Chancellor of the Exchequer Jeremy Hunt leaves 11 Downing Street, London, with his ministerial box before delivering his Budget in the Houses of Parliament, March 6, 2024.
PUBLIC services are at still greater risk as Chancellor Jeremy Hunt gambled the Tories’ election hopes on a last-ditch tax-cutting Budget.
Mr Hunt announced a 2 per cent cut in National Insurance in a bid to put more money in workers’ pockets before Britain goes to the polls later this year.
But the price will be a major squeeze in public spending in the next parliament, with many department budgets likely to fall in real terms.
The Chancellor also abolished the non-dom tax rule which lets the wealthiest avoid paying taxes on overseas earnings, a key Labour pledge, and brought more families within the scope of child benefit payments.
The Budget therefore leaves Labour more politically denuded than ever — it will either have to find other ways to raise the money it had planned for public services from scrapping the non-dom loophole, or more likely drop residual spending commitments altogether.
Labour leader Sir Keir Starmer told MPs that Labour supported the National Insurance cut too, leaving the parties exchanging rhetorical sound and fury on economic policy but with no significant differences.
From missed opportunities to ‘Tory hot air’, trade unions weigh in on the Spring Budget announcements
Responding to Jeremy Hunt’s spring budget statement today, union leaders have shared their thoughts on what it will mean for workers across the UK, with warnings of deepening crises in their respective industries.
The Chancellor was condemned for failing to announce proper investment in public services, with trade union leaders accusing him of using “deeply cynical” pre-election “gimmicks”.
Union leaders had already warned the Chancellor of the need to provide extra cash for public services, as Jeremy Hunt has been blasted for falling well short of delivering for working people.
A budget totally out of step with what people want and need.
Today [yesterday] saw Chancellor Jeremy Hunt deliver his much-awaited Spring Budget. The stakes couldn’t be higher, with the economy in recession, millions struggling to make ends meet and a forthcoming general election.
In what is likely to be the last budget, and possibly the final fiscal event before the general election later this year, Hunt sought to present a rosy picture of the economy, one which is totally divorced from reality.
A budget totally out of step with what people want and need, opinion polls have repeatedly shown that the British public prefer investment in public services rather than tax cuts. There was no bold and radical plan to get the UK economy out of economic stagnation, to tackle poor productivity or to improve public services.
Image of the Green Party’s Carla Denyer on BBC Question Time.
“People can see through these pre-election tax bribes that will have to be paid for by cuts to our NHS and other vital public services,” says Green Party co-leader Carla Denyer.
Denyer said:
“People are crying out for investment in social care, in our NHS and in dentistry. We needed a ‘care full’ Budget but have ended up with a careless, reckless Budget.
“Chancellor Jeremy Hunt is attempting to bribe the electorate through tax cuts, which can only mean more pain for public services that are already on their knees.
“People won’t be richer, healthier or happier because of this Budget. People know a con when they see one.
“Councils are going bust up and down the country, NHS waits are getting longer, dentists can’t be found, while anyone travelling by train or bus, or visiting our town centres feels the lack of investment all around them.
“These headline tax cuts will do nothing to reverse the decade-long, real-terms wage freeze most workers have faced under successive Conservative governments.
“There is wealth in the UK, but it is distributed unfairly. Our economy is failing because our wealth, rather than circulating and benefiting everybody, is held in the stagnant assets of the super-rich.
“So, we needed a Budget that released the money available from a wealth tax to invest in the green jobs of the future, to cut NHS queues and restore nature and the places we live and work.
“That would have provided the vital public investment our country is crying out for.
“Now we have Labour huffing and puffing but offering no real alternative to being locked into a Conservative-forged cuts straitjacket.
“Thankfully, a General Election is coming where people can vote Green for the real change that will lead to a fairer, healthier and more caring country.”
Two Just Stop Oil supporters have blocked the entrance to the Royal Courts of Justice. They took action to highlight the injustice of private injunctions being used to silence peaceful dissent in the UK, and are demanding the government end all new oil, gas and coal projects.
At around 10:10 am yesterday, Tez Burns, 35, and Callum Goode, 24, glued themselves to the entrance gates of the Royal Courts of Justice. The action comes after eighteen Just Stop Oil supporters have appeared at the Royal Courts of Justice over the past three days, facing trial over an alleged breach of a civil injunction taken out by National Highways Ltd in 2022.
On Tuesday, eleven Just Stop Oil supporters signed an undertaking committing them to no further action. In addition, six Just Stop Oil supporters, who were previously named on an injunction taken out against Insulate Britain supporters, were not offered an undertaking. Five of these have accepted the breach and will be sentenced today. Both Callum and Tez have refused to accept the breach and have pushed for the case to be heard at trial, which is currently ongoing.
A Just Stop Oil spokesperson said:
“Injunctions are private laws bought by corporations and government agencies. Typically they are used to protect someone from harassment, and are intended as a remedy not a punishment, but since the Insulate Britain campaign began, they’ve been increasingly used by the State and private companies to silence dissent by climate resistors. They are being used to circumnavigate the usual rule of law, where defendants appear before a high court judge with no jury. They potentially expose defendants to ‘double jeopardy’ for the same action, where they may also be facing criminal charges. Typically injunctions result in astronomical legal costs which are applied to people named on an injunction, even if they have never broken it. Where defendants are offered an undertaking- which commits them to a certain action- and they choose to sign it, all costs are then divided equally amongst any remaining defendants. This is a divide and rule tactic being used to silence those speaking out about the criminality of politicians and business leaders.”
Callum Goode 24, a maths graduate from Ashbourne, said:
“I’m being taken to court for allegedly breaking a court order I wasn’t even aware of, granted just two days before I climbed a gantry over the M25 to demand an end to new oil and gas licences. Hidden away, a judge with no jury will be deciding what happens to me. I’ve already spent 11 weeks in prison without trial for the action I took that day and I will also face a criminal charge- this double jeopardy is obvious injustice.
For this stand I’m likely to face tens of thousands of pounds in costs and potentially prison and I’m only one of hundreds facing the injustice of these injunctions. In court, I have told the truth as I have sworn to – that resisting a government that is knowingly taking actions that are killing countless people and risking hundreds of millions more lives, is the only moral option.”
The use of injunctions to silence climate defenders has received international condemnation. Michel Forst, the United Nations Special Rapporteur on Environmental Defenders under the Aarhus Convention recently said: “I am deeply troubled at the use of civil injunctions to ban protest in certain areas, including on public roadways.” adding: “The repression that environmental activists who use peaceful civil disobedience are currently facing in Europe is a major threat to democracy and human rights.”
“The environmental emergency that we are collectively facing, and that scientists have been documenting for decades, cannot be addressed if those raising the alarm and demanding action are criminalised for it. The only legitimate response to peaceful environmental activism and civil disobedience at this point is that the authorities, the media, and the public realise how essential it is for us all to listen to what environmental defenders have to say.”
Just Stop Oil protesting in London 6 December 2022.
