The Parade of Bleeding Stumps in Britain

There was an interesting billboard doing the rounds here in Manchester around the local elections, and I’m sure it was being plastered up all over Britain, so you have probably seen it as well.  It was paid for by UNISON and has writing at the bottom that is supposed to depict David Cameron’s Big Society.  It read, “Fewer 999 operators, fewer bin men, fewer ambulance drivers, fewer lifeguards” etc etc.  The message was clear, “Minor spending cuts mean that nothing will every work for anyone ever.”

We’ve seen this tactic time and time again, so much so that it even has a name – the parade of bleeding stumps.  It is a well known civil service tactic, by which the head of a department faced with spending cuts would overlook cutting executive salaries or trimming the fat from the department, and would instead threaten to slash front line services as brutally as possible.  The Minister in charge would panic at the idea of slashing services, and back down on the spending cuts, leaving the public sector gravy train as it was.

We have seen similar tactics ever since the Coalition took power in May 2010. Left-wing groups like UNISON have been promising us an apocalypse unless we stay committed to our unsustainable increases in public spending.  Apparently, unless spending keeps going up and up, there is no way that bins can be emptied or that ambulances can be driven.  The fact that these cuts (which aren’t actually cuts, spending is set to rise for the next few years) could be met by cutting spending on executive pay and by cutting waste has been completely ignored; according to the narrative, any cut must directly affect front line services and the left’s favourite go to word – “the poor.”

This nonsensical stance by Labour and their left-wing cronies has been exposed this week, first by the Telegraph’s access to various council and civil service credit cards.  Civil servants at the Department for Communities and Local Government spent thousands of pounds at top restaurants, on theatre and exhibition tickets, and went on shopping sprees at the public’s expense, totally £865,000.  They also disclosed that despite many town halls moaning about how brutal the cuts will be, it has not stopped them from spending millions of pounds on everything from iPads to video games, to Tiffany jewellery and Gucci products.  It seems that cuts to front line services are preferred to cuts in spending on Michelin-starred restaurants, five star hotels and first-class plane tickets!

This week has also brought the news that bonuses of senior executives at the Department of Health have doubled in the past five years, with around 1,600 NHS managers earning over £150,000 a year – more than the Prime Minister.  Some NHS executives will retire with annual payouts of up to £110,000.

It is tempting to throw scorn at such civil servants and executives, but really they are only accepting what is offered to them.  There are not many people in the world that would turn down an enormous honey pot pension on principle, and we should not expect it of others.  Instead we should be looking at who it is that has made the decision not to reform such lavish lifestyles funded by the tax payer, and has instead chosen to play the “bleeding stumps” card and to cut frontline services, when little if any cutting was required.

The idea that there is minimal waste that can be cut in the public sector, and that any cuts must therefore come from frontline services and hurt the poor and vulnerable is ridiculous; and yet it is a myth that is successfully being spread around our country by various left-wing groups committed to a big government agenda.

The public are being lied to, and it is time for those of us who believe in fiscal responsibility and accountability in the public sector to stand up against the parade of bleeding stumps.  We do not need to bankrupt our country in order to pay for hospitals and schools, and curbing spending to responsible levels does not require a Dickensian nightmare on our streets, despite what UNISON and Ed Balls might say to the contrary.

The Left's "Alternative" Has Backfired in America

This week’s announcement by leading rating agency Standard and Poor’s that it has changed its outlook for the United States from “stable” to “negative” is abysmal news both for America, and also the British left.


The announcement – that essentially states that there is a one in three chance that the USA could lose its much valued AAA credit rating within two years – is a stinging condemnation of President Barack Obama’s refusal to make any significant spending cuts and instead to spend even more than his predecessor. Despite a handful of cuts passed through the House of Representatives last week, they look insignificant in the face of other legislation such as the $1 trillion entitlement package known as Obamacare. The message from S&P is clear: the US leadership is not serious about dealing with its deficit and debt, and therefore is putting its economy at significant risk.


For America to lose its AAA rating would be disastrous. To know this, one only needs to look at the way the market reacted when the announcement that America might lose its AAA rating was made: US government bond prices fell alongside the S&P 500, gold prices jumped to a new record of $1,496, and the dollar fell sharply against the euro and the pound. One shudders at the thought of the untold damage it would do to the American economy if they were actually to lose the AAA rating.


Britain on the other hand is judged quite well by Standard and Poor’s. Despite suffering a recession twice as severe as that of the US, the UK is praised for being on a credible fiscal consolidation plan that “sets the country’s general government deficit on a medium-term downward path, retreating below 5% of GDP by 2013.” Simply put, George Osborne is doing the right thing, and Britain is on the right track.


Not only is the praise of Tory policy bad for the British left, but the condemnation of the Obama Administration’s economic policy is also a condemnation of the so-called “alternative” that many on the British left have been calling for in recent months. Obama’s pseudo-Keynesian economic policies of tax and spend are exactly the same as those being called for by senior left-wing politicians in this country, and Obama’s programme has been specifically held up as the example to follow by both Ed Balls and Ken Livingstone.


The ludicrous Obama policy of spending oneself out of recession has backfired spectacularly and yet is the policy that is still advocated in Britain by left-wing groups such as the Labour Party, the Socialist Worker Party, and unions such as the TUC. Their “alternative” is being played out in America, and is bringing the once strong leader of the free world to its knees.

Had Britain followed this outdated form of economics – which was the reason our recession was so brutal in the first place – then we would not only be in the same precarious situation in which
America now finds itself, but it would be even worse as for smaller nation like Britain that would be less able to absorb the shock of the consequences of a drop in credit rating.


The left’s economic policies have been wrapped up in fluffy language and good intentions. Unfortunately, economic reality takes little notice of either of these two things, and this warning shot fired by Standard and Poor’s should wake those who thought our deficits and debt were low priorities out of their slumber. If Britain wishes to be open for business once again, and begin rebuilding its once strong economy, it must continue along the line of cuts as it is doing. Should it fail to do so, it will follow its allies across the pond into another economic crisis. We must not allow left-wing groups here to convince us to drag us off our present course.