Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
Realistbear

'bonfire Of Quangos' Failing To Catch Light

Recommended Posts

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bonfire-of-quangos-failing-to-catch-light-tele-14384861ca8b.html?x=0

'Bonfire of quangos' failing to catch light
Louisa "Lou" Peacock, 11:24, Tuesday 31 August 2010
Fresh questions have been raised over the sincerity of the Government's quango cull after it emerged several bodies are not being abolished, nor will they face major change for at least two years.

Big VI, Quangoes are. A lot of favours owed with gravy train jobs at quangoes. Week's wages for an hour's work etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bonfire-of-quangos-failing-to-catch-light-tele-14384861ca8b.html?x=0

'Bonfire of quangos' failing to catch light
Louisa "Lou" Peacock, 11:24, Tuesday 31 August 2010
Fresh questions have been raised over the sincerity of the Government's quango cull after it emerged several bodies are not being abolished, nor will they face major change for at least two years.

Big VI, Quangoes are. A lot of favours owed with gravy train jobs at quangoes. Week's wages for an hour's work etc.

Is it just me or does the citied example of £20k a year for a 3.5 day week for a Chairman position not seem perfectly reasonable value for money?

Do they mean 3.5 days a month?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://uk.finance.yahoo.com/news/bonfire-of-quangos-failing-to-catch-light-tele-14384861ca8b.html?x=0

'Bonfire of quangos' failing to catch light
Louisa "Lou" Peacock, 11:24, Tuesday 31 August 2010
Fresh questions have been raised over the sincerity of the Government's quango cull after it emerged several bodies are not being abolished, nor will they face major change for at least two years.

Big VI, Quangoes are. A lot of favours owed with gravy train jobs at quangoes. Week's wages for an hour's work etc.

Why would anyone be surprised at this, Dave nice but dim Caneron is just another member of the plutocrat party, just as was Blair or Brown, all we've done is change the name of the government..the ruling classes commitment to saving and enriching themselves and their wealthy backers remains the same wether the party in power is called Labour, Conservative or Liberal: with respect to quangos all that will happen is that there will be some modest shuffling of the deckchairs as Tony and Gordons mates are replaced with Dave and George's mates...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anyone be surprised at this, Dave nice but dim Caneron is just another member of the plutocrat party, just as was Blair or Brown, all we've done is change the name of the government..the ruling classes commitment to saving and enriching themselves and their wealthy backers remains the same wether the party in power is called Labour, Conservative or Liberal: with respect to quangos all that will happen is that there will be some modest shuffling of the deckchairs as Tony and Gordons mates are replaced with Dave and George's mates...

I'm not convinced about this, and still think that there is a clear Tory = advocates small government / Labour = big government split.

However, like you, I'm not surprised that the bonfire will be a slower burning one than we've been led to expect. Winding down large and/or bureaucratic organisations takes a while, and certainly public sector ones in which I suspect that most of the workforce are on contracts that entitle them to six months' notice. Whereas a lot of these quangos do very little work that is actually needed or beneficial, they do do some and making the arrangements to have these functions moved elsewhere takes time. The trick will be to get the ball rolling on this process as soon as possible, so that it becomes to all practical intents and purposes unstoppable, even if it's still going on at the next election and that election results in a change of government.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not convinced about this, and still think that there is a clear Tory = advocates small government / Labour = big government split.

However, like you, I'm not surprised that the bonfire will be a slower burning one than we've been led to expect. Winding down large and/or bureaucratic organisations takes a while, and certainly public sector ones in which I suspect that most of the workforce are on contracts that entitle them to six months' notice. Whereas a lot of these quangos do very little work that is actually needed or beneficial, they do do some and making the arrangements to have these functions moved elsewhere takes time. The trick will be to get the ball rolling on this process as soon as possible, so that it becomes to all practical intents and purposes unstoppable, even if it's still going on at the next election and that election results in a change of government.

If that was the case, surely they'd be announcing the axing of organisations in principle, in six months' time, once their functions have been transferred to X, etc.

