holiday in Spain. Industry will go where people will work hard, hence the move from europe to Asia and the US.
    As a member of the generation that is going to pay for the last 13 years of stupidity I have prepared myself to do my bit. As a country we need to grow up, knuckle down, and realise its not all about us.

  • Comment number 52.

    Oh dear, I see the first comment is straight from the Daily Mail book of excuses for this travesty of a Coalition. Blame the last Govt's spending. Under Labour UK debt (inherited from the Tories) was reduced from 42.5% of GDP to 36.5% of GDP before the bankers decided to plunge the whole world into economic meltdown. Schools and hospitals were built or refurbished etc etc. I won't go on because some people just can't see past their own noses. Yes, they got an awful lot wrong and lost touch with the electorate, what Govt doesn't when in power for a long time. But can we get away from this simplistic - it was all Labour's fault.

    I expect the cuts to put this country on the back to the dark ages for at least a decade. There has been little thought put into this review, it is hasty and led by ideology. The multi millionaires who have hatched this will not be sharing our pain - that is the only guarantee. The real cause of the difficulties now facing the country are in the city paying themselves huge bonuses once again as if nothing happened. The British public is so gullible. No wonder they get away with it. We should be more like the French.

  • Comment number 53.

    1. At 09:11am on 20 Oct 2010, david wrote:

    You couldn't make it up..
    A Labour spokesman stated yesterday that he felt that the proposed cuts were 'reckless'...
    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!

    ........................................

    Spending was unavoidable, if the banks weren't being bailed out, a large portion of the British population would have felt the impact directly, which would have led a larger money injection at a later point... as soon as you see an infection, you treat it immediately you don't wait months down the line in hope it will go away, because eventually you realise it wont go and you make need to cut off some limbs down the line...

    What labour did was spot on, the Tories would have done exactly the same, although they probably would have let the whole problem escalate further before doing this...

    Now the ConDem party are using the 'no choice' argument you set their privatisation plans in motion.

    I can see it in 5 years time; half of what we know now to be public services will be in the hands of the highest bidder, and labour will have to do more spending to counter this travesty.

  • Comment number 54.

    I am dreading the coming months and years. We are going to return to a dark Britain as we did under Thatcher in the 80's. It might even be worse. The only people that won't suffer are those who are rich and well off for spare cash - like I dare say all of the Tory and Lib-Dem coallition cabinet are. 'In this together' - what patronising nonsense.

    Nick Clegg and his Lib-Dem cronies should be ashamed to be part of this.

    Come on Ed Milliband - rally your team and rally the country and get a Labour government back into power as soon as possible.

    I am sickened and appalled by the continued Tory arrogance.

  • Comment number 55.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 56.

    · 10. At 09:20am on 20 Oct 2010, Robert Warburton wrote:
    I simply cannot believe the "arrogance" of the Labour Party. They seem to have this "mental blockage" that the over-spending was actually caused by the Labour Party. Ed Miliband is a puppet and that is all he will ever be.
    ####################


    I simply cannot believe the "arrogance" of the Tory Party. They seem to have this "mental blockage" that the near bankruptcy of the country was actually caused by the Banking sector and the city


  • Comment number 57.

    I'm fed up of hearing about the cuts already the british are too guttless to stick together like the French and get out on the streets and protest so in the end if your not willing to fight them you have to live with them and stop moaning.

  • Comment number 58.

    My child was not born into material poverty or richness nor do we live with either now.... As I have zero confidence that the co-alition will ever accept any accountability for the actions they are taking, when we are living in material poverty I may simply move down south and a higher class of homelessnes.

  • Comment number 59.

    What might the impact of these cuts be? I hope we'll be able to crawl slowly out of the deep financial hole Labour left us in. We should be OK as long as Labour stay out of power for a good long while, otherwise we'll be straight back in the hole again.

    Are there any alternatives to cuts? No. We are currently borrowing more than £500million pounds per DAY just to keep the country afloat; this cannot go on - something has to be done.

    Do they seem fair? Fairness is subjective. The best outcome would be that everyone feels hard-done-by, then no-one will be able to do the 'It's not fair!' act.

  • Comment number 60.

