Whitehall Lines Up ‘doomsday’ Cutbacks

[cashinmattress]

Whitehall lines up ‘doomsday’ cutbacks

Secret “doomsday†plans for 20% cuts in public spending are being prepared by senior civil servants, who fear politicians are failing to confront the scale of the budget black hole.

Whitehall mandarins have begun creating detailed dossiers containing reductions in expenditure that are far deeper than the more modest savings being proposed by Labour and Conservative politicians.

The disclosure comes as Gordon Brown faces a mutiny inside No 10 over his failure to admit that a future Labour government would have to reduce public spending.

Downing Street advisers have warned the prime minister they are ready to quit unless he sacks the cabinet minister they blame for encouraging him to make misleading claims about budget figures.

They are demanding the removal of Shaun Woodward, the Northern Ireland secretary, who has a desk in Downing Street after being given a special role advising Brown on strategy.

The row threatens to undermine the prime minister’s attempts to relaunch his struggling government and find a coherent strategy to take on the Conservatives.

Senior civil servants have let it be known that they are sceptical about the claims made by both main parties on public spending.

While Labour wants to increase expenditure despite the £175 billion budget deficit, the Tories, using figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), have acknowledged the need for cuts of up to 10%.

Mandarins, fearing a prolonged recession and a collapse in tax revenue, have begun planning for more severe cuts of up to 20%.

The dossiers will be handed to cabinet ministers the day after the next general election, whichever party wins.

Jonathan Baume, general secretary of the FDA, which represents senior civil servants, said: “It could be even worse for some departments than the IFS has predicted.â€

Lord Turnbull, the former cabinet secretary, echoed the warning. “The civil servants will have to assume that whatever both parties are saying today, in the end they will have to be bolder. What politicians say on the record will underestimate the magnitude of the task,†he said.

Steve Bundred, chief executive of the Audit Commission, the spending watchdog, said politicans had failed to be honest about cuts and called for “severe pay restraint†for public sector workers.

He said that health and education spending — which the main parties have been reluctant to touch — should be included in any cuts.

David Cameron’s shadow cabinet has been holding preliminary meetings with permanent secretaries to brief them about its plans.

Officials complain, however, that some shadow ministers have been vague about the types of savings they are seeking and warn that the civil service will have to “fill in the gapsâ€.

The proposals likely to be put forward by officials include reductions in spending on London Underground, renegotiating Labour’s generous pay deal for GPs and savage cuts in funding for local authorities.

The final “doomsday†reports will be written up only in the three weeks before the general election to reduce the risk of leaks. The documents will be colour-coded: blue paper for a Conservative victory, red for Labour and yellow for a hung parliament with the Liberal Democrats holding the balance of power.

The row over Woodward marks a return to the internecine warfare that has dogged Brown’s premiership. The Tory defector was given his No 10 role last month because of his inside knowledge about how the Conservatives operate.

However, a Downing Street insider has revealed that Woodward’s influence has triggered a bitter row behind the scenes, with senior figures including Lord Mandelson, the business secretary, blaming him for a “calamitous strategic miscalculationâ€.

The friction has become so serious that Mandelson refused to take part in a No 10 strategy meeting also attended by Woodward. The business secretary told the prime minister that he would not continue with the discussions until Woodward was ejected.

At least two senior aides last week warned Brown that Woodward was making their jobs “untenableâ€. One insider said: “Shaun is causing mayhem. Gordon trusted him to give sensible advice, but he has been a disaster. There are people who are ready to walk out if he doesn’t go.â€

According to the Downing Street source, the sensitivity surrounding Labour’s election pitch on public spending reflects the absence of an alternative tactic to portraying the Tories as “cuttersâ€.

“We have to get this right because there is no plan B,†the source said.

Insiders say Woodward has undue influence over the prime minister because “he is telling Gordon what he wants to hearâ€.

There are fears at the highest level that Woodward is jeopardising Labour’s election chances by encouraging the prime minister to stick to his mantra that Labour will continue to invest in public services, while the Tories will make cuts.

Philip Hammond, the shadow chief secretary to the Treasury, said the Conservatives were looking for “serious efficiency savingsâ€, but refused to put a figure on how much would be cut from spending.