As in this case (22nd July)

"Communities and Local Governmen Secretary Eric Pickles announced his intention in principle to shut down the eight offices for the South-West, South-East, East Midlands, West Midlands, East of England, North-West, Yorkshire & the Humber and North-East."

We may see more announcements in the spending review on 20th October, I suppose.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or does the citied example of £20k a year for a 3.5 day week for a Chairman position not seem perfectly reasonable value for money?

Do they mean 3.5 days a month?

A year?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If they are all on 2 year contracts, then this makes sense. Give them two years notice so no massive redundancy payments that would annoy the public.

Again, in that case why not announce they'll be disappearing at X date (whenever the longest contract ends).

This from when the axing of health quangos was announced (26th July)

"The Department of Health stated that "the changes will reduce the number of health ALBs (arm's-length bodies) from 18 to between eight and 10; they are expected to deliver savings of over £180m by 2014/15". "

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Again, in that case why not announce they'll be disappearing at X date (whenever the longest contract ends).

This from when the axing of health quangos was announced (26th July)

"The Department of Health stated that "the changes will reduce the number of health ALBs (arm's-length bodies) from 18 to between eight and 10; they are expected to deliver savings of over £180m by 2014/15". "

Two reasons.

1) the Tories want to make sure that there is private sector job growth is locked in before starting to cut and they will cut at a lower pace than private job growth so there are no bad headlines.

2) They have said that plans will be agreed on cuts in September and the implementation i.e scale of cuts when, who, size of announced then as well.

On a separate point there is mass hysteria about 25% to 40% cuts as if these are going to happen instantly , this is a leftie tactic to fear monger. In reality the cuts will be spread over 4 to 5 years so 5% a year will achieve that which does not sound so bad.

Number of Public sector workers in UK is 6million so 5% cut is 300K a year or 25K a month. easy hey.

Edited by ralphmalph

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

1) the Tories want to make sure that there is private sector job growth is locked in before starting to cut and they will cut at a lower pace than private job growth so there are no bad headlines.

In that case we can look forward to very few, if any, cuts in public sector jobs.

Where is private sector job growth going to come from?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case we can look forward to very few, if any, cuts in public sector jobs.

Where is private sector job growth going to come from?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10628641

Already happening, may be the bulk is currently temp workers but it is a virtuous circle, more in employment, more consumption, more workers needed, more consumption.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Two reasons.

1) the Tories want to make sure that there is private sector job growth is locked in before starting to cut and they will cut at a lower pace than private job growth so there are no bad headlines.

2) They have said that plans will be agreed on cuts in September and the implementation i.e scale of cuts when, who, size of announced then as well.

On a separate point there is mass hysteria about 25% to 40% cuts as if these are going to happen instantly , this is a leftie tactic to fear monger. In reality the cuts will be spread over 4 to 5 years so 5% a year will achieve that which does not sound so bad.

Number of Public sector workers in UK is 6million so 5% cut is 300K a year or 25K a month. easy hey.

well said - talk tough to appease the markets, but wield a delicate timely scalpel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

well said - talk tough to appease the markets, but wield a delicate timely scalpel

They are playing a very political game. The Tories want to avoid a double dip at all costs. Why? So they can humiliate Ed Balls who is going around spouting that the tory cuts will push the UK into economic depression. When they cut and the growth is still there (all be it low growth overall - plenty in the private sector counter balanced by public sector cuts and this also assumes that people think that GDP growth funded by borrowing is growth at all (I do not)) then they will be shouting at the top of their voices "Ed Balls is moron" (as if the public did not know that already).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10628641

Already happening, may be the bulk is currently temp workers but it is a virtuous circle, more in employment, more consumption, more workers needed, more consumption.

They're not temporary, they're part-time. I do wish people would learn the difference.

"However, the increase was due to a record 148,000 rise in the number of part-time workers, while full-time workers increased by just 12,000. " From the BBC news item linked.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case we can look forward to very few, if any, cuts in public sector jobs.

