Why can the UK magic up billions for war but none for social security or local services?

Speech: David Cameron made his announcement at the Lord Mayor of London’s annual banquet – surrounded by gold and while stuffing his face with the richest food Big Money can buy.

Look at this:

Prime Minister David Cameron has announced plans to spend an extra £2bn on the SAS and other special units over the next five years.

The announcement has, of course, led to outrage from the British public – people who are being told that tax credits, universal credit or housing benefit will be cut because George Osborne can’t find that kind of cash.

“So Osborne finds £4bn in 3 days for security,” tweeted ‘Joe Public. “The same amount he said he needed to save while trying to push through his tax credit cuts.”

Scott Nelson tweeted: “David Cameron says there is no money for Tax Credits, welfare or local services, but £2billion available for war,” alongside a photograph of Cameron shaking hands with some Saudi Arabian bigwig.

Here’s one last tweet, from Liz Jordan: “Billions for this, billions for that, now looks we’re going to Syria (not cheap). Thought we had no money?”

That’s what we all thought.

And the expedition against Daesh (IS if you like) is pointless in any case – a knee-jerk military adventure with no direction or purpose other than playing with the “big boys”.

But, wasn’t it playing with the “big boys” that created the current Middle East mess in the first place?

Source: David Cameron announces £2bn extra funding for Special Forces over next five years – ITV News

Join the Vox Political Facebook page.

If you have appreciated this article, don’t forget to share it using the buttons at the bottom of this page. Politics is about everybody – so let’s try to get everybody involved!

Vox Political needs your help!
If you want to support this site
but don’t want to give your money to advertisers)
you can make a one-off donation here:

Donate Button with Credit Cards

Buy Vox Political books so we can continue
fighting for the facts.

Health Warning: Government! is now available
in either print or eBook format here:

HWG PrintHWG eBook

The first collection, Strong Words and Hard Times,
is still available in either print or eBook format here:


59 thoughts on “Why can the UK magic up billions for war but none for social security or local services?

  1. Barry Davies

    They will no doubt try to get round it by saying it is a different budget that can’t be used for social care, just as they have for primary health care, due to ring fencing, but as they make and change the law, this is not a valid position to take.

  2. gareth

    The first job of any government is protecting its borders and citizens. Proving a monetary safety net for those in society at the lower income end should and always will come far below that. Without armed security you won’t need to worry about tax credits, ‘cus someone will just take all your family and belongings anyway

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      So it’s all right for UK citizens to die, as long as it’s the UK Government causing the deaths? Is that what you’re saying?
      Your priorities are twisted. While I agree that protecting our borders is the most important task of any government, this is only as part of the overarching task of protecting all citizens from harm. Can you see, now, why there really is a serious issue about Tory Government priorities here?

    2. beaubladeandrake

      Anyone who believes that the UK is under threat of invasion is, at very best, a poor decision maker.

      What you’re essentially saying is low probability risks which can be a threat to anyone (including, possibly, the rich) need to be prioritised over definite and measurable threats to the poor.

      1. James

        Why don’t you go and tell that to the friend and family of 7/7 bombing and those good people in Paris.

        Welfare is no doubt important, but let’s put things into perspective.

        – Benefit payouts (including the state pension) are expected to come to about £171 billion in 2015/16 alone
        – £2bn is one week’s worth of NHS expenditure
        – £2bn over the five years for the arm forces is £40 0million a year

        Anyone who believes that the UK is not under threat of terrorist attack is possibly deluded.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        £2 billion is also around £650 in everybody’s annual tax credits.
        That’s a lot of money for people to lose.
        I take it you’re writing this because you won’t lose anything when the tax credits/universal credit/housing benefit/wherever-else-Osborne-can-find-the-money hammer falls?
        Your problem is that you appear to have been brainwashed into believing that throwing more money at the terrorism problem – in order to buy, what, more guns, bombs, bullets and the people to fire them? – is the only answer. It isn’t.
        Intelligence and properly-targeted strikes are the answer – and they don’t need any extra money at all.
        Finally, perhaps you haven’t noticed but it has been revealed that the ‘extra’ cash is in fact money that had already been agreed, to keep the UK in line with Nato investment targets. Cameron’s people just said he’d found £2 billion more because they wanted a headline that would make them popular.
        Well, the blew it.

