Yesterday the Chancellor missed the chance to avoid a cost of living crisis which is causing sleepless nights for families up and down the country.
People need support. Instead, they got tax hikes, benefit cuts and no answer to skyrocketing bills. ⬇️https://t.co/9ajEwxfvaO
— Liberal Democrats (@LibDems) October 28, 2021
Just days before the UK hosts COP26, this is a laughable announcement that makes a complete mockery of our commitment to reducing aviation carbon emissions.#Budget21 #COP26 https://t.co/ndpbAeioXs
— Sarah Olney (@sarahjolney1) October 27, 2021
The Chancellor has just announced that IF the fiscal rules are met, the aid budget will be restored by 2024/25! That is far too late. Millions will suffer. What are they supposed to do? Wait?! #Budget2021
— Layla Moran 🔶🕊️ (@LaylaMoran) October 27, 2021
The @LibDems called for an Emergency Budget for Children. We called on the Tories to pledge the £15 billion their *own* catch-up tsar proposed. They’ve offered less than £5bn. Why do Tories always draw a red line when it comes to our children’s futures? #Budget21
— Daisy Cooper MP 🔶 (@libdemdaisy) October 27, 2021
A budget leaving us thinking 'what if' and revealing the Chancellor’s priorities are not the priorities of the British people pic.twitter.com/FCtS0ggEG2
— Christine Jardine 🔶 (@cajardineMP) October 27, 2021
The Chancellor mentioned the word "wine" twice as many times as he did either "education" or "children".
Priorities? 🤔
— Munira Wilson MP 🇺🇦 (@munirawilson) October 27, 2021
It's absolutely shocking that four days before COP, the Chancellor did not say the word climate even once in his *hour-long* speech.
The Conservative's aren't committed to solving the climate crisis. Their priorities are all wrong.
— Wera Hobhouse MP 🔶 🇺🇦 (@Wera_Hobhouse) October 27, 2021
Follow @LibDemVoice on Twitter
Like us on Facebook
Subscribe to our feed
Sign-up for our daily email digest
Starmer kills off Leveson two
Michael's weekly ward surgeries today! #dundeewestend
Woodhead railway tunnels to Hadfield today
Bye bye coal: A Net Zero milestone
Alex Macfie
Matt (Bristol)
Peter Martin
25 Comments
New Comres poll: 53% approve of the budget.
I would suggest that a good percentage of the population would not have understand half of the conjuring tricks that successive Chancellors pull on the country every year!!
Sorry ” understood “.
Shouldn’t that headline read; “Female Lib Dem MPs react to the Budget”? Is it a case of the “sisters doing it for themselves”? Oh gosh, I’m getting to sound like Philip Davies MP! What are the fellas doing (besides Sir Ed, of course)?
@John Marriott. Why? What has gender got to do with it?
@ John M.
Perhaps it’s because the Budget refers directly to their portfolios?
Kyle,
It’s funny how, surprisingly frequently, what superficially looks like a good Budget turns sour once the analysts have dug into the detail. Let’s see how popular it is in a month’s time…
@Mary Reid
I think it likely that male Liberal Democrat MPs are just as likely to give their reactions to the budget as female Liberal Democrat MPs. Therefore it does seem odd that the article only features comments by female MPs. I suspect questions would be asked if only comments from male MPs were quoted, so John Marriott is absolutely right to ask the question. (And to answer your specific question, gender should have absolutely nothing to do with it. )
@Mary
@Mark
It’s the ‘optics’. What concerns me, and, it would appear people like Brad Barrows, is that, as I said, to borrow that Eurythmics song, “sisters are doin’ it for themselves”. Haven’t Messrs Carmichael, Farron and Stone anything to add? They appear to be sending Sir Ed out to bat on his own!
If you are unfamiliar with the song, let me remind you of a few of the lyrics;
“Sisters are doin’ it for themselves
Standin’ on their own two feet
And ring in’ on their own bells….”
Don’t get me wrong, ladies. I applaud your verve and fighting spirit. After all, as the song states; “…behind every great man/ There had to be a great woman.”. Now in the modern Lib Dems the rôles appear to have been reversed! So, come on chaps, stir yourselves before it’s too late!