    For most of us who can in no way be regarded as wealthy but hardworking, I am expecting the financial equivalent of a good kicking.

  • Comment number 61.

    What do you expect from a Conservative government? (Not that so-called Labour were much better.) They have a secret longing to have it all back to the days when the working class was kept in its place, touching its forelock to the 'superiors'. I wonder will any cuts be made to the perks enjoyed by the government ministers and royal family? Thought not!

  • Comment number 62.

    · 20. At 09:31am on 20 Oct 2010, Confuciousfred wrote:
    Well everyone, including Labour and Condem supporters seem to think the cuts equate to shrinking the ranks of the civil and public service back to the levels employed in 2003. That does not seem unreasonable to me.

    Leave the bankers out of this one, nothing to do with them. This is all about redressing the spendthrift polices of Mr Clown.
    ###################

    “Leave the bankers out of this one, nothing to do with them”

    Do you believe in the tooth fairy and little red riding hood as well?


  • Comment number 63.

    Everyone understands that the deficit needs to be tackled, but it is the way it is being done i disagree with. By making so many unemployed the government will place an extra burden on the welfare state, they will lose money in revenues collected through tax and because consumer confidence will fall companies will make less of a profit and they will also lose money in revenues through capital gains tax. The deficit does not need to be reduced at the rate the tories are suggesting and by using Greece as an example they are misleading us. We are in a completely different situation to greece our repayment terms are different and our interest rates are different. We should be looking to follow what Germany and France are doing and reduce the deficit at a slower rate. I feel that by taking the action the tories are planning we run a very strong risk of slipping back into recession and making the job of reducing the deficit even harder.

  • Comment number 64.

    These cuts are purely idealogical. The deficit and national debt increase have come around purely from the recession and banking crisis. If you actually look at the historical debt levels in this country from the labour government was bellow the average and it only spiked when the banks collapse and they where forced to invest in the country's fiscal stability. The reason the public sector grew large was to provide the jobs that the private sector couldn't provide, the exact thing that we are being told will happen to make up for the 500000 job loses that the Tories are planning.

    What makes all this worse is it is only possible by the duplicitous Liberal Democrats turn-coating on there published ideals for a brief spot in the limelight, for which they (and us) will pay for by this country going back to two party politics.

  • Comment number 65.

    Until the cuts/savings are implemented and the conditions for them to be imposed are agreed, then any opinions of their effects are pure speculation. With the amount of speculation going on, someone somewhere will be right or partially right, but until it's done and time is allowed to see what happens, no one will know for sure.
    From what I have heard so far regarding job 'losses' in the public sector, a lot of these will be through 'natural wastage', which is to say that people retiring and leaving for other jobs will not be replaced. Additionally, the amount of redundancies (non-voluntery), will be dependant on what deals the unions are prepared to come to with regards to future pay and perks - i.e. if they agree to a 3yr pay freeze or very low increase (something the private sector has been doing for 3 or more years already), there will be less jobs lost.
    Before anyone goes completely overboard about critisising what is being done by the Coalition Gov't, take a look at what Labour was going to do. The Gov't want to cut spending by £81+Bn over the next 4 - 5yrs split as 74% from public spending and 26% in taxation increases. Labour wanted to make similar reduction in spending, but their split was 60% public spending and 40% in taxation increases. So under the Coalition that is an increase of around £20Bn in taxes, under Labour it would be closer to £35bn - where do you think that extra would come from? It would not have come from the low paid and the banks and highest earners would not pay more than about half in supertaxes which leave who? That's right, the good old middle income earners again!

  • Comment number 66.

    13. At 09:21am on 20 Oct 2010, Tez wrote:
    I hope these 'cuts' will get people to be honest enough with themselves - to ask the question; - why did LABOUR put this Country in this position?

    As always with LABOUR, we are once again, having to deal with the SYMPTOMS because THEY failed to deal with the CAUSE - via their pathetic, irresponsible financial incompetence and lies...
    =================================
    I am fed up with the stupidity of comments like this.
    Look - its was an international crisis caused by the greed of the Financial sector.
    It was NOT a local UK crisis. It has caused havoc in numerous countries.
    For God sake stop this lying propaganda and lets get on with trying to repair the damage by making the culprits pay.
    If teh ConDems dont listen to the people then we should take a look at our French neighbours to see how best to get the message across...