      3. beaubladeandrake

        James: appeals to emotion are facile and should be beneath you. “Who don’t to say that to the families of people who’ve committed suicide after their benefits were cut”. See?

        “‘cus someone will just take all your family and belongings anyway” was Gareth’s statement I was responding to. Terrorist attacks could (metaphorically) take your family away, though not your belongings – and even if one occurs, the likelihood of that happening to any one UK citizen is statistically very low. To literally take away your family, or in either sense your belongings would require an invading army. Which is simply not going to happen.

        To someone on benefits, I’d imagine the cuts are far more real, and dangerous.

    3. Selina

      I’m all for protecting our borders but what does that have to do with going to other countries and creating more trouble there! This country will be f*#ked up the ar$e over and over again until real people get into power and not these c#^ts that were born with a silver spoon in their mouths and could care less about the people who they supposedly work for!!! Grrr makes me so mad!!!!!

    4. Tildryn

      Invading countries halfway around the world is not protecting your borders or citizens. Anyone who thinks the UK is at any risk of being invaded is delusional at best.

  3. Mr.Angry

    Nothing will change “The deficit” a Tory con and forced down our throats daily. If we are so broke how can they even discuss HS2 Railway, Garden City, Extension runway at Heathrow, the great Northen power house, overseas aid. MP’s pay rise, renovation of Westminster, 900 + piers in the house of Lords and it goes on.

    Lied to on a daily basis and most accept it, I don’t.

    1. carol frost

      how can we be broke then if today it was unveiled the £10million plane just for the prime minister to go around in – don’t bring in State pensions either as a drain – both me and my husband and millions of others paid into that fund for over 50 years, if the government have misused that fund then blame them not us. we are entitled to some of that money back each month we did the hard work saving not cameron or osborne or any one else.

  4. John Hansted

    Surely before spouting about going to war he should ask us if we want to go to war. After all its our men and women who will die while fighting. He’ll be alright because he’ll be hiding in his bunker and not fighting it himself.

    1. no bull

      You would have thought. But Isis were trained and funded by the US to remove Assad. Terrorism in France and soon the UK is a result of this. Whilst austerity is because the bankers purposely collapsed the system to enslave the public through debt knowing the arrangement was that governments would facililitate this. The banks (imf,fed,bank of eng.) print out of freshair and are really the Rothschild family. The public purse is held responsible as the borrower and finds interest repayments never get repaid. Why else are governments not interested in chasing corporations for tax, after all they make the tax laws? There is No shortage of money for war just the slave population. The elite run the politicians. Its a scam.

  5. Joe Breedon

    The world is run, by Warmongers, Dictators and Hypocrites… there’s always money for an arms race, although we have about a 3rd of our Military still in service as the 1st thing Cameron and Osborne did when they came to power was slash the Defence Budget, (He’s given our most advanced Naval Warships to India, half our RAF Fighter Jets to France, Egypt, Israel and China and exporting millions of weapons to war torn countries who have sadly lost them to groups like ISIS and the Taliban) thinking this country and Europe would never be attacked like it has over the last 5 years…

    He doesn’t give a s*** about us, he doesn’t give a s*** about this country, he doesn’t really give a s*** about The rest of the world… like every investment banker, it’s all about how much money he’s got and domination of those who haven’t… Britain is a business venture to him and nothing else…

  6. daijohn

    This point gets to the core of the problem. Wars, and that includes terrorist activity, cannot happen without funding. So we use our extensive security facilities to find where the money is coming from to fund the various terrorist groups and how the international financial system is facilitating it and stop it. Simple, we did to the NUM why not ISIS?

      1. daijohn

        So I see – yet another helping on rhetorical waffle from the PM, he has no intention of going after the secrecy jurisdictions or the City of London. ( Do you suppose GCHQ will make a note of that?)

    1. Fanny Adams

      So stop funding them, stop everything you do and start becoming self sufficiant. Stop paying and stop working. We have to loose alot to get it all back, under our terms.

  7. NMac

    Whatever the circumstances our politicians can always find billions of pounds for wars. They have been itching to start this latest war on Syria. The excuse has been given to them.

