What did the cuts march achieve?

More than 250,000 people have attended a march and rally in central London against public spending cuts. Did you protest?

Labour leader Ed Miliband addressed crowds in Hyde Park and the main march organised by the Trades Union Congress passed off peacefully.

But splinter groups have attacked shops and banks, and a stand-off with police is taking place in Piccadilly.

Ministers say the cuts are necessary to get the public finances in order.

Did you take part in the demonstration? What cause were you marching for? Were you caught up in the protest while out in central London? Do you agree with the protests?

More...

Scroll to see replies

Reply 1

i.am.lost

Whether we like it or not, the cuts are necessary to get the public finances in order.

Reply 2

username547863

*Ed Milibands cringiest speech
*Damage to private and public propety

Thats about it, it wont effect the cuts

Reply 3

Tnetinbum

It showed that Ed Miliband really is completely out of touch with reality and is begging to be made a puppet by the unions. He had no right to be part of a demonstration when just under a year ago intended to make cuts that were just as bad.

And the police are completely and utterly useless. If this was the USA those anarchists would be locked up in hours.

(edited 13 years ago)

Reply 4

thunder_chunky

The splinter groups that were behaving violently were despicable:

Spoiler

Disgusting behaviour

Reply 5

thru sun and rain

The cuts really won't be affected by any amount of protesting. well unless they have to increase cuts to pay for the damages the protests cause. No one wants the cuts but like many things in life they are a necessary evil.

Reply 6

MissCardboardBox

Absoultely nothing. Just being honest. The decision was final the cuts will be made, it'll take 5years or so to see if they was painful but helpful or just left a disastrous and painful effect on the economy.

Nothing.

That the Labour Party are absolute retards.

Ed Miliband

A few months ago

'We would have made cuts if we were in power as well as they're needed to deal with the deficit'

Yesterday

'Im going on the march tomorrow against the cuts because of the massive effect they will have on people in the UK'

Today

'Dear Diary, I'm an absolute retard'

Reply 9

im so academic

Original post by meenu89

Nothing.

Agreed.

Reply 10

Aj12

Nothing much. Ed Miliband has now shown he will be running on a no cuts at all platform other wise he just lost himself 250k of votes.

Reply 11

Will Lucky

It achieved a bill to the Tax Payer for the Police and the damage done to the shops in the area and the clean up that will follow.

Reply 12

garethDT

It didn't achieve much, no one expected it to but the turnout was a lot more than was expected. This is only the beginning, we're going to see a lot more of these protests and strikes.

Reply 13

tieyourmotherdown

Pretty much bugger all.

Original post by i.am.lost

Whether we like it or not, the cuts are necessary to get the public finances in order.

Whilst the cuts are necessary at some point, they're not necessary at this speed and ferocity, which is what I think the march was about.

Reply 14

f00ddude

well, it took a big chunk out of the polices budget, means theres more money spent fixing the damage, therefore less cash to go round in general
on the plus hand all the liberal hippie douche types will feel they actually did something and will shut up for a couple of weeks

Reply 15

f00ddude

Original post by tieyourmotherdown

Pretty much bugger all.

Whilst the cuts are necessary at some point, they're not necessary at this speed and ferocity, which is what I think the march was about.

at the moment we have to borrow money to pay the interest on our debt... we need the cuts fast

Reply 16

thurin

Original post by f00ddude

at the moment we have to borrow money to pay the interest on our debt... we need the cuts fast

The point is do we protract our debt payments in favour of more gradual restructuring, so that economic growth is not hampered, or do we cut hard & fast now and hope that when the times get good we can rebuild much of the social programmes and infrastructure lost?
None of us are qualified here to pass comment on which is the better action - we can only make ideological assertions. I don't even think the government has enough information and insight to pass comment either.

Reply 17

tieyourmotherdown

Original post by f00ddude

at the moment we have to borrow money to pay the interest on our debt... we need the cuts fast

That fact alone means practically nothing. Our national debt will be barely affected by these cuts, so it makes no difference either way, if it's the national debt you're getting at, which isn't the issue here anyway. As for the deficit, many countries have been running on larger deficits than us for years now and it hasn't posed a problem. Obviously it's not ideal but there is nothing to suggest that the cuts need to be made as quickly as they are now.

Reply 18

f00ddude

Original post by tieyourmotherdown

ok, thats like saying its not going to make a difference if 1 person takes enviromental meassures, so lets none of us bother
with your kinda thinking look what happened to Ireland

Reply 19

f00ddude

Original post by JAR12

they are doing both
the student tuition fee rise will actually be costing the government more money for a few years due to implementation costs and the much larger student loans needed. its only when people start paying it back it will make any real difference
and i study politics at uni so i do actually know what im talking about as a large chunk of my seminars are talking about this at the moment