back to article Digesting the Budget: First-belch reactions

Responding to George Osborne's Budget, Labour leader Ed Miliband said growth is down, employment is down and living standards are falling. He accused Osborne's second Budget of building on the failure of his first. He said the coalition strategy of cuts was undermining the economic recovery. Stock markets were mostly unmoved …


This topic is closed for new posts.
  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    IR35 - A new Helpline... oooooh... same ol' same ol'

    2.203 IR35 – Following the publication of the OTS review of small business tax, the

    Government commits to making clear improvements in the way IR35 is administered. These

    improvements will include setting up a dedicated helpline staffed by specialists, publishing

    guidance on those types of cases HMRC view as outside the scope of IR35, targeting compliance

    activity by restricting reviews to high risk cases and setting up an IR35 Forum which will monitor

    HMRC’s new approach. The Government has decided to retain IR35, as abolition would put

    substantial revenue at risk.

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    One thing I noticed

    One thing I noticed in what is a fairly insignificant attempt at a first "full" budget was that he's continued a practice first introduced by Brown. That is to say promising a significant improvement in some area or another, but deferring it by twelve months or more. This achieves three things from the Chancellor's POV; firstly it makes this year's budget look good even though the change should really be in next year's budget; secodnly he can announce it again as an improvement in next year's budget for people with short memories; and finally he has twelve months to think of an excuse to reverse the decision.

    We need legislation to restrict the budget statement only to changes which will take effect in the coming twelve months.

    1. PsychicMonkey

      Good point, but

      Isn't one of the main problems with goverments in general is the short term view they all take?

      What is really needed is to layout a 10 year ,20 year or even longer term plan. The problem being that all they really look at is how to get elected again next time out.

      1. The Other Steve


        "What is really needed is to layout a 10 year ,20 year or even longer term plan"

        It is quite literally impossible to make a realistic economic plan of that range, simply because things change. Take for instance growth forecasts which are now different than they were six months ago.

        Had we made a 20 year plan based on the information we had just six months ago, it would now be broken.

        1. Anonymous Coward

          not really

          Well yes an no, its impossible to tell whats going to happen in 20 years, so yes you cant say income tax will be x NI will be X and so on, but what you could and should do is say, right, the NHS is a leach on country and needs scrapped whilst forcing everyone to take out insurace and putting in place a state funded clause for those unable to pay, 20 year time line, lets go

          Of course thats never going to happen because in 5 years your up for re-election

          This whole stupid situation is a direct result of

          A, too big a public sector

          B, not making enough of anything in the private sector

          C, stupid tax system that is in place to pay for (A) by taking money out of the private sector which is partially the reason for (B)

          D Politictions promising the electorate everything under the sun for free so that they can get in to power, there by making Many people in the country feel they should have everything for nothing, which in turn means the next govenment has to "promise" more, which means they need to increase (C)

          ok thats fairly simple way of looking at it but that is basically it, this has nothing to do with current state of the world and everything to do with succesive govenments over the last 100 years an a couple of world wars.

          1. Anonymous Coward
            Thumb Down

            ...logical fallacy there involving healthcare and the profit motive

            "...the NHS is a leach on country and needs scrapped..."

            Good idea, you better hope you never need a transplant then

            1. Anonymous Coward
              Anonymous Coward

              argument fail

              Hey, ill pay insurance and and keep myself happy thanks, but why the hell should i have to pay money in the form of tax to give you a transplant UNLESS your unable to pay for insurance, likewise, why should i have to pay tax to pay for doctors pay rises above inflation when other NHS staff are on a pay freeze

              Im not going in to detail but this is basically a working model, if i have a problem today i can go to some places within Europe get seen and treated in the same day, then ironically change some of it back to the NHS

              Im sorry, but the NHS is a monolithic monumental organization that is wasteing our money left right and centre. If the NHS was a private company it would have been liqudated long ago for missmanagment

              1. Naughtyhorse

                Working model


                you menan like they have in the states, where the insurance companies all get together and screw the people, and use some of their ill gotten to bribe the govt. to never change things.

                meanwhile 50 MILLION people in the worlds richest country have NO medical cover. There people can only get treated at emergeny rooms - A&E - which means all A&E systems are clogged with a continual stream of people who have become 'emergencies' because of the system, rather than the illness.

                oh, and those expensive, overworked ER's are payed for....... by the people who DO have insurance.

                to summarise:

                insured medicine costs more.

                insured medicine excludes vast numbers of people

                insured medicine guarantees increased waiting times in ER/A&E

                insured medicine ends up charing the policy holders (with uplift - and then some) for the inadequate ER anyway.

                oh and PS - you got cancer/chronic heart disease/diabetes/MS/any of the major psychiatric labels/downs/haeomphillia - basically anything serious with a more than 5% chance of re-admittal. then you cant get cover - at any price.

                i think your master(bater) plan needs a little more work you selfish opinionated moron

                1. BongoJoe

                  The very same

                  This wouldn't be the same American health system which relies on drug users and alchoholics to supply blood which causes no end of health issues, nor would it be the same American health system which has to rely on BRITISH doctors flying over to sports centres and halls in (oddly enough) the black areas to offer them basic medical aid when the same doctors should be really going over to Africa.