A Tory government would be determined to safeguard basic public services, said Hammond: “I hope civil servants are not simply going to sit around the table and come with a series of options which cuts everything at the front line and leaves the mandarins’ back office alone.â€

Hammond revealed he had recently met a delegation of politicians from Canada, who were responsible for a radical 20% cut in spending imposed by the federal government in the 1990s.

“The psychological tactics they used to get ministers to work together, looking at it as a shared problem rather than a series of departmental problems, were important,†said Hammond.

The two architects of Canada’s programme review, Jocelyne Bourgon, who was the country’s top civil servant, and Marcel Massé, a former minister, cut 47,000 civil service jobs.

Under the programme review, ministers and officials were required to assess all the activities of the government “to identify those that no longer served a national purpose or could be delivered more efficiently through other meansâ€.

Subsidies were cut, particularly for transport and agriculture, and many of the activities of government departments were scrapped, pared back or transferred to the private sector.

Downing Street described the allegations about Woodward as “silly and untrueâ€.

A spokeswoman for Woodward said: “Shaun has known Peter {Mandelson} extremely well for more than 18 years and holds him in the highest regard. We are not going to get into a commentary on claims from anonymous sources.â€

Well, there you are folks. This is just the beginning.

All those public servants, who have 'liar loaned' their way into expensive homes, MEW'ed the difference, and thought they were going to sit out the recession/depression and come out of it with a gold plated pension are in big trouble.

[flatnose]

Whitehall lines up ‘doomsday’ cutbacks

Well, there you are folks. This is just the beginning.

All those public servants, who have 'liar loaned' their way into expensive homes, MEW'ed the difference, and thought they were going to sit out the recession/depression and come out of it with a gold plated pension are in big trouble.

Lets hope it is the chaff that gets winnowed, rather than doctors, nurses etc.

[cashinmattress]

Lets hope it is the chaff that gets winnowed, rather than doctors, nurses etc.

Hmm, I reckon it will be the front line troops, such as doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, etc...

The desk jockey beaurocrats will do everything they can to keep their posts....kind of like Gordon.

[Shrink Proof]

Lets hope it is the chaff that gets winnowed, rather than doctors, nurses etc.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....

(pause for breath)

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.....

I take it you've never encountered that particularly virulent form of the Managerialism parasite that lives in the public sector...

[hilltop]

I find the whole issue a non-story. It is common sense that in any set of circumstances, strategy should be developed across a range of possibilities. Secretaries of State need to know their options and what would have to go at given levels of cost cutting. No story yet, move along.

[Si1]

Hmm, I reckon it will be the front line troops, such as doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, etc...

The desk jockey beaurocrats will do everything they can to keep their posts....kind of like Gordon.

you're not for a minute suggesting that there are immoral thieving b*stards in the public service?

[R K]

Only 20%??

Looks like massive tax hikes it is then.

[Moo]

No story yet, move along.

Not sure about that. Just as inflation expectations play a part in people's behaviour, so do public spending expectations. Make no mistake, even small cuts could be extremely painful not only for the public sector, but for public sector dependant private firms (and there's a lot of them), so this sort of stuff can have an effect on decisions made now regardless of what actually lies ahead.

Furthermore, on it's own an article like this has little impact, but in a situation where the debate is essentially "there will be savings made, we just don't know how big and where", as opposed to be "will there be savings?", it's actually quite a hard-hitter.

Or to put it another way, there'll be a lot of directors out there reading that (and similar articles) wondering if their business model will still be intact in an era of focusing on the real essentials - Mrs. Smith will still be teaching English to the Sixth Form, but will Mr. Jones still be selling (and installing, and providing training, and providing maintenance...) his interactive whiteboards to Mrs. Smith's boss? Fred's still going to be working out what to do with Somethingshire's household waste, but will Jenny and Co. still be paryting on the money from designing, printing, and distributing the quaterly newsletter to tell the people of Somethingshire they're saving the earth by keeping green and brown glass separate? Derek's still going to be keeping a track on state of the roads on his patch, but will he be telling Dave and his crew of road menders to fix quite so many?

[jonboy]

I tell you what, some of you talk some real sh!te sometimes... talk about sheeple. It's like you've just seen the giant snowball of media spin, which has been clearing the way for politicians to announce spending cuts without damage, and you've bought it. I thought you guys were a bit more savvy.

