I look at the world through the eyes of the least well off, even if I am aware that my own circumstances are more financially fortunate.
Today's budget will leave very large numbers of disabled people, and their families and carers, much worse off. That is the stated intention.
And today's budget will, by seriously cutting the business rates income that is to now fund local authority services, threaten the future of many social services on which a great many people rely.
At the same time the children of parents well enough off to be able to save £4,000 a year for them will be given a straightforward gift of £1,000 a year in the new younger person's ISA scheme.
Think of it as a subsidy to the school fees.
Or as a contribution towards the cost of going to university for the very wealthiest that the rest will never get.
Think of it as a deliberate increase in inequality in this country.
Think of it as something we simply cannot afford to do when so many other children live in poverty, and yet will be doing none the less.
And hope that a big enough stink might end this planned gross injustice.
Thanks for reading this post.
You can share this post on social media of your choice by clicking these icons:
There are links to this blog's glossary in the above post that explain technical terms used in it. Follow them for more explanations.
You can subscribe to this blog's daily email here.
And if you would like to support this blog you can, here:
Buy me a coffee!
The Sheriff of Nottingham Chancellor. Thieving from the poor and the Commons to give to the rich.
They’ll be flogging off the Magna Carta and it’s provisions to the 1% at this rate.
When you said above of the government’s (ie the taxpayers’) £1000 contribution to ISA savings “Think of it as a subsidy to the school fees.” were you then aware that all schools were going to be owned by privateers? Because really, giving money for school fees when all schools are privately owned, is just another way of funneling taxpayers’ money to Osborne’s business chums, isn’t it?
Cannot believe that there is no replacement to the abolition of much of the business rate base. Would imagine that one or two councils will find survival difficult. Perhaps now is the time to encourage some of them to set up their own local banks — so at least they could create money for social housing.
Yes, the prescription suggested in Ellen Brown’s ‘The Public Banking Solution’ could have applicability in the UK. As well as a National Investment Bank we could have more devolved publically owned banks, perhaps at county level (the natural unit of administration in the UK), or for groups of smaller counties. All devoted to the common good.
I have only recently subscribed to your daily email and, as an economics lay-person I have learned more about the subject that at any other time in my 60+ years on this planet. In this case I have learned that it is not only the individual measures you have to watch, but the way they are stitched together that is really worrying. I feel that my country is being taken apart, brick by brick, and rebuilt into a society that is increasingly devoid of care and respect for our fellow citizens. Thank you for opening my eyes to what is going on.
Thank you Sophie
That makes this a bit more worthwhile
The handouts to savers is abhorrent. If rich people want to put their savings to work then the free market already has schemes for them. Are we closing in on the view that some government handouts have a multiplier of less than 1?
But savings have no multiplier at all
We already have an excess of savings in the economy
That is the whole problem
The handout will at some point become spending – a deposit on a house or higher living expenses in retirement.
Still sticking to a >1 multiplier now?
At some point suggests this is < 1 Why are you stupoid enough (term used appropriately) to presume because one decision is bad all decisions are the same?
But, but, but…
Child poverty is down;
Pensioner poverty is down;
Inequality is down;
And the gender pay gap has never been smaller.
The distributional analysis published today shows that the proportion of welfare and public services going to the poorest has been protected. (according to Osborne in his preamble)
I’m sure I saw somebody with a long nose, who looked remarkably like Pinocchio, in Parliament today!
Every time I watch Parliament TV it seems to be full of cartoon characters putting on some charade or other now they are under more public scrutiny. I really can’t tell which one is more like Pinocchio, Donald Duck, Mickey Mouse or Goofy anymore!
Must conceed it has been difficult, since the late 1970’s, to determine whether the Country is being run by Arthur Daly or Arthur Mullard.
Aren’t all these changes a precursor for total abolition of pension relief?
They could be
It seems explicit that they are. My understanding was that the money can only be withdrawn without penalty at retirement, or by FTBs in the purchase of their first house.
However, it is quite extraordinary how much this will benefit the well off. The very very well off at that…
Spot on as usual Richard but I feel we are becoming a fringe. Developments in this country are very sad more so as so few realise how little it takes for them to suddenly need care or help.
Thought John McDonald conducted himself well on ‘Today’ this morning. When on the minimum wage how can anyone save, every penny counts for basic living. There is as we know a forgotten group of disadvantaged, accepted as the price to pay. So sad.
There is something sadly ironic about this piece of news regarding the sudden disappearance of the Conservative Disability Group website.
