Punish the poor to fund the port – sounds like a plan says Financial Secretary
Editorial by Deputy Editor Nick Roberts….
MARK speaks on page 7 about the fact that “Neoliberalism means deregulated markets, privatisation, austerity and as little state influence in the economy as possible,” and that in the UK “we pay for dentists, care homes, further education and eye tests, and we fund shareholder payouts from rail, telecoms, water, gas and electricity.”
Thank goodness we’re not dealing with that right? What path would we even need t take to wind up in that situation.
On an entirely unrelated note: On the front page we have the Financial Secretary suggesting that we “Look almost dispassionately” at the services government subsidises and going forward with the port would mean accepting that we “can’t do everything” in the capital programme. Oh, and by the way, we’ll need to have a think about whether we want to deal with societal inequality and camp education too.
The public meeting featured plenty of reminders that there’s only so much money, and that spending money in one place means that it won’t be available in another, but never once was there a suggestion to introduce a new tax bracket or two for higher earners; to look at dividend tax; to source money from people who have it rather than take services from people who need them.
It was said during the meeting that we’re in a historic time for the Falklands, where we decide how the country wants to progress. While I agree, I can’t help but feel like it’s for a very different reason to our Financial Secretary.
We’re deciding about much more than how the country will make money and use money in the future, we’re deciding about how this country treats its citizens. When big projects come up do we cut services to the public and widen the gap between the top and bottom earners in our society or do we work with the entirety of the Falklands in mind?
I can’t claim to have all the answers for how it would, or should, work. But I can absolutely give my opinion on how it shouldn’t, and following in the footsteps of the UK when we can see clearly now how it will end is absolutely not how we should progress.