I work in the public sector. Yes, and I manage people and services. Our organisation is trying, and mostly succeeding, to make a difference to peoples lives.

Of course there are some problems within huge public sector organisations. Part of my job is about improving quality of services so I know more than most and am probably more critical of public sector services than most.

Public sector services are there for you. For example, how many people on this site or their families wouldn't be alive now without the health service - with all it's faults?

I find it very difficult to understand why when "we" need to save money we are happy that public services get the shoeing.

Banks can't be allowed to fail, bonuses come back, overvalued businesses and stock based on fark all must be supported, the banks must lend, cars must be produced, prices mustn't come down, we must have more debt and spend more money on the high street, we mustn't interfere with he free market (unless it to inflate it), we can embezzle pention funds, etcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetc...... I also read today that the BoE just slipped another £25bn (25000,000,000!!) in to the economy. I'm not one for conspiricy or anarchy but Injin and the boys have it right about all this being based on absolutely fark all.

So what do we do?? Now that we've thrown all the chips on the red again?! We say YEAH! Lets get those public service bwastards out. Lets get those civil servants and managers.

Services you rely on will be worse for it. But hey, "public services" don't make us any farkin money and, we can all still get our plasma tvs and designer shoes and handbags... AND THAT IS WHAT MATTERS!

Pathetic.

[Guest sillybear2]

So what do we do?? Now that we've thrown all the chips on the red again?! We say YEAH! Lets get those public service bwastards out. Lets get those civil servants and managers.

The tax base has collapsed jonboy, the cupboards are bare, nobody is out to get you, sometimes things are as they are.

[Guest happy?]

I tell you what, some of you talk some real sh!te sometimes... talk about sheeple. It's like you've just seen the giant snowball of media spin, which has been clearing the way for politicians to announce spending cuts without damage, and you've bought it. I thought you guys were a bit more savvy.

I work in the public sector. Yes, and I manage people and services. Our organisation is trying, and mostly succeeding, to make a difference to peoples lives.

Of course there are some problems within huge public sector organisations. Part of my job is about improving quality of services so I know more than most and am probably more critical of public sector services than most.

Public sector services are there for you. For example, how many people on this site or their families wouldn't be alive now without the health service - with all it's faults?

I find it very difficult to understand why when "we" need to save money we are happy that public services get the shoeing.

Banks can't be allowed to fail, bonuses come back, overvalued businesses and stock based on fark all must be supported, the banks must lend, cars must be produced, prices mustn't come down, we must have more debt and spend more money on the high street, we mustn't interfere with he free market (unless it to inflate it), we can embezzle pention funds, etcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetc...... I also read today that the BoE just slipped another £25bn (25000,000,000!!) in to the economy. I'm not one for conspiricy or anarchy but Injin and the boys have it right about all this being based on absolutely fark all.

So what do we do?? Now that we've thrown all the chips on the red again?! We say YEAH! Lets get those public service bwastards out. Lets get those civil servants and managers.

Services you rely on will be worse for it. But hey, "public services" don't make us any farkin money and, we can all still get our plasma tvs and designer shoes and handbags... AND THAT IS WHAT MATTERS!

Pathetic.

It's the politics of envy. They were quite content to ignore public services whilst they were trousering it themselves, now that the company boss has run off with their pension they need a scapegoat. You'll do - you with your "gold-plated" pension. Yes you.

[The Masked Tulip]

I tell you what, some of you talk some real sh!te sometimes... talk about sheeple. It's like you've just seen the giant snowball of media spin, which has been clearing the way for politicians to announce spending cuts without damage, and you've bought it. I thought you guys were a bit more savvy.

I work in the public sector. Yes, and I manage people and services. Our organisation is trying, and mostly succeeding, to make a difference to peoples lives.

Of course there are some problems within huge public sector organisations. Part of my job is about improving quality of services so I know more than most and am probably more critical of public sector services than most.

Public sector services are there for you. For example, how many people on this site or their families wouldn't be alive now without the health service - with all it's faults?

I find it very difficult to understand why when "we" need to save money we are happy that public services get the shoeing.