  8. Michael Broadhurst

    if there is no money available for especially local services,what are we paying council tax for then.if wer’e getting local services cut like we are then council tax should be cut accordingly.the trouble with council tax is the fat cat people at the top who are on
    150-200k salaries for running half a county or less.
    no one in local government should be on more than an MP,not that i’m advocating that
    MP’s salaries should be brought up to that level,but that the fat cats in local govt should be on less than an MP.
    the whole council tax system wants re-organising,where else would you pay more and more for less and less services,its just legalised robbery.
    if you bought Sky bundle three you wouldn’t expect to pay Sky bundle four prices for it
    would you ?
    how many on here agree with me ?.

  9. Jarrow

    During the Vietnam war America dropped over 7 million tons of bombs on said country and lost. Conventional bombing cannot win a war. The reason why is obvious: Drop bombs on an enemy and the enemy moves somewhere else, or disperses, to dodge them. Honest to God, how the heck Cameron believes that British bombing of Syria will make any positive difference in defeating ISIL is beyond me. I suppose he wants to be seen to be doing “something” but militarily it won’t make a ha’penny of difference whereas properly arming the Kurds would.

  10. amnesiaclinic

    No, the reason is to bomb Syria, which they’ve been itching and manoevering to do since we said NO in 2013 (I think!). It is really Assad, that’s who they’re after because he was another strong dictator who held his country together (and anti Israel) and didn’t conform to the western elitist banking cartel etc. That’s who they’re really after and to scare us witless with the “war on terror” (war of terror) and to take away our rights and freedoms. There is a clip on last night’s Richie Allen replay on Paris of the ex French foreign minister coming clean on how all this was hatched by the british intelligence but france wouldn’t play ball -hmmnn.

  11. digger

    Sorry Mike iv been the recipent of a head injury that has left me with,epilepsy,ptsd,depression,several physical injuries and sleep problems and think that politics is not the best place for people with mental illness it can seriously effect a persons judgement and day to day functions,although on a lighter note,the way most of them behave you would think its a requirement a

    1. ian725

      Digger I sympathise you have a problem that is equated to many service personnel who I’m afraid receive little care from the general public. Epilepsy is not a fashionable disease and so is generally placed on the back burner. Peoples ignorance of the disease today is to blame. As you say anyone can develop it from a head injury or severe trauma and of course Shock. Look after yourself and keep to the medication prescribed.

  12. Rick B (@TenPercent)

    The actual answer is simply; Money is not a finite resource, it is created daily by banks and govt, therefore anything can be ‘magicked’ up at any time, it is about ideology not mathematics. We should stop asking why and start educating people about the true nature of money and how the macro economy works.

  13. David Heard

    I must admit this is good budgeting. If the money was all given out to lazy Jerremy Kyle watchers we wouldnt have a contingency fund available to stop another country walking through ours and we would all be watching Jerry Kyle ha ha That said we invite the enemy in and give them some of that benefit money anyway ha ha ha Labour would have spent every penny and be at the mercy of anyone who wnts to walk through the country

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Are you a real person?
      You see, all your talk about good budgeting, Jeremy Kyle watchers and other countries walking through ours is pure drivel, so I’m wondering whether you were made up by some PR person to see how much of it we’ll take.
      Not today, thank you!

  14. Dan

    Do your research. This is complete tosh.

    “The additional money, to be spent over the next five years, does not reflect an increase in the MoD’s existing budget. Instead it will be found in the growth in the defence budget that will occur as a result of the Government’s commitment to meet NATO’s spending target of 2% of GDP.”

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      So you’re saying that David Cameron fudged up the figures to make a pretty headline and convince the voters that he was doing something positive, when in fact he hadn’t done anything at all.
      Thanks for that – it puts Cameron in an even worse position than before.

      1. Dan

        It’s spin. Do you normally take Cameron at face value? I guess you do if it means you can spin it yourself.

      2. Mike Sivier Post author

        What a silly thing to suggest. If he said it, and it was reported, then clearly we were all intended to accept it as a statement of fact.
        Now it seems it wasn’t true. That’s not spin – it’s simply saying what I see.

