Budgetary thoughts

 

Money, that's what I want said Barratt Strong in 1960 and in the intervening years little has changed, we want most of our money in our pockets and yet we expect (perhaps rightly) for services such as health, education, social care and so on to be provided collectively for all of us regardless of income.

Wednesday saw Jeremy Hunt's second budget, the one after the Albatruss imploded the UK economy in style requiring emergency treatment after fifty days of mind-blowing madness and it is fair to say stagflation is under control even if the beast isn't dead yet and the UK economy continues to outperform those most sceptical predictions.

The overall tax burden remains stubbornly high even if with everything we've endured since 2019 such as Covid and it's impact, the war in Ukraine and it's implications for fuel and food and so on.

There's scarcely a major economy not grappling and struggling too with these things as much as chaotic, even malfunctioning poltical machinery over hardly helped, not that had the General Election result had been different, there wouldn't of been other problems.

Thus cutting the National Insurance contributions isn't a bad idea nor is leaving taxes on alcohol alone coupled with assistance for the hospitality sector but what cannot be dodged is there is little real room for manoeuvre when it comes to either cutting taxes however desirable (and i.m.h.o it is ) in the medium to long term or increasing public sector commitments where we see the struggles in hospitals, social services and education.

I would rather see more attention paid to reducing "back room" office costs, ending the virtual signaling and non jobs associated with it and looking at more efficient centralized procurement to reduce the costs of providing services which few of us can deny are really needed rather than a race to the bottom of eligibility criteria. 

While I understand and to a point agree people looking for work need to be prepared to take up reasonable offers and be prepared to train for new roles, there still remains too much "shirkers vs workers" rhetoric when in reality many benefit claimants are in fact workers and shamefully what they earn of itself doesn't begin to meet the true costs of living of which massive hikes in food, fuel and rent/mortgage costs have pushed up to worrying levels.

The implied threat to remove free prescriptions from those found to not met revised conditions for benefits is simply wrong. 

There is no connection  at all between employment and such support - a person sacked for a disciplinary offence at work doesn't lose entitlement, a prisoner receives free medical services regardless of his or her crime and yet we are suggesting not taking up an offer (that might be contestable at tribunal) such be denied free medication if needed or legal aid to challenge the very decision at a tribunal???

Nor is expecting disabled people to work from home where the issue may not be getting to work but such things as anxiety, fatigue and so and where you may of been waiting years for any treatment from - yes the very government that seems to think being disabled and out of work is a lifestyle choice. 

That side of things makes little sense and potentially hands over a victory to the opposition parties and for what?