  • Comment number 67.

    It baffles me why any government is so eager to renege on its responsibilities to the citizens who employ and pay for it.

    Never mind their fiscal obligations, where are the measures to protect those who will not receive support when they need it or who will lose their jobs from the greed of the banks?

    One simple law: if a mortgage-payer loses his job, the mortgage company needs to be required to accept whatever 'housing benefit' the jobless individual receives as sufficient monthly payment to stave off repossession. It even makes sense as far as the 'public purse' is concerned: costs far more to rehouse the homeless than pay housing benefit and keep them housed.

    The government seems to be more concerned with looking after the interests of financial institutions than meeting its obligations to the citizens of this country: they need to get their priorities straight!

  • Comment number 68.

    As a pensioner and 'working class' - well the government is forcing the country back to pre war conditions - I might as well use pre war language, I don't expect anything from the statement to come.

    The more that has been revealed so far, the more we can see that basically it is only one part of the population that is going to pay for the banks greed.

    Where is the chasing after Tax avoidance? Where is the making those who got us into the mess helping to get us out of it? What we are seeing is that there is a severe lack of thinking from the government. A couple with an income of £83,000 a year, you keep your child benefit. Be a single wage earning family with £84,000 income a year, you lose child benefit. I'm not an economist, but something just does not add up here.

    Get people off invalidity benefit, something I seem to remember was introduced by the Tories years ago to get people off the unemployment figures, to encourage them into jobs. But wait, what jobs? There aren't any. They have all gone to the immigrants. And with a potential 500,000 - 750,000 public sector jobs being lost over the four or five years, the unemployment figures will be going up.

    Stand by for people begging in the streets, children going around in rags, an increase in crime as desperate parents try and provide food for their families and so on.

    Today will begin the destruction of British society as politicians of all persuasions and in their various ways, have completely screwed up the country.

  • Comment number 69.

    I see Mervyn King is saying there is a danger of a 1930s-type slump. With all the down-talking and the very real sense of precarity for many people they will indeed curtail their spending.

    The admission by the Government itself that it is by no means sure where its policies will lead might be honest for once but not helping much.

  • Comment number 70.

    I hope people in Labour constituencies get hit hard.

    Too many either living on benefits or in public sector non-jobs created by the last government just to keep their own voters happy, and paid for by the hard working private sector.

    Now their time has come - hopefully!

  • Comment number 71.

    Time alone will tell....but if you tighten your belt, expect to feel HUNGRY!

  • Comment number 72.

    The only thing I've not heard is what will happen to the 400 odd tanks and artillery that the army is going to lose. I mean, Challenger 2's are a state of the art tank, hugely sophisticated and really effective. Now argument over whether we need them aside, surely we aren't just going to scrap them? After all it cost to procure them and their intrinsic value that would be madness. Can we not sell them to a responsible partner? Australia are doing quite well economically. Maybe they would like some tanks for a knock down price? Anything but scrap them, at least we'd get something back.

  • Comment number 73.

    "9. At 09:19am on 20 Oct 2010, theoldgoat wrote:

    ""1. At 09:11am on 20 Oct 2010, david wrote:

    You couldn't make it up..
    A Labour spokesman stated yesterday that he felt that the proposed cuts were 'reckless'...
    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!""

    ////

    on the other hand, if the bankers had not acted like irresponsible kids - just because the rules say you can does not mean you should - we would not have the current mess."


    You are of course both correct. Add in the fact that Gordon Brown knew EXACTLY how much money was being loaned out by the banks (It's in the Bank of England figures), he knew about the way "Risk" was being "managed" by banks and the FSA was well aware of the ponzi mortgage schemes being created by banks.

    You can only conclude that this has been manufactured by the few for their sole gain.

    Lessons still have not been learned by anyone in Government, they'll lower the exchange rate, cut back and reset the system for another boom in about 5-10 years time - which of course will crash AGAIN.

    Until money is actually spent on creating goods that people in this country and abroad will buy then this country will continue the slide down into obscurity. Germany will continue to get stronger and the UK will weaken as it always has done.

