We heard yesterday discussions about whether the emergency budget is either progressive or regressive. Fancy wording for fundamental questions? It might be better to simply ask whether the budget is equitable and protects the most vulnerable in our society ?
The Institute of Fiscal Studies (IFS), not a “radical” organisation, considers that the poorest families amongst us will be proportionately bearing the brunt of the cuts. It is tragic that in spite of previous efforts by a number of organisations to eradicate child poverty by 2020 it is now apparent that this goal will not be met. A quarter of the children in Scotland live in persistent poverty and most of them are part of single parent households. According to the IFS, this is one of the groups that will be the hardest hit. Only those able to bear a load should help carry the burden. The challenges are understood; but why does it have to be those least able to withstand the brunt that carry the biggest share of the load? In other words Mr. Cameron and Mr Osbourne, why does it have to be our children?
No comments:
Post a Comment
Thank you for commenting. Your comment will be moderated according to my Netiquette statement. The comments posted by readers of the blog are not necessarily the opinion of, or endorsed by The Church of Scotland.