I do wonder how this individual managed to stick with his political beliefs for so long throughout the last few years of increasing attacks on his fellow sick and disabled in this country.
While JC raised this issue to a small extent during his speech yesterday, I still don’t believe the Labour party as a whole have realised how much of a vote winner it would be to actually go on a full offensive attack on the Tories over what all decent people in this country will see as yet another sick and cruel act.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/graeme-ellis-tory-campaigner-quits-party-and-sabotages-website-over-disability-cuts-a6935371.html
Keith-the cuts for the disabled are expected to impact as much as £3000 a year, the marginal value of each of those pounds being immense. I suspect the broad middle-class with its institutional Schadenfreude largely don’t care. They care as long as their corner isn’t touched, if any one touches them then liberal values go out of the window on the spot.
Chris Hedges: ‘Death of the Liberal Class’ touches on this issue.
I disagree Simon, there is still a sense of fair play in large swathes of this country and I don’t know many people without any sick or disabled relatives who have been caught up in these cuts. It will fall on these families to step in and help out, when they realise that even the charities can’t cope with the demand for assistance.
Self-interest only runs so far down the wealth and income scale in my view. Most of the so-called “middle class” that I still acquaint with (i.e. those who are in reality still “working class” as they have not reached escape velocity to rely entirely on investment income) still know they are only slightly more secure than the “precariat”. Like me, they know you can very easily and quickly go from sitting smugly in the top 5-10% to hitting rock bottom through no fault of your own. Without substantial wealth, the state is the only back-stop.
The problem is Labour have so far failed to lock into this issue (perhaps because there is still a latent “scrounger” mentality in the Blairite wing) and the Lib Dems are muzzled by their lack of MP’s to make any noise in parliament or the media.
I would not be surprised to see UKIP spot an opportunity to step in and take the lead on this issue!
“there is still a sense of fair play in large swathes of this country”
Keith, maybe you’ve come across more of this than I have but let’s list the things that the ‘middle class’ have NOT got angry about so far:
1) Bedroom Tax
2) Brutal Sanctions regime
3) The suicides and deaths
4) Tripling of food bank use
Don’t you think that the Tory ideology is to split those feeling insecure on the edges of middle class life from the less fortunate by the crude rouse of pretending THEY are taking YOUR money, which takes any potential focus from the real issues:
1) secular wage stagnation
2) Wealth going to capital
3) Poor quality insecure jobs as a result of globalisation
4) a series of at least 4 housing bubbles-bank led.
I hope you are right-but why has it taken SO long for there to be signs of concern, albeit limited?
Channel 4 stated IFS estimates of 370,000 disabled people will lose on average £3500 from the PIP changes. Charities estimate up to 640,000 will be affected.
What on earth did these people do to deserve this attack? Just easy targets for a very evil government!
I agree
This budget will unravel
I think the Tories (at the top) really believed the country would respond with the same level of narcolepsy as the first five years ‘lets blame the vulnerable’ bully boy stuff. IF and I say ‘IF’ very cautiously, the level of callousness has hit a ‘natural limit’ then that is at least something. But it’s not saying much.
I agree with your analysis Simon that the tories are deliberately dividing popular opinion (across all sectors of society) to create an “us and them” mentality in order to push through such cruel and unjust cuts. But I think they’re going to learn that such divisive tactics will eventually backfire and this maybe their “tipping point”.
I’ve probably had rose tinted lenses in today as the sun was shining here in Wiltshire and also I sensed some outrage at last in the media on this issue. But I accept I could be completely wrong!
There is a bigger, unspoken impact of the cuts in PIP for disabled people and that is the knock-on effect on council social care budgets.
Unlike the NHS adult social care is not free – people are financially assessed to see if they have a contribution (an Orwellian phrase if ever there was one) to their care. People in receipt of the care component of PIP will see a lot of this clawed back by the local authority as a contribution toward their package of care. People in need of care might lose their PIP but they will still need (and be entitled to) the care, meaning the already massively underfunded council social care budgets will be even further stretched deepening the already critical care crisis…
The IFS estimates that 370,000 disabled people will lose an average of £3,500 a year because of the cuts. ht.ly/ZCUfw
if the cuts above go through surely it would be possible to mobilise a considerable number of middle class voters who have benefitted from personal allowance increases to act on a voluntary basis? I feel sick that I’ve effectively been given £1000 when disabled people are having £3,500 taken away from them.
Sorry, my maths is wrong in the last post, but the sentiment remains
Osborne and IDS are worse than a couple of snake oil selling cowboys, just look at the way they justified the latest benefits – a so called independent report which didn’t have anything but anecdotal evidence to substantiate it!
