Public sector cuts

[LordChaverly]

A big issue at the moment is whether or not to cut and, if so, where? Questions concerning the optimum size and shape of this sector are as salient as ever and will probably always be controversial. Personally, I favour a natural growth strategy, as an integral part of an overall stimulus package, but others may disagree. It is certainly the case that, in unskilled hands, such cuts can be very unwise, even dangerous, regardless of the instruments used. Moreover, nor should we slavishly follow the fashions and vogues of the moment. We should not, for example, adopt the practices common in Brazil, at least without substantial adaptation to our traditions, norms and cultural values.

[Swan_Vesta]

One siignificant problem at the moment is coupled with swingeing cuts is the firesale of public serice assets. The probation service, prison service and fire service are all facing the unwelcome (and inexpert) hand of privatisation interfering with them at the behest of a government who are constitutionally biased toward asset stripping the nation's services. What make these practices even more unsavoury is that the government are cherry picking based upon risk, ie ensuring the private sector bear the minimum risk and the public sector are lumbered with the high risk scenarios.

 

I personally feel that a public service should be just that if it provides protection to the general public. I see no reason why essential public services should be cut or privatised to pay for the bunterish escapades of incompetant, chinless halfwits.

[Fogey]

Thats just about it in a nutshell.

 

Cuts to public sector services in the short term that will probably be picked up by Private Sector in the long term.

 

The problem?

 

Public sector organisations generally do what they're told by their superiors, - if that means doing more than was originally envisioned then they do it.

 

Private Sector organisations generally work to the absolute minimum. If you want more you pay extra for it including profit and inconvenience caused.

 

Cut the public sector and you will either pay more as a taxpayer or individuals will foot the bill and eventually the poorest will be priced out.

[mj.scuba]

All I know is the books need to be balanced. You cannot sustainably continue to spend in excess of income without fueling it with debt, which in itself isn't sustainable either. Short periods of defecit might be acceptable, if the deficit is small and could be balanced within a couple of years. What we've had is years fo running at a deficit, even during an economic boom.

 

Didn't the Chancellor say we're paying £120 MILLION per day in interest payments? Imagine what that could pay for and perhaps the cuts might not have been as severe.

[emma royd]

All I know is the books need to be balanced. You cannot sustainably continue to spend in excess of income without fueling it with debt, which in itself isn't sustainable either. Short periods of defecit might be acceptable, if the deficit is small and could be balanced within a couple of years. What we've had is years fo running at a deficit, even during an economic boom.

 

Didn't the Chancellor say we're paying £120 MILLION per day in interest payments? Imagine what that could pay for and perhaps the cuts might not have been as severe.

 

I think that the problem can be summed up quite easily. EFFICIENCY

 

Over the 13 years of the last government private secor productivity inceased by around 25%. Over the same period the public sector took on almost 1 million extra people and its productivity reduced by around 5%.

 

There is the nub of the problem. Too many folk doing not enough work in the public sector. The public sector needs to adopt similar work practices and efficiencies that the private sector took on board a decade ago. In that way they could probably shed a million jobs without anyone noticing the difference.

[taxman]

All I know is the books need to be balanced. You cannot sustainably continue to spend in excess of income without fueling it with debt, which in itself isn't sustainable either. Short periods of defecit might be acceptable, if the deficit is small and could be balanced within a couple of years. What we've had is years fo running at a deficit, even during an economic boom.

 

Didn't the Chancellor say we're paying £120 MILLION per day in interest payments? Imagine what that could pay for and perhaps the cuts might not have been as severe.

 

But how and where the cuts are made is as important as whether there should be cuts at all. The Government could balance the budget at a stroke if it closed down all the hospitals, sacked all service personnel and stopped spending money on schools but that would be political suicide. Likewise cutting the public sector without encouraging the private sector to redeploy all the sacked workers will just lead to increased unemployment and a higher benefits bill. It can't just be about cuts. They need to be targeted and they need to go hand in hand with a wider economic policy for growth.

 

The Big Society isn't likely to take up the slack.

 

Though the Civil Society minister rather let the cat out of the bag when he said about the voluntary sector :

 

"This is a government absolutely determined to try and help a sector that has become arguably too dependent on the state, to manage through a painful transition into a future where we see a lot of opportunity for it, not least in terms of delivering public services."

 

So in future we can have volunteers delivering public services - problem solved.

[mj.scuba]

I think that the problem can be summed up quite easily. EFFICIENCY

 

Over the 13 years of the last government private secor productivity inceased by around 25%. Over the same period the public sector took on almost 1 million extra people and its productivity reduced by around 5%.

 

There is the nub of the problem. Too many folk doing not enough work in the public sector. The public sector needs to adopt similar work practices and efficiencies that the private sector took on board a decade ago. In that way they could probably shed a million jobs without anyone noticing the difference.

 

Agreed, but not just efficiency. The previous government started to put fingers in pies that the government should have no business putting their fingers in, not to mention the number of quangos that popped up.

[dell12]

One siignificant problem at the moment is coupled with swingeing cuts is the firesale of public serice assets. The probation service, prison service and fire service are all facing the unwelcome (and inexpert) hand of privatisation interfering with them at the behest of a government who are constitutionally biased toward asset stripping the nation's services. What make these practices even more unsavoury is that the government are cherry picking based upon risk, ie ensuring the private sector bear the minimum risk and the public sector are lumbered with the high risk scenarios.

 

I personally feel that a public service should be just that if it provides protection to the general public. I see no reason why essential public services should be cut or privatised to pay for the bunterish escapades of incompetant, chinless halfwits.

 

I agree.

 

It's all very well selling off the forests or the NHS to make a quick short term profit to balance the books. However over the longer terms we'll pay big time. Just look at Railways, Buses and Energy Companies for an example of short term gain irrespective on long term paid. It's purely ideological.

[luybell]

Thats just about it in a nutshell.

 

Cuts to public sector services in the short term that will probably be picked up by Private Sector in the long term.

 

The problem?

 

Public sector organisations generally do what they're told by their superiors, - if that means doing more than was originally envisioned then they do it.

 

Private Sector organisations generally work to the absolute minimum. If you want more you pay extra for it including profit and inconvenience caused.

 

Cut the public sector and you will either pay more as a taxpayer or individuals will foot the bill and eventually the poorest will be priced out.

 

Hurray - someone talking sense. I get so angry when people assume that people who work in the public sector have an easy ride. I have worked in both & can assure people that within the public sector moral is at rock bottom, workloads have increased & staffing is also at an all time low. Particularly within the NHS staff are not being replaced, the work loads are merely spread out & people (& ultimately services) are at breaking point. Compared to this its people in the private sector who seem to be having the easy ride.

[truman]

Compared to this its people in the private sector who seem to be having the easy ride.

 

Really?..Not where I'm working...same work, less people...