Banks can't be allowed to fail, bonuses come back, overvalued businesses and stock based on fark all must be supported, the banks must lend, cars must be produced, prices mustn't come down, we must have more debt and spend more money on the high street, we mustn't interfere with he free market (unless it to inflate it), we can embezzle pention funds, etcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetc...... I also read today that the BoE just slipped another £25bn (25000,000,000!!) in to the economy. I'm not one for conspiricy or anarchy but Injin and the boys have it right about all this being based on absolutely fark all.

So what do we do?? Now that we've thrown all the chips on the red again?! We say YEAH! Lets get those public service bwastards out. Lets get those civil servants and managers.

Services you rely on will be worse for it. But hey, "public services" don't make us any farkin money and, we can all still get our plasma tvs and designer shoes and handbags... AND THAT IS WHAT MATTERS!

Pathetic.

I rarely get angry about posts on here but this one has caused me to reply. I think your post is pathetic - especially as you use the Health Service to try and justify the enormous waste and bloat of the Public Sector.

Yes, the NHS is a God-send for all of us and we are fortunate to live in a country which has the NHS.

However, because the NHS exists it is not a justification for every Public Sector worker to justify their own job through the NHS's existence.

There are hundreds of thousands of clerks, pen-pushers and admin staff that could be fired from all areas of the PS today and no one would notice they have gone.

Having worked in the private sector consulting in public sector organisations I am never ceased to be amazed by:

1. How over-staffed every Public Sector organisation is.

2. How the above staff work incredibly slowly.

3. How many endless meetings such staff attend.

4. How such staff moan about hard done by they are when in fact they have it easy.

5. How come 4PM in the afternoon Public Sector workers seem to disappear - I think you all think you are still in school and work school hours.

6. How you complain about wages when in truth many of you now earn very good salaries indeed, epsecially when you look at your working hours, holidays and pensions.

7. How not taking repsonsibility for anything has become a PS art form.

No, do not dare to try and justify the billions of taxes wasted on a bloated Public Sector by using the NHS as your cover. You disgust me that you have tried to do that - all those hundreds of thousands of non-jobs, of paper-shuffling, of redtape, of cr*p which is a bane on the lives of tens of millions of British people and you think you can justify it by citing the NHS!

[R K]

I tell you what, some of you talk some real sh!te sometimes... talk about sheeple. It's like you've just seen the giant snowball of media spin, which has been clearing the way for politicians to announce spending cuts without damage, and you've bought it. I thought you guys were a bit more savvy.

I think you'll find it was the expansion in real spending on the NHS (in particular) by Gordon over the last 7/9 years that was the giant snowball of media spin.

The money wasn't there in the first place.

It just appeared to be there based on the fictitious growth based on the fictitious asset prices based on the derivatives based on the leverage employed by Messrs. Goodwin, Hornby et al.

It was a dream. The NHS gravy train you've been living off wasn't real. It was a work of fiction. Your credit card just got pulled.

It seems you've still not woken up.

Edited July 5, 2009 by Red Kharma

[jonboy]

The tax base has collapsed jonboy, the cupboards are bare, nobody is out to get you, sometimes things are as they are.

Genius. Of course "things are as they are". I don't think anyone's out to get me but I do think that some people (and the media are driving this and always have been) feel there's all this waste in public services which can be cut without losing any effectiveness in, say, their local maternity unit (which comes in very handy when one's partner is needing a c-section for example, or maybe even some free pain relief).

The point is, the posts on this (and the other) thread are suggesting that it is more acceptible to cut public spending (by cutting public services) than holding the aid to the financial sector which in my view seems to be more porous than the NHS or LG. I mean how much have we put in to the financial sector over the last 24 months?!! Staggaring.

I'm not even arguing about my job or me, that I chose public sector for a variety of reasons including (more) stability and a 'better' pension, I the downside is that we don't get high wages (ask the city boys or bankers) - apart from the top 2-3 tiers of management there isn't a lot of money in the public sector, everyone knows that. I prioritised other rewards than just the money, many others didn't. Same reason why we haven't bought a house we couldn't afford... I'm bailing those guys out now too, same thing.

But yeah, the tax base has been dramatically reduced, I'm still paying in to it, more now and more to come, for me that is, not for politicians with their own accountants paid for by us or for those with real money and several sources of income, flipped or off shore.

