[bots]

Originally Posted by joeysteele

I say again a surplus is fine, if it comes from true and solid economic growth.

To set out to build a surplus while cutting funds, care and support for the sick, disabled, most vulnerable and elderly is obscene and should have no place in any so called decent society.

Sort that out first, then run a surplus if you can but don't build one on the backs of and to the detriment of the weakest in society.

Labour is now right to oppose this move because it would hold any govt of any party to run a surplus regardless.
That is wrong and the only wrong thing from Labour was that they ever explored supporting this move in the first place for me.

Enacting crippling cuts to mental Health care, social care services for the elderly, home care for the sick and disabled, cutting this benefit and that benefit for the poorest and most vulnerable.
Doing all that and then saying we should run a surplus is a disgrace.

Shocking and disgusting in fact.

The whole point of the measure is to stop the country being put in to debt by over spending during a period of growth. This would ensure that we didnt have a recurrence of what happened in the Blair years where money was squandered and wasted, pushing us into debt and without a capability to deal with the economy when times are tough ... ie saving for a rainy day. We all have to do it, its called being responsible. That's what labour have done the U-turn on supporting. They are basically retaining the right to continue overspending, just like all previous labour governments have done in the past.

Labour didn't get in at the last election primarily because the british public had no confidence in them being able to manage the economy. No lessons have been learned, and labour are heading for another epic fail.