Proceeding contribution from Angela Eagle (Labour) in the House of Commons on Thursday, 28 October 2010. It occurred during Debate on Comprehensive Spending Review.
Comprehensive Spending Review
Well, the hon. Gentleman could take a look at the March Budget, which was presented to the House before the general election, and the Red Book that was published subsequently. We went into the election with far more detail about what we would do had we been re-elected than either party opposite. And at least we did not flip-flop immediately afterwards so that we could get into government. These are not just numbers; they are the people being asked by this Conservative-led Government to shoulder the burden of a crisis that was made in the banks. It is not those who caused the crisis who will now suffer as a result of the Chancellor's reckless gamble with jobs and growth. It is the 490,000 ordinary men and women serving in the public sector whose jobs will go, and it is the 500,000 jobs in the private sector that PricewaterhouseCoopers has calculated will also be lost as a direct result of the spending review. Redundancies on the scale now threatened are not inevitable, but are the result of the Government's choice to cut further and faster.
Secondary information
- Type
- Proceeding contribution
- Reference
- 517 c515
- Session
- 2010-12
- Chamber / Committee
- House of Commons chamber
- Subjects
- Cost effectiveness Government departments Economic growth Public expenditure Economic recession
- Link
- View this Proceeding contribution on www.publications.parliament.uk
Librarians' tools
- Timestamp
- 2023-12-15 13:32:23 +0000
- URI
- http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_674286
- In Indexing
- http://indexing.parliament.uk/Content/Edit/1?uri=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_674286
- In Solr
- https://search.parliament.uk/claw/solr/?id=http://data.parliament.uk/pimsdata/hansard/CONTRIBUTION_674286