BBC poll in favour of public spending cuts poll is a distortion‏

Is anyone really surprised that the public support public spending cutsand cuts to tax credits? They also keep on voting for Jedward and wouldbring back hanging. It doesn't make popular opinion right or logical. The BBC poll is far from an independent analysis. As with most media based surveys the questions are overly-simplified and designed to lead to a particular set of statistics that make a cheap and cheerful news story.

If a dentist asks a patient if they would prefer a filling to an extraction most would opt for the filling - it is perceived to be less painful. In the case of public opinion public spending cuts are the filling with tax hikes the extraction - ever unpopular. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/mobile/business/8363114.stm

Tax hikes to recover some of the deficit is seen as a painful option andone that most people would argue that they cannot afford, with personal debt high and families curbing their spending to cope with the impact ofthe recession. On the other hand public spending cuts are seen as a soft target. The perception remains that the public sector is wasteful andb ureaucratic and public sector workers have a feather bedded approach to the recession.

The harsh reality is somewhat different. We are seeing thousands of public sector workers face a pay freeze - the small settlements reached have not even begun to reflect the real inflationary costs faced by public sector workers. Moreover cuts to public spending will not be painless but it is intangible to most electors until the cuts actually begin to fall at a local level.

As Brendan Barber said at yesterday's TUC event on the economic crisis "public spending is the only motor of growth currently available to us. Swingeing cuts would increase the risk of Britain suffering a Japanese-style lost decade, would mean the unwelcome prospect of a jobless recovery, and would lead to the emergence of a so-called Zombie economy" http://www.tuc.org.uk/economy/tuc-17254-f0.cfm?

Local councils are already discussing 'de-commissioning' not as part of Obama's commitment to end nuclear proliferation but to determine which non-statutory services they will cease to provide. De-commissioning could impact on some high profile public services such as leisure services and local parks but it is only when such facilities close that the real impact of spending cuts will creep into the public's recognition.

In the case of health care and social services the impact will be far worse than not having a local swimming pool or playground available. It is also extremely short-sighted as highlighted in the excellent research pamphlet produced for the TUC by APSE. The public need to be careful what they wish for. http://unisonactive.blogspot.com/2009/11/speaking-up-for-public-services.html