The prime minister's enterprise adviser has apologised after saying most Britons had "never had it so good" despite the "so-called recession".Any balance between the correct and incorrect assumptions in Lord Young’s statement is lost in the sweeping, smug and triumphalist overtones that are always easy to hear - whether they are there or not - in a Tory’s lexicon. It is also the latest in quite a few unfortunate quotes (I’ve got a Porsche, raa) that have come from that part of the political spectrum. In February Sir Nicholas Winterton voiced his concerns about the different sort of person found in standard class carriages on the train – quite unlike the quiet working environment he had and needed in first class.
Tough, untouched Tories, and they are in government making those cuts. While most dominant voices in the party offer the expected PR to accompany the shock, divisive statements like those above are often imagined to represent what the Conservatives really think. These cuts aren’t the unfortunate inheritance of a new government that is loath to cut anything. Rather, they are made with relish by people who won’t be affected by them, or perhaps may benefit from them. No more uppity hoodies moving next door, please.
It’s not that the Conservative Party can’t sound sincere in its claim to be making tough choices for the nation’s benefit. Their qualified election win this year certainly suggests that they can convince. But for many people the Conservatives will never sound sincere, and for those people Conservative cuts are always to be expected, budget deficit or no. The Liberal Democrats' role in the cuts represents more of a sea change. Despite this, it was the mean old Conservative Party HQ that took a kicking in the student protests on the 10th. The student-forsaking Liberal Democrats - they who reneged on their promise to vote against lifting the cap on tuition fees - had a more easily dispersed group gather on their doorstep, and a solitary smashed car window. The Lib Dem HQ might be targeted on the 24th though.
The marchers who stayed on the planned route accused both Cameron and Clegg over fees, and made their way from Whitehall to Millbank for the rally and speeches. In the aftermath it was the glaziers’ new best friends who stole the narrative, though. No concerned/dismayed party could get away from them. Those who attacked the protest cited the smashed windows, those who praised the protest cited the smashed windows and those who attacked those who praised the protest cited the smashed windows.
Out of 50,000 people or more, about 2,000 broke windows and injured the police (and each other) – that’s a news story for the sizable minority. I can grab hold of that as a news consumer. Broken windows, violence and hurt police? I can judge that to be right or wrong, magnificent or disgusting. 48,000 + students protesting over fee changes I don’t understand and can’t contextualise? I can’t form any judgement from that. I can’t be angry or pleased about it. I don’t know what the sum total of all these little news stories about cuts here, department closures there, and staff/student campus protests everywhere else means. We’ve all got to cut back a little haven’t we? Even students? More harshly: especially students, in those elitist universities, where they teach them stupid so called ‘subjects’ and all the students go on a three year booze – ah, the mixed, self-answering/defeating critique.
Of course, we are being rationalised into the idea, correct or incorrect, that cuts are unquestionably necessary and that almost everyone - every sector, government department, local government, public service, private business and many aspects of daily life - will have to accept their share of them. This allows people like the Guardian’s Julian Glover to say things like:
Keep calm and carry on has become a cliche, but it is good advice for a government. Stay pragmatic and keep explaining, firmly, in moderate language and with courtesy. The left will howl at budget cuts that their own economic legacy makes necessary, just as the right will howl against political reform.The coalition must rise above the bile of the left. While the left may only be offering an accusatory ‘JUDAS!’ level of criticism, praising the coalition’s pragmatism assumes them to be in the right - that the cuts are imperative and that the government is undertaking the difficult and thankless task of fixing the mess. Essentially, if the ‘booo, hiss, cuts, Judas’ argument is presented by the moronic leftovers of New Labour (and it certainly is, and they certainly cut plenty of things themselves) then the argument against cuts must be moronic. If those who are against an increase in tuition fees go about smashing windows, injuring riot police and each other, then opposing the fee changes must be the stance of idiot extremists.
All the while we are leaning, if not wholeheartedly, towards the line of thought that the cuts are imperative, we will get very carefully worded (perhaps tepid) media reportage, limited to what each cut means and how much will be saved by it. It is analysis that accepts the news story – the traditional ‘who, what, where, when and how’ are present, but not ‘why.’ This is a conspicuous absence in a media elsewhere obsessed with ‘was this preventable’ features. Of course, presenting the cuts as death and taxes inevitable also affects how we read protests. Are they valid criticisms, or stupid/self indulgent?
President Obama has increased higher education funding in the States. The belief is that investment in education = boost in new recruits to business = more earning potential = produce/earn your way out of economic downturn. In Britain we must cut, and if you don’t accept that…well it doesn’t matter because the majority do accept it.
Investment rather than cuts is just an alternative. It’s not necessarily better or the correct solution but then neither is cutting. The important thing to note is that both are viable, even if we don’t think it a good idea to have it up for discussion in the current climate, or whatever catchphrase of ease you’d prefer. I’ll leave you with the words of an ex-tutor of mine. He was reacting to Labour’s cuts earlier this year - in particular the effects of cuts as they filtered down to the specific, and King’s College London shut down its American Studies department:
Lacking the balls to raise taxes for education every political party in power seeks to reduce public spending. The British public now losing their houses and jobs in abundance, and every responsible economist I have talked to thinks the worst is come, will probably vote for the one who actually says he will cut more. It's known as a masochist style of political response. Unfortunately Vice Chancellors seem to imitate the mood. Not for them the long-term restructuring of debt, for which their assets would perhaps serve as collaterals to save what's valuable, Immediate cuts now is the order of the day. It's the political mood and they simply reflect it. Obama has upped education support in real financial support by 39% across America. Try telling that to Gordon Brown or David Cameron.
No comments:
Post a Comment