    When I was young I thought the country was going to get better, I mean how could it be any worse than the 1970's with strikes and the Communist Arthur Scargill - now I look at Ed Miliband, the son of a Communist Immigrant who has used the Tax system to his own advantage.

    It is hopeless.

    The Labour party should be banned and all the members deported for throwing away the lives and opportunities of the last 10 years.

    The Conservatives will be marginally better, however when it comes to Job creation their past history has been poor.

    We need a new dynamism, both these dynosaurs just havent got the tools or the will power to put this country on a good footing. There are obviously vested interests up and down the country with certain families in the political world lined up to take the money. I often see people both in politics and in the media come to the fore and wonder just who the hell put them there.

  • Comment number 74.

    14. At 09:25am on 20 Oct 2010, Bob wrote:
    "... We are very close to civil disorder similar to France"
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    What do you mean? There is no civil disorder in France. The people are merely exercising their right to manifest and show their opposition to policies. There has been disorder there in the past, e.g. the mass car-burnings in the banlieux by youths of N. African origins, but what is happening today is quite different. It's telling that not many English appear able to distinguish the two.


  • Comment number 75.

    I was watching, and listening, I was wondering and pondering - and these images began forming inside my head! Was it some revelation, some nightmare, some odd fantastic vision, or a reflection of some distortion of history?

    The scene was set of some rotund podgy fingered, fat cigar smoking, grinning fool in a pin-stripped suit, holding some poor fellow upside down by their ankles - While the last pennies drop out of the poor fellows pockets onto the floor - I witnessed other members of the little gang of pin-stripped thugs scrabbling around on hands and knees pocketing the money while laughing insanely! And out in the street I saw another group of grinning fools in pin-stripped suits rounding up the next load of poor fellows from the bus stops and gutters - and dragging then kicking and screaming to be the next victim of the pin-stripped cigar smoking thugs!

    I thought it was a nightmare, or a film made in 1925, but gosh was I surprised when I realised it was The BBC News channel in 2010!

  • Comment number 76.


    The alternative to cuts are no cuts. Experience counts in economics - so who in their right mind would choose the youngest Chancellor of the Exchequer at this time? - only DC. Joesph Stiglitz, the Nobel Economist says why bet the country on the external confidence that the Financial markets may ascribe to these cuts? They could equally go the other way and lose confidence - after all external markets are interested to make money - a good way to do it is to push down UK confidence in the market.

  • Comment number 77.

    The impact of these cuts will involve a massive write in on HYS and in letters to the press regarding the need for the cuts to deal with a problem caused by the errors and stupidity of the previous labour government. The mainstream media including the BBC are already committed to endorsement of the austerity scam and the British public will meekly accept whatever this cabinet of millionaires impose on them.

    Not much point in reading HYS comments for the next few days.

  • Comment number 78.

    "18. At 09:30am on 20 Oct 2010, jewel_peacock wrote:
    We found out yesterday that my husband's job (he works for a council) is at risk and he'll know by Christmas if he has something to come back to. It's not looking good. We're in our early 30's, homeowners for 2 years after scrimping and saving for a deposit, and expecting our first child in January.

    We couldn't care less about all this 'he did it' nonsense the political parties are playing, what matters to us now is making sure we can keep our roof over our heads and that of our unborn child.

    We both work extremely hard for the little we earn, yet apparently the bonuses of bankers and perks of politicians are worth more than our attempts to make a home and have a family. And nothing is more upsetting for my husband than to hear that because he works for a council, he is simply 'waste'.

    The biggest betrayal of all? We voted Lib Dem in the last election. Utterly, utterly betrayed. We were Thatcher's children and our parents suffered when we were born, now our child will suffer in the same way under the ConDems"


    I do sympathise with your position, having been made redundant myself - when it was the private sector's turn a little while back under Labour.

  • Comment number 79.

    Riots, burning barricades, national strikes, direct action, millions marching - just some of the things that the apathetic population of this supine nation won't be bothered to do.

  • Comment number 80.