[Pindar]

I rarely get angry about posts on here but this one has caused me to reply. I think your post is pathetic - especially as you use the Health Service to try and justify the enormous waste and bloat of the Public Sector.

Yes, the NHS is a God-send for all of us and we are fortunate to live in a country which has the NHS.

However, because the NHS exists it is not a justification for every Public Sector worker to justify their own job through the NHS's existence.

There are hundreds of thousands of clerks, pen-pushers and admin staff that could be fired from all areas of the PS today and no one would notice they have gone.

Having worked in the private sector consulting in public sector organisations I am never ceased to be amazed by:

1. How over-staffed every Public Sector organisation is.

2. How the above staff work incredibly slowly.

3. How many endless meetings such staff attend.

4. How such staff moan about hard done by they are when in fact they have it easy.

5. How come 4PM in the afternoon Public Sector workers seem to disappear - I think you all think you are still in school and work school hours.

6. How you complain about wages when in truth many of you now earn very good salaries indeed, epsecially when you look at your working hours, holidays and pensions.

7. How not taking repsonsibility for anything has become a PS art form.

No, do not dare to try and justify the billions of taxes wasted on a bloated Public Sector by using the NHS as your cover. You disgust me that you have tried to do that - all those hundreds of thousands of non-jobs, of paper-shuffling, of redtape, of cr*p which is a bane on the lives of tens of millions of British people and you think you can justify it by citing the NHS!

+1

Open up public sector services to true competition and prices would drop over night, saving the users an absolute fortune.

[Si1]

The point is, the posts on this (and the other) thread are suggesting that it is more acceptible to cut public spending (by cutting public services) than holding the aid to the financial sector which in my view seems to be more porous than the NHS or LG. I mean how much have we put in to the financial sector over the last 24 months?!! Staggaring.

I think many on both sides of the argument are shocked at the silly bank bailouts. Some kind of relief seemed horrible but inevitable as a complete banking meltdown would have led to a state of emergency within a week as all services likely shut down, including shops and utility services.

How it came to this was the banks getting into bed with a naive government, I'd hang them both up by the goolies frankly.

However, during the good times, the public sector paymasters suspended disbelief and borrowed to the national limit to expand public services, including salaries.

the downside is that we don't get high wages (ask the city boys or bankers)

sorry, but this is selective b*llshit. I moved from private to public sector and I earn more and am shocked at the waste

But yeah, the tax base has been dramatically reduced, I'm still paying in to it, more now and more to come, for me that is, not for politicians with their own accountants paid for by us or for those with real money and several sources of income, flipped or off shore.

if the tax base has been reduced then the public sector burden should also be, this is simple accounting, of course wqe wil have worse services and have to accept this. The bank bailouts have been mishandled and overpaid. However, a trillion pounds of public sector debt says that this is a much buigger issue, in money terms, than the bank bailouts, even tho' I share your outrage.

[CokeSnortingTory]

Genius. Of course "things are as they are". I don't think anyone's out to get me but I do think that some people (and the media are driving this and always have been) feel there's all this waste in public services which can be cut without losing any effectiveness in, say, their local maternity unit (which comes in very handy when one's partner is needing a c-section for example, or maybe even some free pain relief).

The point is, the posts on this (and the other) thread are suggesting that it is more acceptible to cut public spending (by cutting public services) than holding the aid to the financial sector which in my view seems to be more porous than the NHS or LG. I mean how much have we put in to the financial sector over the last 24 months?!! Staggaring.

I'm not even arguing about my job or me, that I chose public sector for a variety of reasons including (more) stability and a 'better' pension, I the downside is that we don't get high wages (ask the city boys or bankers) - apart from the top 2-3 tiers of management there isn't a lot of money in the public sector, everyone knows that. I prioritised other rewards than just the money, many others didn't. Same reason why we haven't bought a house we couldn't afford... I'm bailing those guys out now too, same thing.

But yeah, the tax base has been dramatically reduced, I'm still paying in to it, more now and more to come, for me that is, not for politicians with their own accountants paid for by us or for those with real money and several sources of income, flipped or off shore.

jonboy - I presume you are in a union - Unite or Unison? As those unions are major contributors to the Labour Party, I think it would be more productive if you agitated within your union to get the leadership to pull their fingers out and tell Brown exactly why they shouldn't be bailing out the financiers.

