After the announcement of a further £2bn cuts today it seems as though we can wave goodbye to the pre-election "efficiency savings" policy championed by the Tories.
After Danny Alexander’s announcement of a further £2 billion of spending cuts today it seems as though we can well and truly wave goodbye to the “efficiency savings” policy championed by the Conservatives during their election campaign.
The theory that £12 billion in “efficiency savings” could be found in 2010/11 was forcibly challenged by opponents from the moment it was proffered by George Osborne in the run-up to the election. The Conservative efficiency savings model was deemed deceptive by their opponents; conceivable only with the aid of “magic”. Tory spells seemingly forgotten or mis-uttered; cuts on frontline services, rather than efficiencies, have unsurprisingly begun to appear.
George Osborne’s £6 billion of spending cuts just three weeks ago signalled the first assault on frontline areas such as health and education. Danny Alexander’s list of cuts today included the cancellation of projects such as the North Tees and Hartlepool hospital and suspension of the £73 million Health Research Support Initiative. Moves to this effect seem hardly like “cutting waste”, as George Osborne’s pre-election mantra boldly claimed.
As well as combating general national debt, the Conservative strategy of cutting back on wasteful government spending intended to offset Labour’s increase in national insurance. Osborne had called the raise the “economics of the madhouse“.
However, if we cast our minds back to 2008 and consider the Prime Minister’s own assessment of a government “efficiency drive”, it appears that the Conservatives have had a few mental jolts of their own. Cameron cited an episode of Yes Minister, in which one such “efficiency drive” is deployed as a smokescreen for action that is ultimately more “difficult”, more painful.
“[It’s] one of the oldest tricks in the book”, Cameron said at the time. Such a trick, apparently, that with the reality of government kicking in, he can’t find the efficiencies after all.
To reach hundreds of thousands of new readers and to make the biggest impact we can in the next general election, we need to grow our donor base substantially.
That's why in 2024, we are seeking to generate 150 additional regular donors to support Left Foot Forward's work.
We still need another 124 people to donate to hit the target. You can help. Donate today.
14 Responses to “R.I.P – Conservative “efficiency savings””
tracy j
and if you want to keep the elderly active then better than free swims would be taking away their free bus passes and tv licences.
Estelle Hart
RT @leftfootfwd: R.I.P – Conservative "efficiency savings" http://bit.ly/dxLxjc
John Ruddy
Replaced by service cuts – because they're easier to do RT @leftfootfwd: R.I.P – Conservative "efficiency savings" http://bit.ly/dxLxjc
Mr. Sensible
Yes, I read about that too, Jacqui.
So much for leaving a legacy from the Olimpics!