"If the economy was a sick patient, George Osborne would be struck off"

Larry Elliott writes on today's Guardian website:

"Weaker growth has meant the government's deficit reduction plan is well off track, with David Cameron admitting that austerity will now continue for a decade, double the five-year period of pain promised when the coalition came to power. The Treasury has borrowed well over £500bn since the recession began and the figures are worse this year than they were in 2011."


http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jul/25/economy-george-osborne-growth-figures?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

John Cridland, DG of the CBI and general all-around supporter for the Chancellor says:

“These are very disappointing figures. They show there has been a lack of growth in the first half of 2012. “When I talk to businesses on the ground, however, the overwhelming view is that right now the economy is flat rather than negative, and there is potential for Britain to get back into growth later in the year.”

http://www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2012/07/cbi-comments-on-latest-gdp-data/

Yep, that's it - after 5 of 7 quarters of negative growth, an economy smaller than it was in 2008 and government borrowing way beyond target, added to which another decade of austerity is forecast with, a 2014 Comprehensive Spending Review which has to decimate the public sector further because there is nowhere else to go if your economy is contracting - the CBI appears to be the only major representative body not to be calling on the Chancellor to 'do something different!' Shameful. Even the British Chambers of Commerce, hardly a left-wing organisation, is calling for public investment in infra-structure and the IoD, definitely a right-leaned organisation, says improved leadership is needed from the Chancellor.

Even the 'red-braces' are panicking, given that the ratings agencies, those small, shadowy completely unaccountable companies who can wreck a nations creditworthiness, are circling the UK's AAA rating. Just watch the fall-out when that happens - and there's no pleasure in that, particularly when we all suffer and our pensions are put at risk (both private and public sector - yes, we are all together in that mess!).

Meanwhile, Osborne is the Government's chief political strategist as well as the Chancellor - glad to see he fills his spare time gainfully.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jul/25/george-osborne-under-pressure-economy?intcmp=239

Bitter? You bet I am. This is a disaster and the Government can no longer go on repeating, ad-nausea, that it's clearing up the previous Government's mess. It just doesn't wash.

Attack on pensions challenged this week

I've previously written about how many employees across all sectors deserve better from their pension schemes, whether final salary or defined contribution, public or private sector. What's clear from so many studies is how little most of us will be getting when we come to retire and how so many public sector pensions are not 'gold plated' at all, despite the rhetoric spouted in numerous debates. 


So much of that debate about pensions has been skewed by government and its policy proponents as a public v private, cuts v fairness debate, when the actual position has most of us, across all sectors, looking forward to relatively little in retirement and after a decision made by Osborne in 2010, even less. 


The attack on all pensions via the government's 2010 budget announcement that in future pension and benefits up-rates will be based on the Consumer Prices Index rather than the Retail Prices Index will be challenged in the courts by public sector unions this week. It's not only public sector pensions that will be affected by this 2010 decision, it's also estimated that hundreds of thousands of private sector workers will be affected as well.


Why the change? The CPI is less generous and the RPI a more accurate indicator of inflation, which of course is why Osborne claimed the former was the more appropriate index - it suited his agenda then and still does now. It's mean spirited, an attack on millions who had a 'contract' with their employers stretching back years. In numbers terms the estimated savings of this change equate closely to the vast sums shovelled into the banks to save our banking system (and keep those 'masters of the universe' in their inflated salaries, pensions and bonuses). 


As we find too often, profit and benefit is privatised for the few, loss and cuts transferred as a burden to the public and those who serve the public. It appears the vested interests of the few continue to set the terms of policy, rather than the needs of the many. That's sad, iniquitous and will yet again find a voice in the wider society and economy over the longer term as people's quality of life and their sense of justice affected. Good luck to the challenge in the courts.          

Haringey and the Tottenham riots

A quite momentous week, often for the most puzzling or troubling of reasons, e.g. USA’s downgrade to AA+ reliability (which panics 'the markets' - ever wondered just exactly what or who these 'markets' are and why they panic so easily?) juxtaposed with the highly local 2011 Tottenham ‘riots’, which if nothing else seems to show the relative fragility of community cohesion. The continued reduction in third sector sustainability, the lack of sustained growth in the economy and waves of redundancies in both the commercial and public sectors suggests a winter of discontent, whether of an employment relations nature or of community resilience.

Here's one recent perspective. Given the Tottenham events, a compelling video from Haringey about the effect of cuts on youth services, seems worryingly prescient.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/video/2011/jul/31/haringey-youth-club-closures-video?CMP=twt_fd