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/pip-cuts-disability-benefits-untested-anecdotal-evidence-gray-review-a6936411.html
It seems the Tory ranks are splitting on this issue, although I am sure they are more concerned about hanging onto their seats in parliament than any thought for the welfare of the sick and disabled.
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2016/mar/17/tory-rebels-osborne-disability-benefit-cuts-just-not-acceptable
Sounds like various Tory MP’s are resigning (under pressure) as patrons of various disability charities including Goldsmith who thinks libertarian capitalism can spread wealth. Then notion of a Tory patron of a charity has a 19th Century ring about it connected with the myth that there is only endogenous money. I hope it harms Goldsmith’s campaign.
I can understand how people stick with their political beliefs in the face of cuts to the disabled and vulnerable. Some years ago, when it became obvious about the direction the government was heading, I had a heated debate with an ardent Tory who, herself, had a disabled sister.
This woman’s claim was that most people on benefits were ‘scroungers’, apart from a few people, like her sister, who were genuinely ill/disabled and the government would protect. So many people bought into the ‘benefits scrounger’ myth. They didn’t believe cuts would affect them or their family, because they were ‘genuine’ (unlike all the other cases they read or heard about).
The was a sort of nascent version of the scrounger myth implicit in the Blair (holds up crosses and Garlic) years with the ‘stakeholder’ crap and a lot of bullshit about ‘rights with responsibilities’ and similar condescending twaddle aimed at those on benefits. So the ground was largely set then-the Tories ‘ran with the ball.’
The only concept of stakeholder that made sense to me in relation to Blair would a holder of a stake that could be driven through Blair’s vampyric heart.
Let’s not forget Unum have been lurking since the early 90s.
Didn’t know about UNUM:
‘Union Mutual Life Insurance was incorporated in 1848 in Maine.[7] The company issued its first policy, which covered the life of founder and company president Elisha B. Pratt for $5000’
‘I am financialised therefore I am’ Tory version of the ‘cogito.’
Can you explain to me how the Lifetime ISA can be used to pay school or university fees? As I understand it, you can withdraw without penalty when you buy a “first home” (for no more than £450,000), or pass 60 years old, or are diagnosed as terminally ill. Otherwise, if you make a withdrawal, you lose the 25% bonus on that amount, and face a 5% penalty.
See https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508176/Lifetime_ISA_final.pdf
When you are wealthy you plan across generations
And a fund for buying a house at lower cost can be used to redeem student debt very easily – maybe even whilst a student
Slightly off topic but I found this a very interesting interview by Owen Jones with Mhairi Black highlighting a number of UK political issues through a young, left wing, Scottish person’s perspective.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2016/mar/17/mhairi-black-owen-jones-video-interview
Mhairi Black is absolutely brilliant-she’s fantastically articulate in the great radical tradition of Scotland and if more young people with here gusto became MP’s we could clean out the Augean Stables of Westminster, which, as she says, is well past its sell-by-date and the stench is hitting our nostrils.
Simon this should cheer you up : http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/03/17/zac-goldsmiths-odds-have-eased-to-the-point-where-he-becomes-a-value-bet/
Thanks for that-I hope the ‘steward of bars’ gets wiped out by the vote! He’s a self defined ‘ecological libertarian’ whose ecological concerns don’t seem to include vulnerable humans.
have just read that the ‘revue’ behind the Governments cut to ESA and PIP was written by one Paul Gray an ex-acting head of HMRC who resigned from that post in 2007 due to the loss of 25 Million Child Benefit records.
Interesting?
Add your voice to these petitions of you are outraged at this governments attack on the weak and vulnerable, sick and disabled in our society. Share with your friends and family via social media, word of mouth, email, etc etc….
Stop the change to the points system for Personal Independence Payments
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124431
Reverse the ESA disability benefit cut
https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/124016
I understand it’s going to be complicated because this will mean abandoning the much-trumpeted benefit cap. One wonders how they’ll try to squirm out of that one.
38 Degrees also now has a petition on the PIP changes
https://speakout.38degrees.org.uk/campaigns/save-pip
IDS resigned, tories infighting over benefit fiasco, cabinet squabbling – best Friday night I’ve had this year!
I think even the most rabid Tories will have problems voting for them but what’s the alternative. Labour is in worse turmoil, making themselves unelectable. All the work Blair did to modernise the party and recognise that we’re not all union coal-miners any more has been flushed away and the party now reflects hardly anyone.
Reapectfully, and as a non-party member, that is absurd
Labour is seeing its membership sky rocket