Talk:United Kingdom government austerity programme

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the United Kingdom government austerity programme article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1

Social Work High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Social Work, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Social Work on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Social WorkWikipedia:WikiProject Social WorkTemplate:WikiProject Social WorkSocial work articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Politics of the United Kingdom Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Politics of the United Kingdom, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Politics of the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Politics of the United KingdomWikipedia:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomTemplate:WikiProject Politics of the United KingdomPolitics of the United Kingdom articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

More information:
/
	This article has been marked as needing immediate attention.

Text and/or other creative content from this version of United Kingdom coalition government (2010–present) was copied or moved into United Kingdom government austerity programme with [516084179 this edit]. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Expansion of 'effects' section drastically needed

The effects section only covers the impact of the program on food bank use, but the austerity program had all sorts of highly important effects (economic, social, political) about which there are many different views. I think it needs major expansion urgently, and have added a template on this note, but unfortunately I don't consider myself knowledgeable enough about this topic to do it myself. N Oneemuss (talk) 14:49, 25 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Effect on EU Referendum?

As we have the effect on the general elections, shouldn't there be a section on how it affected the EU Referendum, namely the NHS bus? Aquataris (talk) 16:53, 8 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion of 'Arts and Culture'

Hi, I am a new editor to Wikipedia and I'm thinking about austerity and the impact of arts and culture. I haven't found much written about this, so I would greatly appreciate any help and/or collaboration if anybody is interested as I think increasing visibility of this topic is so important, particularly as a result of COVID-19. My edits to the section so far have been rather surface level but I am hoping to expand this to explore the impact of austerity on different and more specific areas of art and culture (creating sub-sections on libraries, museums, theatre etc). Please let me know if you have any information or know of any resources that could help me, of if you would be interested in collaborating!VictoriaManning (talk) 12:50, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for deletion:

Liz Truss official portrait (cropped)2.jpg

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

First austerity period

"UK government budget surplus in 2001-2 was followed by many years of budget deficit[10]"

The statement is too broad and the citation given is simply not contemporary nor even appropriate to the timeframe being referred. If the statement is true, it should be rephrased and a citation referring to a massive overspend between 2003-2007 is required. 212.159.100.223 (talk) 05:41, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The citation in question, titled "UK government deficit widens unexpectedly in August" is dated from 2018 - and completely out of context to the paragraph timeframe Edrandall (talk) 05:48, 9 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

'Failed fiscal policy' why?

The first sentence says that this was a failed fiscal policy, but no reference is given, and it is not explained why this assessment has been made. If the stated objectives were to reduce the deficit and begin debt falling then to some extent those objectives were met. The article lacks some neutrality. LaxeyStu (talk) 08:34, 9 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The 'failure' of austerity can be reasoned in terms of the fact that despite significant cuts, it did not significantly shrink the size of the state. This is because of low growth from 2008 onwards. It seems that the low growth is separate from the reduced public spending (I.e. simply undoing the cuts would not restore the growth and close the deficit).

This explanation is in an article in The Times by Paul Johnson, 10 June. LaxeyStu (talk) 01:16, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes this seems to have been added by an anonymous user very recently, I've removed as I think you're right its not neutral Mostlythunder (talk) 19:36, 11 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]