Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!

Big savings needed in Haringey. Where should the savings come from?

Now the party's truly over. I've been talking for a while now about the need for local authorities to save something like 20-25% from their budgets. This evening Panorama took up the theme. It's now out there. For Haringey that'll mean savings of something like £80-100m in savings. That's huge! We're facing the biggest cuts since the 1970s. Handled badly, it will be an emergency.

So what do we think? What would we choose? We can sit back and let the Council take decisions or we can share the responsibility and contribute our views. Probably about as exciting as doing your expenses, but something we should probably be doing.

Here's how Haringey's spending is split right now:

So discuss. For more details on Haringey's finances, see this area on their website.

Some rules. Only constructive discussion allowed. If you want to party-politic or bash the Council, please go to another discussion. I'm opening this discussion for constructive discussion only. Break those rules and ya get nuked!

Tags for Forum Posts: cuts, public spending cuts

0 members like this

▶ Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on June 8, 2010 at 16:10

Got a mortgage Will? Why, if a lot of us are hundreds of thousands in debt, is it wrong for the govt to borrow £2500 per person more than we get in income? Are you saying we should have no debt, or just a little?

I don't know what would have happened if we'd have taken the previous govt's advice and cut gently so as not to damage the recovery but I do think it's a political decision.

If we want to, we can do either. All we need is the political will. The majority of us elected parties who want savage cuts now so that's what we'll get, but it's not the only way.

For rich first world countries, debt is not in itself a bad thing. Why, for example, is the USA national debt $13Trillion - is that wrong too? There is not enough political will in the USA to make the savage cuts needed to reduce this debt.

My point is that it is a political decision to cut, not a necessity.

▶ Reply

Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on June 8, 2010 at 16:29

So, your mortgage allowed you a better life and you didn't mind borrowing to attain it. You're paying back the debt at a much lower rate than ever and you have a house that's lovely to live in (I guess) and increasing in value! Worth every penny if you ask me.

If the cuts are avoided and the economy recovers quicker than it otherwise would, your house will rise in price without you having to cut your lifestyle at all, in fact, you'd be unwise to pay it off now if you don't need to.

And that's the point - provided the fundamentals are sound, to pay off debt now rather than later is an ideology, not a necessity. The USA disagrees with us. They have chosen a different path for their priorities. They are not wrong, just different. I cited them to underline the point.