THE name might make it sound about as interesting as a public reading of the Greater Manchester phone directory.

But this year’s Comprehensive Spending Review is going to affect all of us.

The event – which involves the Treasury announcing “firm and fixed spending budgets” over several years – is about cutting £83 billion off the national outgoings.

That’s 32 brand new aircraft carriers (and remember, we’re currently quibbling about the cost of buying just the two).

It’s £33 billion more than we spend on education and more than double what we spend on defence.

The effects are already being felt locally.

Poole council is looking to find £28.7 million over three years through cutting services or raising income. It has already cut social services to all but the most needy.

Dorset will need to find £40m by 2013-14 and more than £5m immediately. Early cuts include £633,000 to children’s services and £591,000 to environment spending.

Bournemouth council has said it is facing potential deficits of up to £7.2m in the next five years and staff are expecting redundancies.

Police authorities are facing cuts, with the number of frontline police in Dorset and Hampshire set to fall, as are the fire service, the NHS and every government department.

Some of the early cuts

AXED: The Building Schools for the Future project worth £150m to schools in Bournemouth and Poole. Five have their improvements cancelled, one is spared, three are waiting to hear.

AXED: Business Link, the organisation helping local business, axed.

AXED: £2.3m government grant to Bournemouth Centre for the Community Arts.

AXED: Free swimming for pensioners.

AXED: Child benefit for families where one parent earns £44,000 a year.

AXED: Labour plans for free parking at hospitals. Instead, local charges will go up.

CUT BACK: The number of fixed speed cameras in Dorset to be almost halved.

CUT BACK: Hampshire police braced to axe up to 1,400 jobs.

CUT BACK: Poole is withdrawing social services to people with only “moderate” needs and withdrawing subsidy for hot meals to around 200 vulnerable people.

ON HOLD: £5.7m improvement to Wimborne’s Canford roundabout.

ON HOLD: £26m improvements to the A338 Spur Road will not get the expected government cash.

The government hopes all this will put the country back on its feet. But only yesterday accountancy giant PwC warned that almost 500,000 jobs could be lost in the private sector as a result of the cuts in public spending.

At the root of all this is the money that Gordon Brown’s administration spent bailing out British-based banks who’d been caught out in the American sub-prime mortgage fiasco.

It steadied the ship but financially cleaned us out.

Some may wonder why we didn’t debate massive spending cuts before the General Election rather than after.

Only in May, David Cameron was saying in the election leadership debates that every business could save £1 in every £100.

The Prime Minister now says that when he finally saw the books, things were far worse than he had envisaged.

Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg says he became a convert to deep spending cuts when he saw the unfolding economic crisis in Greece.

Critics such as former Chancellor Alastair Darling believe that removing £83 billion from the economy will have a detrimental effect on the fledgling recovery.

If thousands of workers lose their jobs, how can they spend us out of the recession?

Whereas some see the cuts as a short-term response to a crisis, others see an opportunity to permanently alter Britain’s welfare and benefits system; axing money for the undeserving and challenging the nation to do more for itself via the Big Society.

Chancellor George Osborne opened a Spending Challenge section on the Treasury website, where public sector employees could leave suggestions for cost-cutting and waste reduction.

Leaving aside such intriguing proposals as wiring up prisoners’ exercise equipment to the National Grid, many of the suggestions have been sensible.

It’s evident that many people – 60,000 to be precise – have given the matter careful thought.

One suggested re-negotiating IT contracts across government. “I know of an instance where the supplier charged over £12,000 to make textual changes – which they then inputted incorrectly and recharged.”

Another wrote: “Set all printers to a default setting of black and white print and only give the option of colour as a prompt.”

Another wanted to see better mobile phone contracts.

“Our agency are paying £6 a month for the ‘hire’ of the phone but paying for all calls and text on top of that. Ludicrous.

“There are hundreds of contracts out there that give free minutes etc.”

Critics of this initiative have claimed it’s just a softening-up process, allowing the public to feel part of what’s going on when, in reality, they will be the victims of slashed services.

When George Osborne gets to his feet in the Commons next Wednesday, the people who run your schools, sweep your roads, deliver your home care, manage your day centre, or run your local theatre will be listening.

Just what they will hear remains a closely-guarded secret. But no one expects it to be pleasant.