Skip to main content

The time to organise resistance is now

We reject these cuts as simply malicious ideological vandalism, hitting the most vulnerable the hardest.
Join us in the fight.

It is time to organise a broad movement of active resistance to the Con-Dem government’s budget
intentions. They plan the most savage spending cuts since the 1930s, which will wreck the lives of millions
by devastating our jobs, pay, pensions, NHS, education, transport, postal and other services.

The government claims the cuts are unavoidable because the welfare state has been too generous.
This is nonsense. Ordinary people are being forced to pay for the bankers’ profligacy.

The £11bn welfare cuts, rise in VATto 20%, and 25% reductions across government departments target
the most vulnerable – disabled people, single parents, those on housing benefit, black and other ethnic
minority communities, students, migrant workers, LGBTpeople and pensioners.

Women are expected to bear 75% of the burden. The poorest will be hit six times harder than the richest.
Internal Treasury documents estimate 1.3 million job losses in public and private sectors.

We reject this malicious vandalism and resolve to campaign for a radical alternative, with the level of
determination shown by trade unionists and social movements in Greece and other European countries.

This government of millionaires says “we’re all in it together” and “there is no alternative”.
But, for the wealthy, corporation tax is being cut, the bank levy is a pittance, and top salaries
and bonuses have already been restored to pre-crash levels.

An alternative budget would place the banks under democratic control, and raise revenue by increasing
tax for the rich, plugging tax loopholes, withdrawing troops from Afghanistan, abolishing the nuclear
“deter-rent” by cancelling the Trident replacement.

An alternative strategy could use these resources to: support welfare; develop homes, schools, and
hospitals; and foster a green approach to public spending – investing in renewable energy and public
transport, thereby creating a million jobs.


We commit ourselves to:

> Oppose cuts and privatisation in our workplaces, community and welfare services.
> Fight rising unemployment and support organisations of unemployed people.
> Develop and support an alternative programme for economic and social recovery.
> Oppose all proposals to “solve” the crisis through racism and other forms of scapegoating.
> Work closely with similar opposition movements in other countries.
> Organise information, meetings, conferences, marches and demonstrations.
> Support the development of a national co-ordinating coalition of resistance.


We urge those who support this statement to attend the Organising Conference on
Saturday 27 November 2010 (10am-5pm),
Camden Centre, Town Hall, London, WC1H 9JE.

Comments

Joe Otten said…
But the cuts are all a consequence of things that happened under Labour. There's no way the Lib Dems in particular would sign up to any of this were the budget already balanced.

By all means protest. I share your anger. But blame please where it is due. Labour.

Of course we should expect deficit denialism from the outgoing government party - as the Tories did in '97 - but no reason for the broader left to indulge them.

Popular posts from this blog

Post-Growth: A new vision for a fairer and more sustainable Britain

More on why 20's plenty -- without need for any further 'trials'...

There are a number of reasons for setting a default speed of 20mph throughout the 'unclassified' road network in residential parts of a city such as Norwich. Most important perhaps is that of driver recognition as to what the speed limit is. If you have 20 mph as the default then you not only establish this limit clearly, but you also adjust the driver's recognition as to what is the "normal" speed in such residential areas. The most important aspect is that drivers set 20 mph as the norm with those 30 mph areas or roads being seen as 50% faster, rather than seeing 30 mph as the norm with 20 mph as 33% slower. The psychological adjustment of normal speeds in residential areas is key to the success of reducing speeds and therefore danger to pedestrians and cyclists. Therefore any trial, pilot or whatever, that only implements 20 mph in a tiny proportion of the city is not modelling 20's Plenty in any realistic manner.   When considering the val...