Can HQ tell us in detail what coverage of Liberal Democrat views there was on the main news bulletins and the news discussion programmes? We often seem to be invisible.
@John Marriott
“to borrow that Eurythmics song, “sisters are doin’ it for themselves””
Eurythmics duo wrote it but don’t forget Aretha Frankiin sang on it as well.
All the party tweets call for increased spending but also complain about higher taxes.
Increased spending, higher taxes – you can’t have one without the other.
Lib Dems need a coherent policy like we did with Vince Cable.
56% of Remainers approve of the Budget.
17% pf Remainers disapprove of the Budget.
Source: https://twitter.com/SavantaComRes/status/1453456017195507715
Why are Lib Dem leaders are so out of touch with their own supporters? Are they in a Westminster bubble.
@Brad Barrows et al – actually I did look up Tim Farron, Alistair Carmichael and Jamie Stone when putting this together, and none of them had posted anything original about the Budget.
But please – this kind of whataboutery (look it up) has no place in Liberal debate.
@Mary Reid
I guess that’s 1-0 to the girls, then? All credit to them. I feel inclined to the view that, unless they are careful, men appear to be heading towards the ‘endangered species’ category as far as the Lib Dems in Parliament are concerned!
Sorry to disagree with your final comment; but it’s the ‘optics’, as I said at the beginning that people notice. As for “Liberal debate”(sic), shouldn’t that be written with a small ‘l’? Come to think of it, what IS “L/liberal debate” anyway?
The Budget is essentially about ritual. The Chancellor expects a good press on the day of delivery (delivering a speech that is). The next day the analysts have got stuck into their interpretations. And on the third day the Institute for Fiscal Studies makes its pronouncement. Then we lesser mortals think about our campaigning over coming weeks and months.
Why is it that any increase in basic income is looked on as a bad thing? Something that ordinary hard-working folk should fear because the burden of cost will surely fall on them.
And why is it, that in what is supposed to be one of the advanced nations of the world, those less fortunate in our society than us, those with chronic illnesses and disabilities which prevent them from working, are treated as pariahs who sponge off the State claiming benefits the rest of us have to fund?
Why is it that never a word is said when wealth gets a massive boost?
Why is it Rishi Sunak felt it necessary to increase the tax burden to its highest level in 70 years, a tax burden which mainly falls on ordinary folk who at best are on modest incomes?
Why is it that in the very same budget Rishi Sunak felt the need to hand the banks a £1bn-a-year tax cut? These are the same banks that you and I helped to bail out just over a decade ago because of a financial crash they helped to create.
Why is that Rishi Sunak also felt the need to give the elderly a kick in the teeth by withdrawing the triple-lock? A Liberal Democrat policy adopted in the Coalition years, a policy which was designed to help drag up the derisory amounts we pay pensioners in this country to the same levels as other advanced western nations. Many of these same pensioners have put their trust in the Conservatives over recent years, for what? To be cast aside in the name of optimism.
A Living Wage should mean just that, it should be pitched at a level that folk of all ages, whatever their circumstances need in order to pay their way. If we truly believe in a fair and just society high spending should not result in higher taxes for the vast majority who are on modest or low incomes.
@Ian Shires
“the world, those less fortunate in our society than us, those with chronic illnesses and disabilities which prevent them from working, are treated as pariahs who sponge off the State claiming benefits the rest of us have to fund?” Does anyone treat those people in that way? Can you cite anywhere in which a mainstream political party or mainstream politician has described people with disabilities in that way? And if so, can you provide a link?
“Why is it that in the very same budget Rishi Sunak felt the need to hand the banks a £1bn-a-year tax cut?” He didn’t hand them a tax cut. He increased the total corporation tax they pay from 27% to 28%. Check out the discussion in href=https://www.libdemvoice.org/davey-on-budget-bankers-get-twice-catchup-for-children-68949.html
@John Marriott 8 of our 12 current MPs are female. It’s a very welcome change in gender balance from our embarassing long history as a party that was in principle in favour of gender balance but never came near achieving it. As recently as 2015 we had no female MPs.
