More is less: a Brighton 9 defendant on why they did it
Posted by Christie Malry on September 27, 2011 at 8:41 pm
Here's Tess Riley explaining why it was vital that they stuck their fingers to the glass and kicked over a couple of store mannequins:
Acquitted or otherwise, we know that we are not the criminals in this situation. Acknowledging alternatives to devastating spending cuts is a basic human right. The failure to do so is the real crime taking place around here.
Well, Tess, I hate to be, um, chartered accountant about it, but don't you think you should look at what the government is forecasting for public sector expenditure over the next few years?
From page 48 of this year's Budget document:
Excluding capital expenditure, public spending is set to increase from £632.8bn last year to £656.7bn this year, and then increase each year up to £713.4bn in 2015-16. Including capital expenditure, it increases from £694.4bn last year to £710.4bn this year, and £763.8bn in 2015-16.
How the Brighton 9 can portray increased expenditure in every year across six years as 'devastating spending cuts' is anyone's guess. Can anyone explain?
sums = bad
rhetoric = good
[...] it as a badge of honour to spend more and more every year. Even in a time of supposed austerity, government spending is still increasing year on [...]