Spending review – who's watching/listening?

Maybe the Tories have all been wearing helmets and had a crash

Spending Review: NHS gets small funding rise

That is the headline on the BBC website summarising the spending review. Not sure what I missed there.

BBC on NHS

tory cuts are not lower than that espoused by labour. Not that labour had a solid figure but even if you accept the 20% then its the same as the tory cuts. I don’t think they e3ver got to a costed figure tho and it was going to be delayed a further year

Teh cuts are a little less than I thought but far closer to what I said than what yo said – which was that there would be no cuts at all. So while I was a little high in my estimates, in broad I was not far off and far close than you were with your denial of any cuts at all.

Jeezo your life must be sad if such a trivial “victory” over me means so much to you.

Osborne wields UK spending axe

Is the headline I see…

Jeezo your life must be sad if such a trivial “victory” over me means so much to you.

[Wipes tears of joy from eyes]

EDIT: clubber – added a link for you old chap
EDIT2: Between me posting and me checking my link worked they have only gone and changed the fricking headline haven’t they!! they are trying to make me look daft, I assure the headline was correct at the time of publishing. [dons tin foil hat]

Must have been a swivel-eyed evil Tory who did the original headline 🙂

Spending Review: NHS gets ‘bare minimum’ funding rise

Is the headline now 🙂

Doesn’t the NHS have to find £14bn of efficiency savings? That sounds like a cut to me.

“Swivel eyed right wing loony” is the correct phrase. You can exchange “zealot” for “loony” for PC time.

Trouble is that swivel eyed left wing loony is just as apt as most of the recent politics threads have demonstrated…

Teh NHS is a strange case.

Inflation in healthcare tends to run ahead of inflation in the general economy and advances in treatment are mainly more expensive than the previous treatments. Also with an aging population demand rises each year.

Demand is also almost infinite.

In the reversal of the MOD ( where I say you decide what you wnat to do then fund it) in healthcare you have to do the opposite – decide on funding level then decide on activities.

A budget increase that is only a tiny amount more than general inflation will lead to lower activity each year and demand will continue to rise. effectively this means cuts..

Just for the record!

Nah – left wing loonies are not swivel eyed. Think Redwood.

Not that labour had a solid figure but even if you accept the 20% then its the same as the tory cuts.

No, nineteen percent is not the same at twenty percent, and nor is it the same as the twenty five to forty percent that you claimed it would be!

I don’t think they e3ver got to a costed figure tho and it was going to be delayed a further year

So, its perfectly possible that the Labour cuts would have been even higher than the 20% they planned

Teh cuts are a little less than I thought but far closer to what I said than what yo said – which was that there would be no cuts at all. So while I was a little high in my estimates, in broad I was not far off and far close than you were with your denial of any cuts at all.

Overall public spending will rise over the course of the parliament, that is not a cut in the size or cost of the state!

Jeezo your life must be sad if such a trivial “victory” over me means so much to you.

I’m here **** off over the fact right now 😈

You were wrong, just admit it!

Zulu – try to read. I never said 25-40% Re read your own quote. I said acveraging 25% some depts up to 40%

It looks like the average is nearer 20% so I was a bit out.

Far closer to the truth than your ” there will be no cuts” and ” labour cuts are bigger than tory ones” both of which are pure balderdash.

th labour cuts wer not going to start for a further year yet which means over the course of the parliament they would have been less

Is this the highlight of your day?

With the cuts all you have to do is to look after yourself better. Spend less, eat less and sleep less.

😈

I think he may be far too pig headed to admit he’s wrong. He loves to get one over on most with his lofty opinions and “facts” in many threads but simply thinks everyone is wrong bar himself, despite evidence to the contrary.

He’ll never admit he’s wrong, I wouldn’t bother.

Do you think if TJ and Zulu met they would cancel each other out?
If Surf Matt and grum met would they make a biggerer cancellation than TJ and Zulu?
If they all met in the same place, do you reckon that would be enough to create a whole new universe of bile filled vitriolic pedants who all refuse to understand each other?

Tune in to STW tomorrow for answers to these questions and more in…

FightyTrackWorld!

vitriolic pedants who all refuse to understand each other?

A very good summary 🙂

I fully admit I said 25% average cut and 40% in some depts. It looks like that was a bit high so I was not correct on that. This is an obvious fact. teh cuts are less than 25%

However the general thrust of what I said is right. Huge cuts that will be significant in terms of cutting services. Half a million more unemployed. Reduction in teh police force of a significant amount. etc etc

However I never said some of the outlandish things I am accused of saying.

TandemJeremy – Member
I fully admit I am wrong

TandemJeremy – Member
Torys are going to make 100% cuts

TandemJeremy – Member
There’s going to be a quadruple dip recession

See, you said ALL these things 😉

There’s sod all that can be done about it. Those of us in the public sector will just have to wait some more to see where the actual axe falls, if it does at all. these figures aren’t a surprise and certainly our agency has been planning for reductions of this scale. the only thing that grates is the unfairness in the so called fair way of changing child benefit – should have been done on household income!

I’m sure all public sector staff can suggest significant savings in all our departments, but we’re not being asked, it’s being done by the media and the ‘public’ baying for blood. For example we pay over £1200 for laptops with docking stations, now give me the same budget and I could buy double that with a higher spec from the high street and it wouldn’t cost us anymore in maintainence as we pay for that in house. Same with lots of our procurement just nonsensical.

Oi clubber!

What? 🙂 It’s in quotes so you must have said them…

clunbbber

Zulu is a whey faced poltroon

coming to an economy near you soon…..

Only double?

That clunbbber is pretty perceptive 😉

I know what you mean Spud we pay £350 for a Blackberry when Play do the same one for £250. National procurement contracts are just a complete rip off.

the-muffin-man – Member

Any ideas where the private sector will generate circa 500,000 jobs?

The public sector could borrow a ****-ton of money and create them!?

Posted 2 hours ago # Report-Post

3 people being interviewsd this pm, first says hes going to loose jobs, second says the same, third, the interviewer says youre in hospitality and doing quite well, and taking on staff, camera goes to him,
he looks embarased and says yey butwere only taking on 30 staf, (all possibly on the minimum wage).
Much sniggering here. :-)as he realises he needs to find jobs for another 450,000 people.

Families with children are being asked to contribute more than the banks, Labour say. The banks are being asked to pay an extra £2.4bn through the banking levy (announced in the budget). The child benefit cut for high earners will raise £2.5bn, although Labour has also identified various other measures that will affect families with children.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/blog/2010/oct/19/spending-review-2010-live-blog

sounds about right to me

i’m disappointed they are going to waste money on the high speed rail line to Birmingham and beyond. I would have thought that there were lots of better uses for that money. That wouldn’t trash so much countryside.