    The rich and employing class of this country need to understand that in exchange from benefitting from relatively low wages and quite high unemployment that pushes down wages and working conditions they must contribute heavily through tax to support the welfare system. That's the agreement and it benefits them greatly. If we had higher employment and better wages the welfare bill would be significantly smaller but even before the recession employment wasn't anywhere near as high as it should be and that is because employers don't want high employment. High employment gives workers too much power so govenments aim for a balance where there are no riots in the streets but pay and working conditions are kept low.

  • Comment number 81.

    I don't think the spending cuts per se are the issue as all parties have stated they would have introduced spending cuts. The question is how fast and how deep are the cuts going to be?? This government is going at break neck speed to reduce this deficit claiming, 'they have no other choice', because of the state the Labour government left the UK economy in. Well, yes they do - slow down. This is where 'call me Dave' and the ConDems are taking too much of a risk with the UK's future economy and stability. Instead of balancing the speed of debt reduction with growth in the economy they are waging their own crusade to prove they are the party to, 'sort out this mess left by the previous Labour government' with frightening haste and speed, and, as we all know, speed kills.

    Today, we will receive the headlines but little detail as this will be announced later. Absolutley amateurish! How can any sane, rational body conceive a strategy for cost reduction without analysing exactly where the budget is to be cut and the ramification any proposed cuts will have. To implement such measures requires an accurate fiscal study of all expenditure including revenue streams; probability modelling detailng cause & effect and a strategy for implementaion ... the ConDems have not done this. Prior to the election, 'call me Dave' cited UK companies already implementing cost cutting measures saying the government had to do the same. Okay, so how did these companies reduce their operating costs? By reducing the number of their employees; wage freezes; cutting shifts; reducing working hours and expecting one employee to do the work of two. The ConDems will imitate this process plunging more people out of work; more people losing the home they have worked so hard to provide; more people being deprived of the welfare benfit they are entitled to and more people facing poverty. It will be the children, elderly, working and middle class families who bear the brunt of the cuts, not the wealthy and most certainly not the Bankers who created this catastrophe in the first instance.

    Amongst the spending considered sacrosant is oversees aid. If the UK is in such dire straits why are we continuing to provide financial support to other countries and foreign affairs?? I'm not wishing to be harsh or jingoistic, but let's look after ourselves first before we consider assisting others. Is it acceptable that UK families and elderly people sacrifice their living standards and welfare just so we can have the 'feel good factor' of helping those less fortunate?! No!

    I predict the announced spending cuts will result in civil unrest subsequently leading to the downfall of this shambles of a government. The 'average' UK citizen will not standby and watch the quality of their life, and that of their family, being eroded whilst those higher up the food chain get richer and fatter. The financial institutions got us into this mess and they should be charged with getting us out of it by repaying the public money given to them.

  • Comment number 82.

    26. At 09:36am on 20 Oct 2010, Frederick McLean wrote:
    Re a previous view:
    "also we were letting in too many foreign nationals that also come to the UK and claim benefits and bring nothing useful to the UK"

    The problem with immigration is not with Commonwealh (and ex Commenwealth) immigrants who generally have a good work ethic but with EC 'labour migrants' who drain all aspects of our economy and state benefits. A staged withdrawal from the EC is the best long term way to deal with UK debt.


    How would cutting off our most important export market help "deal with UK debt"? That would be the best strategy for damaging economic growth, reducing tax income and making the debt worse.

    Did you know there are a couple of hundred thousand high earning French citizens in London who contribute to our economy, pay taxes and don't take benefits? If we left the EU they'd go back. Do you think the hundreds of thousands of retired Brits in France, Spain and elsewhere could do their jobs? Do you think these returning Brits could do (or want to do) the minimum wage jobs in agriculture and hospitality sectors that East European migrants do now?

  • Comment number 83.

    What exactly were you all thinking? Oh yes, I remember YOU were not thinking at all! Just believed it were possible for 'change' and 'fairness' to be achieved by voting for the establishment - On no other basis than a 'hunch' that a government of multimillionaires, and 'families' with a long long history of international finance and banking might have moral integrity, honesty and be competent? - or that they might collectively have YOUR interests at heart -Hohoho

    Laugh - I almost cried out loud!

  • Comment number 84.