  15. Rick Burton

    Always enough money to go to war, never enough to feed the poor. Surely this proves that austerity is the lie we all know it is

    1. Christina Cain-Burrows

      so when Isis are at your door ready to chop off your head,and believe this is what they are planning,will you be worrying about your benefits or council tax ,cause I wont priorities! You wont be here to worry about the latter.
      No doubt you will be the first to say our government didnt do enough to protect us.
      Having a laugh you lot or what??

      1. Mike Sivier Post author

        Nobody’s laughing about this. It’s a subject we have been taking very seriously – more so than you seem to be.
        These terrorists won’t be knocking on our doors any time soon – the UK security forces seem more than adequate to the task of keeping them out (so far). That is, unless all that talk about the number of plots that have been foiled is a propaganda exercise – and I wouldn’t put it past the Conservatives to do that.
        If you have been following the debate, you’ll know that an expedition to Syria won’t do any good because we simply don’t know where the leaders are. Do we even know who they are? I don’t think so. Read the article about Adam Hills; you’ll see that these terrorists want western countries like the UK to react aggressively because it’s the best recruitment resource they could have!
        In any case, it seems the new money isn’t new money at all – it’s simply the rise in defence funding that has already been agreed by the Conservative Government – long before the Paris attacks – in order to meet Nato funding targets. Cameron simply claimed it was new money to make a pretty headline.
        The best way to beat these killers is to cut off their supply of money and weapons, and to use the intelligence services to find out who the leaders are and where they can be found. Then it’s a simple military operation.
        Oh yes, and in the meantime, ridiculing the terrorists at every opportunity. You give them far too much respect.

  16. dave514

    Know whT you mean, but there are certain elements of spending that should be ring fenced, Armed Forces ( Security of the UK HOULD NOT BE COMPROMISED)
    National Health Service, Education and the Emergency Services.
    I am surprised that with all the emails I receive from the Blogger Vox Political there have been none about the biggest con That George Osbourne is bringing in from Next April16, that is your NATIONAL INSURANCE contributions will increase if you are in a Final Salary Pension scheme. Up to now if in a Fianal Salery scheme then you are contracted out and your employer pays a fixed amount, from April 16 this will end and companies will have the choice of either continuing to pay or passing the full amount onto the employee, my Company British Airways has chosen to pass the full cost onto their employee’s, thus averaging a NI increase for the average employee of about between £40 & £100 extra a month, but I do not see this being advertised or taken up by the Opsition Parties.

    1. Mike Sivier Post author

      Clearly you missed the notification of my article about National Insurance. It has been very popular, though.

  17. Stand together

    Typical as always. David Cameron says we won’t be beaten on terrorism we will continue doing what we do everyday and show them we are not afraid and stand together. My question is to him i applause standing together as a nation but what about the ones who are loosing tourist because flights are stopped going to sharm for fear. That is you letting them win and Egyptian hotels and workers are loosing jobs and have nothing.. they did not do anything wrong the airport has severely stepped up security put the flights on and let us that are not afraid of these terrorist go there and show we are not letting them scare us.

  18. allan j

    WHAT WAS IT SCAMERON SAID he cant stand by and watch while syrias bosses butcher their citizens , was words to that affect in a speech to parliment (bbc news 18/11/15) , pot kettle black maybe

  19. NAW

    Maths is one of the subjects that Eton does not teach? Neither is geography, international law or COMMON SENSE!

  20. bevchat

    It always amazes me that the government can produce money out of thin air for wars….yet, everyone else is subjected to “Austerity cuts”…As for Osborne for all his Eton education the man is incompetent…but lets not forget most of these Torys in Cabinet and in power are wealthy people in their own right….Any corrupt government will finance a war for there are profits to be made in war…ask any banker or any arms investor who places their money in the hands of this Government back pocket….in order to persuade, push for and have policies implemented in their favour!

  21. DWS

    These wars were planned a long time ago, according to US General Wesley Clark (look on youtube – plenty of clips) Back in 1991, the US had already decided which countries they were going to invade – all they had to do was covertly stir up trouble in the middle east, and then use the inevitable blowback to build public support via the media by labelling any retaliation as “terrorism”.

    Come on people – how many times to we have to fall for this corrupt criminal bull? We have the Internet now, we can share information and discuss ideas – why are we still believing all the agenda-driven propaganda that comes from the TV and press?

Comments are closed.