                  We do pay insurance on the NHS. This is the National Insurance. However, it's not the policy holders' fault that the insurance company, i.e. HM Govt., is squandering the funds elsewhere.

                  The likes of Aneurin Bevan and the good forefathers of Tredegar must be turning in their graves.

                  If we really wished to get rid of the leeches on the British economy then simply scrap Trident and make a rule on the changing room doors saying "No more than one war at one time, gentlemen."

                2. Anonymous Coward
                  Anonymous Coward

                  Er, no

                  Im talking about the 30 odd health systems above the states largely based in Europe, many of which are considered better than the NHS

                  Listen mate, you can start calling me names, which is quite imature, but the fact remains, the NHS is good idea that will never work, as for being selfish, i dont claim anything from the govenment, i dont earn a lot of money but i make do with what i have, if i get ill id rather pay for it, likewise why should you pay for something that i need? you shouldnt, this country is full of people expecting everything for nothing, but it all costs money, please tell me, what would you do, the NHS is a massive organization, that will need to increase its funding every year as the population grows, not only this but people are living longer, tell me, where does all this money come from? it comes from all of us in the form of tax, the problem is when people get to a certain age they stop working and stop adding to the tax system, if you keep adding people to the population all of whom live longer, and by-n-large use a disproportionate amount of NHS services something is going to give!

                  Why do you think the govenment has had to put back retirerment age? because it cant afford the pensions defict because we are all living longer, so you have to work longer to keep the funding available.

                  Look i like the idea, i hate the way its managed but it will not work in the long run.

          2. Tom 38 Silver badge



            what you could and should do is say, right, the NHS is a leach on country and needs scrapped whilst forcing everyone to take out insurace and putting in place a state funded clause for those unable to pay


            You could say that. You'd be a tool though.

        2. Russell Long

          Doesn't have to be the economy.

          Take immigration, for example. A government could say "We want the country to have 50 million people in it by the end of the 21st century", and limit permanent inward migration to 50,000 per year for the lifetime of its parliament. It would be up to following governments to keep to the policy if they chose to, but certainly some indication of long-term planning wouldn't go amiss.

          Other examples might include long-term plans infrastructure development or a clear vision of the role and purpose of education.

          Even some indication of thought beyond the most primitive cerebral activity would be nice from most of our MPs.

        3. Richard Cartledge


          Maybe they only changed because there is no plan past 6 months?

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Paris Hilton

        reply to: Good point, but

        Well, I think that is what the civil servants are there for really. It is there role.

        Not all policy is prepared by Government. I'd guess that most of it is drafted by civil servants.

        On top of that there are "ratifying roles" on Government ministers.

        So, I suppose, that while Governments do indeed have to take a short term view or policy decisions based on expected term of office UK civil servants can and probably have to cater for the future.

        For example: Army, Navy and Air Force don't cease to exist when there is an elected change of government?

  3. Alfie


    Harsh, but fair!

    LMAO, though :-)

    <- Isnt that what Beaker looked like?

  4. Robert E A Harvey

    "Danny Alexander...

    > assured the BBC that the extra tax on oil extraction would not be countered by oil companies simply putting up prices at the pump"

    As if they would! The very idea!

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge


      They will also put them up at the crude delivery point.

  5. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

    Amused to death

    "Labour leader Ed Miliband said growth is down, employment is down and living standards are falling."

    Remind me again who has been minding the store for the last decade?

  6. Tigra 07
    Thumb Up

    How you know it's working...

    You can tell Labour isn't in power by how we didn't get a tonne of new made up taxes in the budget and council tax is actually going down.

    1. Eeep !
      Thumb Down

      And you know you know it isn't when even the Daily Mail don't agree with you

      "That will make it the first year since the tax was introduced in 1993 that it has not risen.

      Read more:"

  7. John Smith 19 Gold badge
    Thumb Up

    No mention of the £100m going into "Science"

    £10m of it going into "Space," whatever that means.

    Does that mean BAe profits have been looking down lately and the Chairman wants a bit of a sub?

    As for "Reforming the Space Act 1986"

    WTF knew the UK *had* a space act to reform? AFAIK the UN is *still* incapable of recognizing that entities *smaller* than a country (SpaceX being the first, but I hope *not* the last) can now launch orbital hardware and I think it's well overdue that fact was recognized.

    I'd like to see a bit of analysis on this with ElReg being a tech site and stuff.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward


      A quick goog search turns up:

      Which is as clear as mud but hey, at least there is a law for/against/restricting it, whatever it is :)

  8. Anonymous Coward

    CBI, pah!