It would be more productive than venting your spleen on here, where most of us are just sick of the whole public/private plutocratic shebang, and would rather our tax money didn't go to the likes of Paul Myners, whether he is this week running a private hedge fund, or chairman of public-private Guardian Media Group, or a publically-funded Government minister.

[fiddlethefigures]

I tell you what, some of you talk some real sh!te sometimes... talk about sheeple. It's like you've just seen the giant snowball of media spin, which has been clearing the way for politicians to announce spending cuts without damage, and you've bought it. I thought you guys were a bit more savvy.

I work in the public sector. Yes, and I manage people and services. Our organisation is trying, and mostly succeeding, to make a difference to peoples lives.

Of course there are some problems within huge public sector organisations. Part of my job is about improving quality of services so I know more than most and am probably more critical of public sector services than most.

Public sector services are there for you. For example, how many people on this site or their families wouldn't be alive now without the health service - with all it's faults?

I find it very difficult to understand why when "we" need to save money we are happy that public services get the shoeing.

Banks can't be allowed to fail, bonuses come back, overvalued businesses and stock based on fark all must be supported, the banks must lend, cars must be produced, prices mustn't come down, we must have more debt and spend more money on the high street, we mustn't interfere with he free market (unless it to inflate it), we can embezzle pention funds, etcetcetcetcetcetcetcetcetc...... I also read today that the BoE just slipped another £25bn (25000,000,000!!) in to the economy. I'm not one for conspiricy or anarchy but Injin and the boys have it right about all this being based on absolutely fark all.

So what do we do?? Now that we've thrown all the chips on the red again?! We say YEAH! Lets get those public service bwastards out. Lets get those civil servants and managers.

Services you rely on will be worse for it. But hey, "public services" don't make us any farkin money and, we can all still get our plasma tvs and designer shoes and handbags... AND THAT IS WHAT MATTERS!

Pathetic.

Its been nearly five years since i became a member of this site and in all this time i have never read as much s hit than is in this post.

[Si1]

Its been nearly five years since i became a member of this site and in all this time i have never read as much s hit than is in this post.

I've got a feeling that cold fear is creeping into the worlds of the formerly comfortable public sector elite

[Guest sillybear2]

Genius. Of course "things are as they are". I don't think anyone's out to get me but I do think that some people (and the media are driving this and always have been) feel there's all this waste in public services which can be cut without losing any effectiveness in, say, their local maternity unit (which comes in very handy when one's partner is needing a c-section for example, or maybe even some free pain relief).

There will have to be a radical rethink about what the state is able to provide and what people expect from public services, the NHS will be a means tested service before the next decade is out. The problem with large bureaucracies is the fact it's actually impossible to make cuts without affecting services, the pen pushers will protect their own jobs to the last, so front line staff and services will be thrown overboard straightaway and you will basically have organizations consisting of back office staff and little else, such are the hazards of embedding non-jobs into the public services during the boom times.

This isn't about the media, you seem to assume we can all just bury our heads in the sand and pretend there isn't a problem, the problems are very real and acute, tax revenues have fallen off a cliff, as has private sector pay and hours worked, capacity utilisation is also way down so that foretells further job cuts, public sector net borrowing was £19.9bn in May and we're running a deficit of 12% of GDP, excluding PFI dodges and an expected additional 1m unemployed added to the claimant count.

It's a bloodbath, I'm sure you cannot appreciate what the problem is if everyone in your organisation is employed as normal with the usual indexed pay rises, but you are working for a state that is running its finances like a banana republic. If you think this is bad then just wait until the first gilt auction fails or our sovereign debt is downgraded, that's the inevitable outcome unless things are put right now whilst it's under our control. If no changes are made you will certainly know about it when the IMF comes along and dictates cuts, we're not talking about a little trimming either, entire departments and programmes will be dropped wholesale.

I cannot defend the banker bailouts, I've already made it clear that I consider them little other than organised criminals.

I'm not even arguing about my job or me, that I chose public sector for a variety of reasons including (more) stability and a 'better' pension, I the downside is that we don't get high wages (ask the city boys or bankers)

I think you have a skewed view of the private sector jonboy, it doesn't actually resemble the comedy show that is 'The Apprentice', very few enjoy high rewards, the average salaries in the private sector started to fall behind average public sector pay even during the boom times, which is understandable considering the money Brown was pouring in, that's before you even consider the latest developments with real pay cuts, companies asking people to work for free, or the lack of job security or pension provision.