Where is private sector job growth going to come from?

Private security firms - as the rich seek to protect their cash and property.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They're not temporary, they're part-time. I do wish people would learn the difference.

"However, the increase was due to a record 148,000 rise in the number of part-time workers, while full-time workers increased by just 12,000. " From the BBC news item linked.

That is even better news as part-time workers have a contract and so employers are taking a long term view and making a commitment. Whereas temp workers are usually taking on to cover just a short term need.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why would anyone be surprised at this, Dave nice but dim Caneron is just another member of the plutocrat party, just as was Blair or Brown, all we've done is change the name of the government..the ruling classes commitment to saving and enriching themselves and their wealthy backers remains the same wether the party in power is called Labour, Conservative or Liberal: with respect to quangos all that will happen is that there will be some modest shuffling of the deckchairs as Tony and Gordons mates are replaced with Dave and George's mates...

That is exactly how I look at it too. The Tories are just as much if not more a part of the plutocrats as Labour. As soon as you look at any Tories you soon find their sisters, sisters in law, cousins, friends, etc.. working in very lucrative public sector jobs and contracts.

I would go as far as to say I do not believe the Tories will cut anything. Maybe like you said some modest shuffling, with very generous severance packages for the Labour party people currently in the positions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is exactly how I look at it too. The Tories are just as much if not more a part of the plutocrats as Labour. As soon as you look at any Tories you soon find their sisters, sisters in law, cousins, friends, etc.. working in very lucrative public sector jobs and contracts.

I would go as far as to say I do not believe the Tories will cut anything. Maybe like you said some modest shuffling, with very generous severance packages for the Labour party people currently in the positions.

Audit commision?

Housing Benefit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is even better news as part-time workers have a contract and so employers are taking a long term view and making a commitment. Whereas temp workers are usually taking on to cover just a short term need.

They can still be made redundant.

And part-time jobs mean part-time pay. Don't expect many part-time workers to be boosting consumption.

Before anyone says, "Oh, they choose to work part-time for a better work-life balance", one million of them (at the last count in May) were working part-time when in fact they wanted a full-time job but couldn't get one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They can still be made redundant.

And part-time jobs mean part-time pay. Don't expect many part-time workers to be boosting consumption.

Before anyone says, "Oh, they choose to work part-time for a better work-life balance", one million of them (at the last count in May) were working part-time when in fact they wanted a full-time job but couldn't get one.

The fact is that if these busineses that have hired these part-time workers thought that the requirement for additional labour was only going to be short term they would have hired temp labour for a short period and then let them go at no cost, no hassle. The simple fact that they recruited part-time labour with the same workplace rights as full time staff means that they have made a commitment becuase they think that the labour requirement is permanent not just a blip.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The fact is that if these busineses that have hired these part-time workers thought that the requirement for additional labour was only going to be short term they would have hired temp labour for a short period and then let them go at no cost, no hassle. The simple fact that they recruited part-time labour with the same workplace rights as full time staff means that they have made a commitment becuase they think that the labour requirement is permanent not just a blip.

Possibly. The fact remains, though, that they're not earning full-time pay and therefore will make less contribution to consumption than if they had full-time jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it just me or does the citied example of £20k a year for a 3.5 day week for a Chairman position not seem perfectly reasonable value for money?

Do they mean 3.5 days a month?

given the expected experience level of the applicants even 3.5 days a month for 20K doesn't seem OTT.

tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From my observation point, it is a slow burn of the quangos, rather than a bonfire.

One quango I know about (sorry, I can't give the name) gets a piece of cost-cutting news every month. The changes are being dribbled out slowly, but I reckon, by the end of this parliamentary term, they will be less than a quarter of their 2009 size and at least half of their offices will have closed and workforces either transferred or laid off. The writing is on the wall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That is even better news as part-time workers have a contract and so employers are taking a long term view and making a commitment. Whereas temp workers are usually taking on to cover just a short term need.

Don't have to pay NICS on p/t workers, or is that just small businesses?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 140 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.