    CBI, "Ooh managers and business are great! Employees are bad people always on the cadge for more money, more holidays and nicking the stationary when the managers aren't looking!"

    1. Shane Orahilly

      Almost, but not quite.

      Of course, it would be more difficult for employees to steal things that are moving. Fortunately, the stationery is, indeed, most often stationary.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Thumb Down

    And you know you know it isn't when even the Daily Mail don't agree with you

    "That will make it the first year since the tax was introduced in 1993 that it has not risen."

    Read more:

  10. Chaosechoz

    Tax and more tax

    What sickens me is that no matter how much each and every successive government promises tax cuts and breaks for low income families, those such acts or promises never ever seem to come to fruition.

    I've seen low income families fall apart, to such extent were the husband has to "Fake" walking out on his wife and kids so the wife can go and claim single parent benefits such as, housing / council tax payments, social security and JSA while the so called husband is staying at a friends house no more than 2 miles away working and brining in £400-£500 per week which he's giving to his "wife" to spend on the kids and stuff....

    I don't agree with such actions, but if they powers that be don't start helping businesses generate more actual jobs for Brits (not racist in intent). Then I can see more and more families faking a split and shitting all over the system just to survive.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      look, this is it....

      and thats my pont, people believe they are due something for nothing, people want lower taxes but want more credits and freebies, im not blaming this govenment or the previous one, but every govenment for the last 60 odd years has been buying votes with freebies, but all that costs money which is taken out of the private sector, which reduces the private sector and there by reduces income, meanwhile the public sector is increasing in size and sucking more money out,

      This deficit you keep hearing isnt our countrys debt, its the amount added to our debt every year, fill up your kitchen sink with water, and drop a egg cup more in to it,

      that is what the deficit /added to debt looks like

      It Is something like 4 or 5 Trillion pounds total debt including pensions and what not


      £4,000,000,000,000.00 - £5,000,000,000,000.00

      So lets assume that they do make 20Billion worth of saveings, our debt is still going to go up because we would still be borrowing 140billion a year, its not hard to imagin

      if you take out a loan for £40,000, then add up your income, take away all your bills including the intrest on that loan, you will be overdrawn by £1,600 each and every year

      no person would be daft enough to keep that up, so you would have to cut back on your bills, or increase your income, increasing income means tax which will actual hurts the amount of tax you would get (im saving money on petrol because its to expencive to buy so im not buying any petrol, ie no tax at all) or reducing our bills, which means no more freebies and reckless waste

    2. system11

      forward thinking

      Maybe they should have worked out if they could afford to have children, before doing so. Don't expect the world to fund a lifestyle choice you've made. The worst part is the way the system rewards people for having children they can't support to the point where it encourages more children.

  11. Mark 65

    Ed Miliband

    "Responding to George Osborne's Budget, Labour leader Ed Miliband said growth is down, employment is down and living standards are falling."

    Well I'm afraid Ed old boy that you cannot have higher standards of living if they rely on an ever increasing public and private debt bubble - sooner or later you must pay the ferryman.

    1. BorkedAgain

      If it were just the ferryman...

      ...I don't think it'd be such a problem. Wasn't his going rate 2p?

      Mind you, the return fare was the killer. Geddit?

  12. 88mm a.k.a. Minister for Misbehaviour
    Paris Hilton

    influenced by too much editing

    watching the jeremy kyle show that is Jamie's Dream School... those kids are the legacy of multiple governments' (and 3rd generation welfare addiction) failings. My feet wouldn't have touched the ground at prep school if I talked like that to a teacher. 6 of the slipper, 6 of the cane, expulsion.

    - Simples.

    Whilst teaching college is a viable alternative to Art college and class sizes remain so high, we will never catch up with China and India. It is my fear we will only regret this once we can't even catch up with Vietnam. The only budget I want to hear is a refusal to pay the EU any more cash, and the sound of a ripped up human rights act... then health & safety red-tape and insurance companies and their lawyers can be sent to Libya to learn the error of their ways.

    Paris - 'cause she likes 6 of the best

  13. Anonymous Coward
    IT Angle

    and the IT angle

    .. is ipod !?

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    no change to IR35

    Then a pox on all you politicians!

    When companies spend on IT they often bring in contractors or consultants and whatever your personal opinion of them, they are temporary staff who save more than they cost if you had to get the same person full time.

    Maybe that is why so many companies in the private sector manage to *deliver* IT projects for less than the 12 billion wasted on the NHS system?

    This country does not encourage anyone who wants to succeed and do more than just be a moaning worker drone in the public sector.

    1. Phil 38

      You mean the NHS IT project which employed Accenture et al

      That is all.

  15. James Pickett


    Sorry, but I've never been able to take Miliband seriously since his alter-ego Mr Milibean appeared in Private Eye.

This topic is closed for new posts.

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021