Official Report search · Parliament Workbench

Chamber

Meeting of the Parliament 03 March 2011

03 Mar 2011 · S3 · Meeting of the Parliament

Item of business

There is a Better Way Campaign

Peattie, Cathy Lab Falkirk East Watch on SPTV

I thank Elaine Smith for bringing the debate to the chamber. As Pauline McNeill said, we should have discussed these issues before. I, too, thank the STUC for its campaign, and I hope that many people here and outwith the Parliament can support it.

There is a better way. In some ways, that is stating the obvious, when we consider the devastation that is planned for our economy and our public sector, and the poverty that will be inflicted on the most vulnerable. I echo the views of Marlyn Glen and Hugh Henry on the proposed changes to universal postal services, which will have a devastating effect on the poorest in our communities.

We can compare that to the protection that is afforded to those who caused the economic woes, and the privileged background of those who are wielding an axe to services on which they do not depend. It would be hard, unless you are one of the protected and privileged few, to come to any conclusion other than that there is a better way.

There is a better way is a rallying cry for those who want a fairer and more equitable society in which those who have the greatest wealth contribute the most; in which services for those in the greatest need—not bankers’ bonuses—are protected; and in which people reject the daft idea that the deeper the cuts, the better it is for jobs and growth. We know that that is a daft idea, and we should never support it.

The burden of the current policies falls heaviest on the poorest. In the words of Mary Brooksbank, which can be seen on the Canongate wall,

“the warld’s ill-divided; them that work the hardest are aye wi’ least provided”.

I am sure that she would have agreed that there is a better way.

The UK debt, which is currently 78 per cent of gross domestic product according to the Economist debt clock, is used to justify the savage cuts. It is certainly more than the Maastricht treaty allows for, but then we are in interesting times. How does our debt compare with that of other countries? It is higher than that of the USA, which stands at 65 per cent, and similar to Germany’s 76 per cent. However, it is not as high as the debts of Canada, Ireland and France—which are all in the 80s—and nowhere near the debts of Italy, Iceland and Greece, or the highest of them all, Japan, at 198 per cent.

If we consider the figures in terms of debt per person, we are again similar to Germany and lower than the USA, Canada, Ireland, France, Norway, Japan and so on. Among the developed countries, our debt is not exceptional—indeed, it is lower than that of many countries.

The debt justification is simply a myth. The financial crisis has been used as an excuse to attack the public sector and the working people, while the perpetrators of the debt are protected by their public school pals.

Members may find it an inconvenient truth, but it is not just Labour and trade union voices that are highlighting the devastating economic and social impact of the current policies. Many prominent independent academics and commentators have reached the same conclusion.

Contrary to what we have been told by the Con-Demolition and their friends in the media, there is no consensus on the need for the deep cuts that are being made. There are many people from many sectors of civil society who recognise the harm that is being done, and they agree that there is a better way.

13:09