GEORGE Osborne has created a living wage below the level required for people to live on.

His figure of £7.20 an hour is based on a percentage of the median wage, while the real Living Wage of £7.85 an hour is determined by a set of calculations measuring the essentials needed for various household types.

It considers housing and council tax costs across the country, childcare and food and sets the rate at the level needed regardless of median earnings.

Using the Chancellor’s figure would require families to still require top up benefits like tax credits to achieve the real Living Wage standard.

But Mr Osborne has used the pay increase as justification for withdrawing those very benefits people rely on.

It means many will find themselves perversely with a pay rise but a drop in income.

He is legislating for a rise in wages but taking even more back in welfare cuts.

Analysis suggests some would need a further £2000 in wages to compensate for the loss in benefits.

Every analysis of the implications of the budget show low income households losing out.

A couple with two children earning £10,000 will lose £1,300, while a couple with two children earning £90,000 will gain by £770.

For those earning £10,000 in pretty much every working age household type the budget means a drop in income due to benefit cuts.

For every household type earning ten times that amount there is an increase in income due to tax cuts.

The Osborne living Wage only applies to over 25s, but no explanation or justification was given for that cut off.

It is illogical and unfair and surely discriminatory in terms of equal pay.

Does a 24 year-old couple with children require substantially less to live on then a couple a year older?

A 23 year-old with five years experience in a job can be paid much less than a 26 year old new start.

Mr Osborne said it was a budget for Britain and for families.

Instead it looks increasingly like a budget to please Tory ideologists who have a deep seated hatred for the social security system.

It appears to be more targeted at furthering his own political ambition than it does to help the aspirations of people on low wages.

George Osborne did not create a living wage, he stole the term and applied it to a rise in the National Minimum Wage and in doing so he may well have set back the real campaign to end poverty wages.

He did not help those at the bottom of the income scale and offered no help for people on out of work benefits.

He should have been honest and said “This is a budget for the better off”.