@Dennis Mollison
Yes, it IS a welcome change. However, I often look at articles on LDV from the point of view of a neutral observer and, from what I often see (the ‘optics’ is, I believe, the current fashionable word), it would appear that it is the female Lib Dem MPs, who are clearly making most of the running.
Mary Reid, for whom I have the utmost admiration, more or less admitted that she did not seek out the other three Lib Dem male MPs for a quote in order to show a bit of balance. I don’t know much about Mr Stone; but Messrs Farron and Carmichael are usually good for a quote most times.
In the scheme of things, my comments probably don’t amount to much. However, I’m glad to see that I’m not entirely alone in my opinion. Could this actually be an example of the “L/liberal debate’ to which Mary refers?
@ John Marriott. You misquote me. What I said in my comment was: “actually I did look up Tim Farron, Alistair Carmichael and Jamie Stone when putting this together, and none of them had posted anything original about the Budget.” In fact, all they had done was to retweet others.
@Mary Reid
I did not use the verb you did, because it was clear that, from my understanding of ‘look up’, you must have done a quick trawl of social media in general and the twitterati in particular. What you didn’t appear to do was try to contact the three gentlemen in question directly for a quote.
If you did try unsuccessfully to contact them, I apologise. Believe me, my comment was made not to mock but to draw attention to how the Lib Dems might come across to those who are not as yet committed to any political party or philosophy but may not be happy in supporting a party where the gender imbalance is skewed strongly a particular way. I’m sure some diehards will take offence at my remarks; but would draw their attention to the nature of the platform on which this ‘debate’ is currently taking place.
@Mary Reid
And have a nice weekend 👍😀
As I write further on housing, and the problems with Housing Associations adding additional charges for sheltered housing. The cost of the new fire alarms with one Housing Association is Bath has jumped.
I’ve asked like many others, for more transparency on the role of Housing Associations and charges.
We are living in difficult times with Ricketts not unheard of, who would have thought that I would be commenting on children having enough of the right food to eat. 70 years ago, illness like polio and TB were more common.
With the cutting back of some benefits for the most needy in our society, heat or eat.
If only the insulation of homes was a more logical argument, then there would be more interest. Its miserable to be cold and hungry for children and adults also older people.
I watched a zoom meeting last night given my the local Libdems in Bath. Impressed by the ideas that flowed, we all care about those less able to cope.
Nordic countries rank high in the World Economic Forum’s Global Competitiveness Report. Their budgets focus on the drivers of economic growth which are world-class education, social programs, and a high standard of living. These factors create a skilled and motivated workforce.
These countries have a high tax rate. But they use the revenues to invest in the long-term building blocks of economic growth.
Rachel Reeves focuses on some of these aspects in her FT article Reeves:
“Delivering on the green transition presents enormous opportunities for Britain — creating new markets, attracting investment, leveraging in private finance and giving businesses the chance to lead the world. But this is only true if we act now, and act at scale.
Labour would meet the challenge head on, investing £28bn of capital spending in Britain’s green transition every year of this decade. This isn’t just about the moral case, but the economic one as well. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, failure to act on climate change will mean the costs mount up for subsequent generations. If action is delayed by a decade, the price of getting to net zero will double.
As a Labour chancellor, I would also put in place measures to help us buy, make and sell more in Britain, boosting British business while filling the gaping holes in the government’s Brexit deal, especially in financial services, creative industries, farming and fishing.
These plans are crucial because lower taxes and higher spending on public services is only sustainable when it goes hand in hand with growing our economy.
In contrast, Wednesday’s budget contained no such ideas or commitments to the jobs, skills and sectors of the future that are crucial if we are to help businesses thrive and to create sustained growth. We needed a plan to tax fairly, to spend wisely and grow our economy. This government failed to deliver it.”
This is where the LibDems need to be in economic policy. Promoting green business investment and coupling environmental responsibility with Nordic style competitiveness and improvement in living standards across the population as a whole.