diamond geezer

 Thursday, November 12, 2015

Why are Britons so willing to accept cuts in public services?

Just to clarify, today's post isn't about you, it's about society as a whole. There will always be individuals who want the government to spend less on things, just as there'll always be individuals who want the government to spend more. That's perfectly natural, that's the way of things, that's politics. But the national mood has most definitely swung behind towards those happy to pay less, those who see cuts to public services as inevitable, those who accept austerity rather than rallying against it. And I wondered why.

Over the last century (and more), governments of all hues have built up considerable public infrastructure to support society. This includes the education system, a national transport network, the state pension, local government services, and of course the NHS. Various sectors have been squirrelled off to the private sector over the years, but we retain a core of key services paid for out of taxation. Your children are educated, your bins are emptied, soldiers defend your borders and your local care home is maintained. But more and more we're being told we simply can't afford to fund services at existing levels and that they must inexorably be cut back. And more and more the British public accepts this as reality, deeming it necessary, even essential, to the wellbeing of our nation. How did we get here?

There was a time when taxes went up as well as down. If the country needed to pay for something we dug our collective hands in our pockets and paid for it, even if we didn't especially enjoy doing so, in recognition of the greater good. We expected council tax to rise to pay for things that councils do, we expected that a better NHS required spending money, we expected to build more schools (and better schools) from the public purse, and we expected beer duty to rise and fall according to the proximity of the next election. The left liked it more and the right liked it less, but as a nation we generally backed the notion that governments spend money.

No longer. Our government is fixed on cutting costs faster than any government has cut before, hacking at departmental budgets across the board. Ministers have been forced to decide what to cull and what to keep, while those in charge of delivery attempt to plead their worth. A lot of this has been paraphrased as "making efficiencies", but after five years there's only so much dead wood left to hack, and the latest cuts go well below the surface. And yet the general public seem generally unfussed. A library goes missing and only a minority blink. Transport subsidies are whittled down and people continue to travel. Social security benefits are scaled back and those who don't need them simply nod. There's heartfelt opposition from the usual quarters, sure, but the majority of Britons aren't fussed.

And it's not just making cuts, it's not allowing spending to rise. Local government grants are capped, and elected authorities specifically barred from raising more. The licence fee is frozen to force the BBC to do more with less. Education authorities are obliged to match rising pupil numbers but prevented from opening new schools. The NHS retains notional protection but lacks the funding required to maintain an equivalent level of services. Decisions have been made and laws passed, essentially hardwiring our social infrastructure to drive itself down. And yet society continues to function, the argument goes, so why the hell were we spending such excessive amounts of money in the first place?

The government has successfully embedded acceptance of cuts into the national psyche. The deficit must be tamed, we're told, often enough that we believe it must be true. By driving home the message that public spending was once wildly irresponsible, we've come to yearn for the comfort blanket of spending less. Austerity must be embraced rather than queried, a philosophy repeated at every opportunity, the battle for hearts and minds now won. Living within our means has become the priority, with those in power able to decree a ceiling on acceptable levels of expenditure. Indeed so transformed is the electorate's mindset that even politicians on the left compete these days to prove their cutting credentials. The economic centre of our country has shifted so far that it's now more acceptable to close a library than to open one. What changed?

Many of us still hold exactly the same views as before, either that public spending is beneficial or that public spending is weak. So what must have changed are the opinions of the mainstream; cajoled, encouraged and convinced to believe that spending less is more. We've become a more self-centred society, unwilling to support others when we could keep that money for ourselves. If a dozen fewer fire engines means more money in our pockets, bring it on. If cutting tax credits for others means that our pensions rise above inflation, what's not to like? If we were interested in going to Birmingham we'd drive, so why subsidise the losers on the train? And yes, it might mean longer to wait for medical treatment in the future, but only sick people need the NHS, so spare cash for a daily cappuccino is much more welcome.

This must be a deep-seated shift, because the Conservatives deliberately promised to make swingeing cuts in the run up to the last election and in spite of this were voted back in. Be it economic caution or a desire to pocket more for ourselves, we're much more comfortable with lower public spending these days and we don't mind the consequences, because that's the kind of country we've become. And so the government's plan to roll back the state sector continues generally unopposed, until by the end of the decade several services will have been dismantled beyond the point at which they could ever be reassembled. Unless these cumulative cuts ever hit home and make us reconsider, expect our nation's transformation to continue.

<< click for Newer posts

click for Older Posts >>

click to return to the main page

...or read more in my monthly archives
Jan18  Feb18  Mar18  Apr18  May18  Jun18  Jul18
Jan17  Feb17  Mar17  Apr17  May17  Jun17  Jul17  Aug17  Sep17  Oct17  Nov17  Dec17
Jan16  Feb16  Mar16  Apr16  May16  Jun16  Jul16  Aug16  Sep16  Oct16  Nov16  Dec16
Jan15  Feb15  Mar15  Apr15  May15  Jun15  Jul15  Aug15  Sep15  Oct15  Nov15  Dec15
Jan14  Feb14  Mar14  Apr14  May14  Jun14  Jul14  Aug14  Sep14  Oct14  Nov14  Dec14
Jan13  Feb13  Mar13  Apr13  May13  Jun13  Jul13  Aug13  Sep13  Oct13  Nov13  Dec13
Jan12  Feb12  Mar12  Apr12  May12  Jun12  Jul12  Aug12  Sep12  Oct12  Nov12  Dec12
Jan11  Feb11  Mar11  Apr11  May11  Jun11  Jul11  Aug11  Sep11  Oct11  Nov11  Dec11
Jan10  Feb10  Mar10  Apr10  May10  Jun10  Jul10  Aug10  Sep10  Oct10  Nov10  Dec10 
Jan09  Feb09  Mar09  Apr09  May09  Jun09  Jul09  Aug09  Sep09  Oct09  Nov09  Dec09
Jan08  Feb08  Mar08  Apr08  May08  Jun08  Jul08  Aug08  Sep08  Oct08  Nov08  Dec08
Jan07  Feb07  Mar07  Apr07  May07  Jun07  Jul07  Aug07  Sep07  Oct07  Nov07  Dec07
Jan06  Feb06  Mar06  Apr06  May06  Jun06  Jul06  Aug06  Sep06  Oct06  Nov06  Dec06
Jan05  Feb05  Mar05  Apr05  May05  Jun05  Jul05  Aug05  Sep05  Oct05  Nov05  Dec05
Jan04  Feb04  Mar04  Apr04  May04  Jun04  Jul04  Aug04  Sep04  Oct04  Nov04  Dec04
Jan03  Feb03  Mar03  Apr03  May03  Jun03  Jul03  Aug03  Sep03  Oct03  Nov03  Dec03
 Jan02  Feb02  Mar02  Apr02  May02  Jun02  Jul02 Aug02  Sep02  Oct02  Nov02  Dec02 

eXTReMe Tracker
jack of diamonds
Life viewed from London E3

» email me
» follow me on twitter
» follow the blog on Twitter
» follow the blog on RSS

my flickr photostream