George Osborne’s declaration that his economic policy is “working” will have come as something of a shock to millions of families up and down the country.
George Osborne’s declaration that his economic policy is “working” will have come as something of a shock to millions of families up and down the country.
Here are five reasons why George Osborne is wrong:
1) Plan A has not brought the growth he promised
As Will Straw points out, Osborne promised growth of 6.9% over 3 years, but instead there has only been a miniscule 1.8%. Osborne is setting the bar incredibly low for what counts as an economic victory.
2) His government is worst in recorded history for living standards
As LFF editor James Bloodworth wrote last month, this government has seen 36 months of falling wages, which is more than under any Prime Minister on record. Prices have risen faster than wages in all but one month under this government.
3) Osborne won’t meet his deficit reduction plan
In 2010 Osborne declared that he would eliminate the structural deficit and make sure that debt is falling as a proportion of GDP. He won’t achieve either target in this parliament.
4) Long-term unemployment is highest since 1996
There are 915, 000 people in the UK who have been unemployed for longer than a year. This is 32, 000 more than last year. 474, 000 people have been out of work for more than two years.
5) The rise of foodbanks
The Coalition has presided over a staggering rise in the number of people using food banks. The number of people using food banks has jumped from 128, 697 in 2011-12 to 346,992 in 2012-13.
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.
11 Responses to “Five reasons why George Osborne is wrong”
Hatstand
1. The reality is that the UK had/has an incredibly high annual deficit that would have made the national debt unsustainably high in a very short time. In order to continue borrowing at low rates, the coalition needed a convincing plan to reduce the deficit. More profligate spending, Brown/Balls style, would have resulted in very increased borrowing costs and then enforced austerity anyway. As it turned out, Osborne’s ‘austerity’ was pretty feeble and not really much different to that proposed by Balls. The growth was all that could be obtained in the circumstances. Any clown can generate growth by spending money but that is not responsible for the reasons I’ve mentioned.
2. Living standards dropping are really the trade off for keeping unemployment relatively low. They will rise again as the economy grows again. I would certainly prefer to earn less money (I earn less now than I did in 2006) than be out of work.
3. Well, do you really imagine that Balls would do any better? He lost any economic credibility a long time ago. It’s a pity they don’t have Alastair Darling in the job.
4. Again, the best solution for this is a growing economy.
5. So what? Food banks are common in other countries, such as France.
Bill Cruickshank
As a life long socialist, I am no apologist for the Tories. However, Labour had thirteen years to turn the UK economy around, thirteen years to prioritise social justice, it failed miserably. What Labour did achieve was a catastrophic, illegal war and a bankers bonanza which almost bankrupted Britain. There are many reasons for voting YES to Scottish independence next year: Creating a socially just Scotland, which will be free from nuclear weapons and illegal, imperialist wars, are just three of them.
Jake Church
Disgraceful comment about foodbanks, till you have to use one because of this disgusting uncaring greedy, govt’s attack on the poor, disabled and unemployed whilst heaping tax breaks on the rich and mega companies then you have no right, try it mate, go on sign on and see the reality of this country.no i did not think you would!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Hatstand
I have signed on in the past. It’s not pleasant and nor are food banks.
Are you saying that the reduction in the higher rate tax (to a level higher than during the previous government) is indirectly causing increased use of food banks? If so, I think you need a lie down.
Labour would have had to make cuts as well and in the same places. We were/are in an economic corner.
henrytinsley
But there was no justification for dropping the 50% tax rate when everyone else was being squeezed. A nasty bit of class warfare.