The BBC seem to very keen on bigging-up the cuts, on every news programme every day there seems to be at least some mention of the evil and woe the 'savage' cuts will have but very little castigation of who is the cause of WHY cuts are necessary: the bald, jug-eared, media whore HERE for example. They are labour luvvies through and through. I hope their coverage gets more and more scrituny; let's see what they say on Wednesday after Osborne sets out his stall in the spending review. However...
"As we approach the comprehensive spending review, it is worth reflecting on the scale of the mess left by Labour. Labour’s mismanagement of the economy means that this year the UK will be borrowing £109bn that has nothing to do with the recession...." [Link]
The modest cuts are merely CORRECTING THE SPENDING BINGE; they are, says Tim Morgan for the Centre for Policy Studies, "A shower, not a hurricane" [Pdf] He explains that New Labour was in office during a decade of irresponsible excess and that to understand why cuts are essential now we must understand where Blair and Brown went wrong.
"To understand this issue, policy-makers and the broader public need to be fully aware that the economic history of the UK (and of many other western countries) over the last decade has been a chapter of excess, on the part of individuals, businesses and government alike."Nobody can deny this. In that paper Tim "demonstrates that so vast is the scale of Government spending following 13 years of profligacy that, relatively speaking, the proposed spending cuts are actually quite modest overall. They merely involve reversing, over five years, a comparatively small part of the enormous increases which took place in the previous decade.". So says George Trefgarne on "The true scale of the cuts".