Emma Reynolds MP was lying through her back teeth for Labour this morning
Posted on March 17 2025
Emma Reynolds MP, a Labour Treasury minister, has been out on the media round this morning, lying through her back teeth.
She claimed that the UK government is nowhere near austerity. This is nonsense.
Austerity, in terms of government policy, refers to measures aimed at reducing public sector debt and budget deficits through spending cuts, tax increases, or both. This is exactly why the government is cutting disability benefits and austerity is, in any event, a policy choice, which Labour has taken.
There is no public sector debt problem. There isn’t a deficit problem in the UK. There is no need to balance a budget. Labour has chosen to make these issues. So it has chosen austerity.
Reynolds did, however, claim such problems really do exist. She claimed that one pound in every ten the UK government spends is on debt interest. This is blatantly untrue. According to the Office for Budget Responsibility this is the total UK government income and spending forecast for the year 2024/25, and next year will presumably be much the same:
An out right lie. Austerity is the method of achieving this by reducing spending rather then increase revenue. Tax increases have never been considered an austerity measure.
Considering this orgs bias is entirly about not haveing to pay higher taxes. That is a very deceitful definition they are using. One intentionally designed to ignore the actions labour have taken they disagree with. A disgusting attempt to change language to suit their own agenda.
Unbiased as possible (not me of course but trying to be language wise)
Yes some of the actions labour has taken and propose are def austerity based.
And most if not all actions tories used were austerity or wished for growth often promoted by austerity. Plus the tories favorite non proportional tax. VAT.
While tories did attempt to increase revenue via VAT and NI. That was not critisized as austerity. Just accused of class warfare (or lesser ways of saying much the same) as these taxes effect those without extra income or assets much more drematically then the wealthy.
Because media often critisized austerity and non proportional taxation in the same language. Of effecting lower incomes more then higher. This article is intentionally and falsely trying to change the language.
Openly Biased
Tories have always been fuck the poor and claim the rich support them. If the actual data fails backs it up. Yhey have to manipulate it using there fav compare numbers not propotions trick.
Right wing Labour while fighting for the same voters and support. Is only marginly better in the fact they are trying to tax some assets.( Land inheritance including Farms) while farmers refuse to admit higher taxation was the only reason this land was kept as personal owned rather then placed in an LTD in the first place. Farms have been acway for wealthy to hide inheritance for a long while. While actually running the farm as a land company rather then separating out the land as a personal possession would protect it from inheritance while increasing taxation during running.
Many farmers outright refuse to admit to themselves they have been benifiting over other corperations for decades.
i think you might have confused taxresearch.org with the tax payers alliance, and i wonder had you not made that mistake, if you would have written the same thing ?
The lie about the meaning of austerity is still just as much a lie. And bias in its definition.
Based on this article. Yeah I still find the org and/or the writer extreamly biased and disgusting.