Majority of the public reject Osborne’s austerity plan

Poll shows that neither Cameron nor Miliband are trusted to perform safe cuts.

George Osborne ncrj

Poll shows that neither Cameron nor Miliband are trusted to perform safe cuts

A ComRes poll carried out for The Independent shows that the majority of the public rejects George Osborne’s plan to cut public spending faster to clear the deficit.

Only 30 per cent of people agree that government spending should be reduced faster, even if this means cutting public services, while 66 per cent disagree with this approach. This means the public disagree with Osborne’s austerity plan by a 2-1 margin.

As the chancellor publishes his Charter for Budget Responsibility, aimed at clearing the deficit on day-to-day spending on services by 2017-18, the ComRes poll found that 36 per cent of people support such a legal requirement to balance the books, while 59 per cent reject it.

People do not trust either David Cameron or Ed Miliband to cut public spending without damaging public services, despite both promising to do so. The two leaders had identical scores in this part of the poll, with 28 per cent of people saying they trusted them to safely cut spending and 67 per cent saying they do not.

As in the previous ComRes survey for the Independent, Labour has a three point lead.

Labour is on 32 per cent (up one point), the Conservatives on 29 per cent (up one point), UKIP on 16 per cent (down two points), the Liberal Democrats on 12 per cent (up three points), the Greens on 5 per cent (down two points) and others on 6 per cent (down one point).

21 Responses to “Majority of the public reject Osborne’s austerity plan”

  1. swat

    Well they would wouldn’t they? Ask a stupid question and you get a stupid answer.
    The question that should have been asked was: Which Party’s Auterity Programme would you accept 1 Tory 2 Labour 3 Lib Dems 4 Ukip 5 Greens 6 Monster Raving Loony
    We’re getting Austerity whoever’s in Govt, like it or not.

  2. CGR

    Yep. Its payback time for the lost 7% of National Income that occured in 2007 & 2008 under Labour.

  3. Norfolk29

    However over 60% of them (voters) think Osborne is better than Balls at running the economy? One can ask why for all one likes but it is stupid to think that another five years of failure is going to cure the economic outlook of the UK and that is all Osborne can think of (and Cameron and IDS and all of the millionaires around the cabinet table).

  4. Norfolk29

    Payback for who? It is the poor and underpaid workers who are suffering. In a normal society it would be considered honourable to protect the weak. Not in this society where the strong (who are not suffering) think that austerity is a good thing. It will make them get job, insist on higher wages and better conditions when it is the same people who are forcing down wages and want to end the legislation that provides some employment protection. Payback time, indeed.

  5. Guest

    No surprise you’re looting as usual.

  6. Leon Wolfeson

    Er, the Green’s plans are not austerity. Just as bad for the poor, but not austerity.

  7. Leon Wolfeson

    Well, Balls plans 5 years more austerity for starters…

  8. Norfolk29

    Balls knows about economics which is why Gordon Brown asked him to leave the Financial Times and join him at No 11. Do you think for a moment that he does not understand that the world of easy money is over? He does and so do I. We are living in a time when the rich are robbing us blind and there is nothing we can do about it. You know the rich. They are the people who pay less than 10% of their income in tax to HMRC and another 5% to KPMG and PwC to help them avoid the other 30% tax. I think Balls will try harder than Osborne (whose family fortune is tied up in a Trust to avoid tax) to root out this tax avoidance but there will be less money (liquidity) around in the next 20 years as the world adjusts to the 2007/8 financial meltdown.

  9. Leon Wolfeson

    The “adjustment” you are arguing for is accepting, in Britain and in Britain only, that the 99% are screwed. YOU want less liquidity. YOU are arguing against investment, when even America avoided that trap.

    But no – you’re a good Labourite. Britain must suffer.

  10. littleoddsandpieces

    The biggest con by al parties is the flat rate pension that is not more pension but less or

    NIL STATE PENSION FOR LIFE for women born from 1953 and men born from 1951

    https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/state-pension-at-60-now

    The state pension should never have been included in Austerity as now proved by the denied state pension at 60, so denying a couple 7 years of payout, having saved nothing as the £30 billion is in the National Insurance Fund is still there from last year and being called a surplus by all parties, instead of paid out and going to generate business and create jobs on the high street.

    The money cannot be spent on general expenditure by government because it is not a tax.

    If Labour or a real socialist party did a u-turn and paid out the state pension in 2015, repealing Pension Bills 2010-2014, to the rate of £12,500 a year (the basic tax allowance from best offers out there) too those who turned 60 from 2013, for men and women equally, then we might actually get a majority government and not this neck and neck coalition of 4 parties that the pundits say will be the case, fromt he closest general election since 1945, because so few people will otherwise come out to vote.

    The old folk are the best voters and all pensioners from 60 to 100 will like the £12,500 a year full state pension, irregardless of National Insurance contribution/ credit history.