    Most British people seem to want to live in a dictatorship; to be told what to do, have unpleasant things forced on them and enjoy their self-inflicted powerlessness. This government is planning severe damage to many of the vital services and arrangements that used to make us a civilised country and a pleasant, compassionate place to be - the NNHS, the BBC, the Royal Mail, Council and Association Housing Etc. Eventually the penny will drop. When people do begin to realise what is being done to us in the name of making big corporations and their hangers on even richer than they now are there will be so much anger. I would not like to be in Westminster when that happens.

  • Comment number 85.

    74. At 10:26am on 20 Oct 2010, Eddy from Waring wrote:
    14. At 09:25am on 20 Oct 2010, Bob wrote:
    "... We are very close to civil disorder similar to France"
    +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
    What do you mean? There is no civil disorder in France. The people are merely exercising their right to manifest and show their opposition to policies. There has been disorder there in the past, e.g. the mass car-burnings in the banlieux by youths of N. African origins, but what is happening today is quite different. It's telling that not many English appear able to distinguish the two.


    So the cars on fire we have seen on TV the last few nights must be "libary clippage" from this earlier disorder then?

  • Comment number 86.

    There is a thing called a condom to protect us against harmful diseases.. pity there isnt a condom to protect us against ConDems.

  • Comment number 87.

    Crazy decisions being made by this government! They claim these cuts are being made to save interest payments on our debt but what they save in interest payments will be lost in lower tax income and higher benefit payments to all those they are making unemployed. For those that are lucky enough to find work it will no doubt be long hours & low pay with few employment rights and benefits. Add to that the rise in crime associated with high unemployment and people begging on the streets because their benefits are cut or they can't pay the rent. Meanwhile the bankers go on getting annual bonuses larger than more of us earn in a year and the company directors and shareholders pat themselves on the back as they increase profits by driving down wages and employment costs. It's a nightmare scenario and I can see huge civil unrest looming large.

    I really fear for the future - in just a few months of this government we seem to have taken our society back two-hundred years to the era of rich privilaged landowners and for the poor the workhouse or begging on the streets.

  • Comment number 88.

    47. At 10:08am on 20 Oct 2010, Its all Thatchers Fault wrote:

    · 1. At 09:11am on 20 Oct 2010, david wrote:
    You couldn't make it up..
    A Labour spokesman stated yesterday that he felt that the proposed cuts were 'reckless'...
    Er.... Pot... Kettle... Black - if the Labour government hadn't gone on a 'reckless' spending spree BEFORE the banking debacle - we wouldn't be in the situation we're in now..!

    #######################################

    If the greed of the Banking sector hadn’t nearly bankrupted the country we wouldn’t be in the situation we are now.

    Pot Black yes except comeing from your avarage Tory lemming

    its Pot Kettel White

    ///////////////////////////////////

    Er.....& who was it that handed over £200 billion of taxpayers money to those 'greedy bankers' to keep them living in the style to which they have grown accustomed. Don't go on kidding yourself that Gordon Brown or any of the Labour front bench are in westminster for the good of the common man, It's a lesson my father taught me years ago.

  • Comment number 89.

    It would be useful to know what the breakdown of public sector 'job losses' is in regards to natural attrition VS voluntary redundancies VS compulsory redundacies.

    Given the ageing workforce and the timeframe the govt is talking about making the cuts over - a large portion is likely to 'job losses' through natural attrition (i.e. agencies simply not filling vancancies as people retire or move on to other jobs).

    It's the latter category of compulsory redudancies that is going to have the most impact on people's lives.

  • Comment number 90.

    Hopefully to shrink the state, its interference in our lives and the avoidable costs associated with that. The country needs to pay its way and make a sustainable profit which can only be achieved by the private sector's exports. We cannot afford a socialist agenda that sustains public sector expenditure that insulates shirkers, etc from the realities of life. Its time that social workers and their ilk got a proper job.

  • Comment number 91.

    I do but wonder whether MPs will be forced to cut their expenses and have their pay & pensions frozen in this time of hardship.

  • Comment number 92.

    I have an idea, let's wait and see what they are first.

    I am tired of non-interviews such as the minister yesterday who could not make any comments until after the PM presented the findings - why interview him under these conditions, interview him afterwards.