I hope you keep your job and that you are worth the money and really do make a difference as a public servant, but I don't think you or your colleagues actually know how lucky you are. You undoubtedly dislike the uncertain atmosphere, that's why you wish this 'story' would go away, but if you worked in the private sector that's a given anyway, unless you have a good pipeline of solid contracts there is always a sense of impending doom.

But yeah, the tax base has been dramatically reduced, I'm still paying in to it, more now and more to come, for me that is

Sorry, but your tax contributions are paid from a salary that comes from tax payers, it's logically impossible to net yourself out, it's like a dog chasing its own tail. Using that logic everyone could just work for the state and it would be self-financing. The base of all tax is private sector activity, this cannot be replaced by printing presses or Enron accounting.

Edited July 5, 2009 by sillybear2

[jonboy]

especially as you use the Health Service to try and justify the enormous waste and bloat of the Public Sector.

I work for the NHS you pr!k.

However, because the NHS exists it is not a justification for every Public Sector worker to justify their own job through the NHS's existence.

Very insightful for a swansea boy.

There are hundreds of thousands of clerks, pen-pushers and admin staff that could be fired from all areas of the PS today and no one would notice they have gone.

Ah, the insight was an outlier. Is anybody else reading this? This is absolute fiction... hundreds of thousands?? Are ewe shewer mush?

Having worked in the private sector consulting in public sector organisations I am never ceased to be amazed by.

Yes we haven't always got best value from some of our consultants. Shall I do what you've done and resort to the cliche about "consultants", even though I do know a bit about them, I've commissioned enough and done some myself?

1. How over-staffed every Public Sector organisation is.

Well ours isn't. And that's a fact. I ran a training session last week and one of the delegates was a midwifry manager (a midwife who also happens to manage other midwives) she was telling me how difficult it is to get to training and that she'd come on her own time because all training and development was cancelled because hey have no cover for the clinical role, none. Not over staffed, not everywhere NO WAY. Your idea really is out of date.

2. How the above staff work incredibly slowly.

What? all of us? We all work slowly? What a cliche - you really have no substance here do you? Why would you post this?

3. How many endless meetings such staff attend.

There are too many meetings.

4. How such staff moan about hard done by they are when in fact they have it easy.

Some public sector staff are incredibly hard done by. What do you mean have it easy? Again there is no substance to what you re saying at all. In 1992 I worked in the DSS, on the counter in cardiff. Sh!t job sh!t money no prospects. I didn't have it easy. I don't have it easy in my job now and work later than I'm paid to EVERY DAY! I mean what do you think, we all go home at 4PM (in the afternoon, just in case you don't know what PM is), what are your ideas informed by.

5. How come 4PM in the afternoon Public Sector workers seem to disappear - I think you all think you are still in school and work school hours.

Ah, oops, you do indeed think that.

6. How you complain about wages when in truth many of you now earn very good salaries indeed, epsecially when you look at your working hours, holidays and pensions.

Our working hours? Look we've covered that. The vast majority of public sector workers earn below the average wage..? Everyone knows the public sector have sh!t pay, you take the p!ss out of us on here enough? We're not plasterers, builders, estate agents, BTLrs, city workers or farkin footballers... what's the averag wage in the DVLA?

7. How not taking repsonsibility for anything has become a PS art form.

Whereas in politics or the financial or the service or the business sector people line up to take the blame for anything going wrong.

No, do not dare to try and justify the billions of taxes wasted on a bloated Public Sector by using the NHS as your cover. You disgust me that you have tried to do that - all those hundreds of thousands of non-jobs, of paper-shuffling, of redtape, of cr*p which is a bane on the lives of tens of millions of British people and you think you can justify it by citing the NHS!.

Do not dare? Who the fark do you think you are? And who do you think I am? I disgust you??! what has motivated this tone mush, I know it's tough in Townhill but...

You are plainly insulting and wrong. Your arguments have no substance. Your arguments (not you mind) are based on media cliches which were not particularly accurate 20 years ago and haven't changed since then, public services have changed however.

[The Masked Tulip]

I work for the NHS you pr!k.