    As would councils with not having old folk from 60 left forever on benefit, with no ability to pay council tax and needing to be fed for the rest of their lives, with the flat rate pension
    that even does not pay the tiny top up to the even tinier part basic state pension to someone turning 80 in 2016

    https://you.38degrees.org.uk/petitions/state-pension-at-60-now

  11. Norfolk29

    Try telling the Germans that the austerity they are suffering is all a figment of their imagination as all austerity is in the UK. It is not 99% that are being screwed in the UK but the 30% who are working on either minimum wage, zero hour contracts or on less hours than they want. I don’t want less liquidity but accept that if we had a normal economy the banks and financial sector would be taking most of the liquidity and, until we find a way of stopping them, we are better off with less growth. The Spirit of 45 was a delusion. The Germans had recovered their lead in industrial output by 1952 while we were heading for 20 years as the sick man of Europe.

  12. Norfolk29

    Balls plans the removal of the deficit, as soon as possible.

  13. Leon Wolfeson

    Then he’d oppose austerity. As he doesn’t…

  14. Leon Wolfeson

    Germany’s austerity is hurting their economy, and it’s a *choice* made by Merkel there.

    Your denial of the wider negative effects of austerity – shrinking GDP – are just sad, as you call recovering rather than suppressing the economy a “delusion”.

  15. Norfolk29

    Germany’s austerity is totally unnecessary and is politically inspired by Merkel as a sop to the effects that German efficiency has had on Greece and Italy. Having bankrupted most of their neighbours Germany is taking a rest while it decides what to do next. Well, Italy and Greece will simply leave the Euro and start withdrawing from the EU by one means or another. The Greek elections will be the start of the process.
    Regarding austerity in the UK, which is also unnecessary, and used by Cameron and Osborne to shrink the state, the main effect is on the 30% of the population that are low skilled and low educated. Most of them do not vote (try canvassing in some working class areas of the country if you do not believe me) and I believe this is the main reason why they are so badly treated. If they voted, as the middle class and OAP’s vote, they would prevent any Tory chancellor from introducing the bedroom tax or the methods currently used by IDS to remove benefits from people who fail arbitrary tests.

  16. Leon Wolfeson

    *All* austerity is unnecessary.

    Also, you’re underestimating the effect of Labour moving right on effectively disenfranchising people.

    (As to your predictions, I think you’d be better off trying next week’s lottery numbers if you’re that accurate. And then putting the cash into bitcoin)

  17. ForeignRedTory

    If you propose spending more, outline where you have ideas to get the money from. It’s what so exasperating about both neoliberalism and the answers of the left: nary a thought given to finding untapped or undertapped sources of Revenue ( with the honourable exception of Piketty, of course ).

    Investing – in what? People? Those investments – skills – erode so quickly that we might as well invest in Bitcoin.
    More railroads? You missed out by a century or more.

    We need to adress Taxation.
    It’s iresome that the level of taxation on a Chelsea Tractor is the same as on, say, a PC. Foreign flights – yet another ripe area for raising revenue. Some form, a mild form, of taxation on derivate transactions, say .25%? Seems that idea is one whose time has come. A girl being born now, today, will probably live to be a hundred. How many of those hundred years will she be in paid employment? 50?
    We need to look at a future in which taxes on income cannot be the road ahead.

    In the absence of new sources of revenue – and please don’t bore me with Taxing the Rich, or Nationalisation because it would be undone by the NEXT change of Government – Austerity IS the only answer. As for me, I favour spending some serious attention on tapping new sources of revenue. I’d suggest starting with listening to Piketty. I think he’s getting many things wrong, but he, at least is TRYING, and kudos for that.

  18. Norfolk29

    Log in on 8th May 2015. Labour are 5% ahead at the moment which gives them a 12% lead over the Tories because of the FPTP system they (the Tories) fought so hard to preserve in 2011. I forecast that Labour will be the largest party and, on probability, able to form an administration with only an agreement with the SNP and the LibDems. I do the Lottery but never expect to win. I assume you remember 1997 when New Labour won. The UK was 8th in the GDP stakes. By 2001 it was contending with Germany for 4th place.

  19. Leon Wolfeson

    Borrowing drives inflation – and the UK is threatened with deflation.

    And of course you won’t allow the people with cash to be taxed, and don’t like parliamentary sovereignty – nope, you’ll only allow shrinking GDP. I’m sure you want to tax the poor breathing, etc. too.

    Then you abuse Piketty’s good name. Sigh.

  20. ForeignRedTory

    Have you got anything useful to say, ie. not random rants?

    There is a ton of money going about that is not even in people’s hands – neither rich or poor. Such as internal transactions between various parts of the same company – Amazon comes to mind. You know, the very same internal transactions that such entities use to evade taxation in Britain while selling in Britain. A ripe target for a bit of revenue-raising.

    I am told that the amount of money going about in derivatives is something like 20 times the real economy. Get .25% of that in taxation, and hey, presto! That is the equivalent of 5% of GDP raised in revenue.

  21. Leon Wolfeson

    Ah yes, so in your world economics is a “random rant”, right.

    As then then prove…

Leave a Reply