The coalition\’s spending cuts will hit the poorest in society 10 times harder than the richest as the health, social and education services they rely on are slashed, an extensive new study for the Trades Union Congress has found.
Those who gain most from public services and redistribution through the tax system will lose the most if public services and redistribution through the tax system are cut.
By what logic did anyone think it would be different?
There\’s a more subtle point to be made as well. One of the great arguments in British politics (given that no one anywhere near power is seriously proposing either complete laissez faire, sadly, nor outright socialism, thankfully) is over just what is the correct amount of redistribution through the tax system, just which services should be provided through government. It\’s the meat and drink of politics as it actually is.
New Labour went one direction, towards a more socially democratic settlement. I might disagree with such (as I do) but they did win election having said they were going to and fair enough. The Tories and Lib Dems have since won election saying that they\’re going to move that dial back a bit. Similarly fair enough.
Note that I\’m not talking about how quickly the deficit is cut, where the national debt is stabilised: both parties did state very clearly that there would be some withdrawal from that social democratic style settlement.
All of this argument about \”fairness\”, inequality, is simply a cover for trying to insist that there\’s a ratchet effect in place. If the State expands under one government then no future one can be allowed to roll it back again.
And sorry, no, no Parliament may bind its successor.