    Wait until the details have been published and then ask the question.

  • Comment number 93.

    If the public sector is to deliver on cuts, drive greater efficiencies, reduce fraud and error, and provide the services demanded of the public, then it must transform the way it manages and uses its data. Unless information is valued and used more effectively by the public sector, the Spending Review cuts will grab the headlines, but nothing will change for the better.
    The Spending Review takes a largely departmental approach, yet the greatest potential for efficiencies and fraud reduction can only be found when we start to look at exploiting information across the functions of government. Greater priority must be given to new techniques for tackling fraud, waste and error, otherwise cuts will gravitate towards frontline services and public confidence in the Coalition will deteriorate.
    Today is also the UN’s World Statistics Day, aimed at highlighting the importance of information in shaping our society. Data plays a major role in justifying almost every aspect of budgets and programmes and raises the question of how the public sector will track and monitor its performance across the board. While KPIs in commercial organisations are tied to business success, in the public sector they remain all too often a tick-box exercise. KPIs will be critical to measuring the success of the Spending Review, so it’s vital for the government, as a whole, to embed analytics into the KPI process.

  • Comment number 94.

    This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

  • Comment number 95.

    Mr Cameron, Mr Osbourne, Mr Clegg and all your supporters: you are betraying your country to a bunch of billionaire corporate thugs and money-lenders. There will be major civil unrest within two years and I very much doubt that, when it comes to the crunch, that the police and armed forces will support you. Reconsider your actions and you will avoid a great deal of suffering - including your own.

  • Comment number 96.

    What is the typical British reaction? "I don't care about the state of the country as long as I'm alright. I didn't cause the recession so why should I suffer?".

    Well, it wasn't just Labour & the banks that caused this; it was the personal greed of the general public. Taking credit cards they couldn't afford to service, large mortgages they couldn't afford to pay, not living within their means.

    This is all our problem, not just the problem of the few.

  • Comment number 97.

    66. At 10:17am on 20 Oct 2010, sixpackerL wrote:
    13. At 09:21am on 20 Oct 2010, Tez wrote:
    I am fed up with the stupidity of comments like this.
    Look - its was an international crisis caused by the greed of the Financial sector.
    It was NOT a local UK crisis. It has caused havoc in numerous countries.
    For God sake stop this lying propaganda and lets get on with trying to repair the damage by making the culprits pay.
    If teh ConDems dont listen to the people then we should take a look at our French neighbours to see how best to get the message across...
    --
    Niave too say the least.
    While I don't think anyone can deny that the bankers were the catylst for the recession, the main issue is that Labour during a period of strong growth in the economy tried to pretend that there would never be another recession(remember the boast of "end to boom and bust"), and instead of actually saving some of the money that was coming into the gov coffers, they went on a huge borrowed spending spree that was hugely more than was coming in.
    If Labour can't even balance the books during a time of growth, what chance do they have during a recession.

  • Comment number 98.

    "We are all in this together". "It is the sole fault of the Labour government".

    You know that if you repeat a lie often enough, it will become the truth, and that is what has happened with these two phrases alone.

    Wake up sheeple. We are NOT all in this together. The working and lower middle classes are in it up to and above their heads. The people who actually caused the mess are still receiving their fat pay cheques and even fatter bonuses, and we are being thrown on the scrapheap to keep them in the luxury they believe they deserve.

    We really do need to look across the channel for the solution to this, take to the streets and let's start making OUR voice heard for once.

  • Comment number 99.

    Yes. Perhaps for all the waffle on the BBC and elsewhere it is, in truth, just to remind us who is boss and show us our place.


  • Comment number 100.

    I hope that the protection promised to schools funding will also be extended to the funding provided to colleges for teaching 16-18 year olds, otherwise this will create an uneven playing field and the excellent progress in skills training for this important age group will be undermined just when the country needs it most.

 

Page 1 of 21

BBC © 2014 The BBC is not responsible for the content of external sites. Read more.

This page is best viewed in an up-to-date web browser with style sheets (CSS) enabled. While you will be able to view the content of this page in your current browser, you will not be able to get the full visual experience. Please consider upgrading your browser software or enabling style sheets (CSS) if you are able to do so.