Very insightful for a swansea boy.

Ah, the insight was an outlier. Is anybody else reading this? This is absolute fiction... hundreds of thousands?? Are ewe shewer mush?

Yes we haven't always got best value from some of our consultants. Shall I do what you've done and resort to the cliche about "consultants", even though I do know a bit about them, I've commissioned enough and done some myself?

1. How over-staffed every Public Sector organisation is.

Well ours isn't. And that's a fact. I ran a training session last week and one of the delegates was a midwifry manager (a midwife who also happens to manage other midwives) she was telling me how difficult it is to get to training and that she'd come on her own time because all training and development was cancelled because hey have no cover for the clinical role, none. Not over staffed, not everywhere NO WAY. Your idea really is out of date.

2. How the above staff work incredibly slowly.

What? all of us? We all work slowly? What a cliche - you really have no substance here do you? Why would you post this?

3. How many endless meetings such staff attend.

There are too many meetings.

4. How such staff moan about hard done by they are when in fact they have it easy.

Some public sector staff are incredibly hard done by. What do you mean have it easy? Again there is no substance to what you re saying at all. In 1992 I worked in the DSS, on the counter in cardiff. Sh!t job sh!t money no prospects. I didn't have it easy. I don't have it easy in my job now and work later than I'm paid to EVERY DAY! I mean what do you think, we all go home at 4PM (in the afternoon, just in case you don't know what PM is), what are your ideas informed by.

5. How come 4PM in the afternoon Public Sector workers seem to disappear - I think you all think you are still in school and work school hours.

Ah, oops, you do indeed think that.

6. How you complain about wages when in truth many of you now earn very good salaries indeed, epsecially when you look at your working hours, holidays and pensions.

Our working hours? Look we've covered that. The vast majority of public sector workers earn below the average wage..? Everyone knows the public sector have sh!t pay, you take the p!ss out of us on here enough? We're not plasterers, builders, estate agents, BTLrs, city workers or farkin footballers... what's the averag wage in the DVLA?

7. How not taking repsonsibility for anything has become a PS art form.

Whereas in politics or the financial or the service or the business sector people line up to take the blame for anything going wrong.

Do not dare? Who the fark do you think you are? And who do you think I am? I disgust you??! what has motivated this tone mush, I know it's tough in Townhill but...

You are plainly insulting and wrong. Your arguments have no substance. Your arguments (not you mind) are based on media cliches which were not particularly accurate 20 years ago and haven't changed since then, public services have changed however.

I did not read the whole of the above because of your open insults at the start. Anyone who has to stoop to insults in a debate is clearly not worth listening to.

[Minos]

Public sector services are there for you. For example, how many people on this site or their families wouldn't be alive now without the health service - with all it's faults?

I find it very difficult to understand why when "we" need to save money we are happy that public services get the shoeing.

So what do we do?? Now that we've thrown all the chips on the red again?! We say YEAH! Lets get those public service bwastards out. Lets get those civil servants and managers.

Services you rely on will be worse for it. But hey, "public services" don't make us any farkin money and, we can all still get our plasma tvs and designer shoes and handbags... AND THAT IS WHAT MATTERS!

Pathetic.

I'm happy for people to use health care, I just don't want to pay for it. I'm more than happy to pay for my own though. Same goes for a lot of other 'services'.

[jonboy]

I've got a feeling that cold fear is creeping into the worlds of the formerly comfortable public sector elite

No one's got anything real to say then?

I'm not elite, I can't afford to buy my own home! I am comfortable in my rental, but we'll see if I (and my wife and child) can stay past September - I hear the landlord thinks the market's picked up sufficiently to sell a couple.

The public sector elite will be ok... as in every other sector. Hope I'll survive but the NHS is already being reorganised in Wales, my organisation ceases to exist in September and we don't really know what's going to happen then. My destiny is certainly not in my hands (I laughed at that picture of backroom staff protecting their own jobs). It is only the chief exec and the next layer of management in local government and local health services that can decide who stays or goes.

[Minos]

Our wonderful doctors, nurses, teachers, police and soldiers are the human shields that the mad terrorist Gordon Brown huddles ever closer around him as the enemy tanks of financial reality draw near.

Doctors, nurses etc can still be wonderful if paid for privately.