[Closed] Cuts - Union knee jerk response or last line of defence against the Torries?

I reckon Bob Crow should think about what happened the last time Unions tried to take the government on. 😆

Seriously, I think unions have created some very unhealthy situations in the public sector. Cuts are painful, and it takes a crisis to get people to act - I doubt serious efficiency savings could be made without the heavy pressure from central government.

The head of the TUC was on the Beeb this morning saying that there was no need for any cuts at all. When pushed on his alternative solution it was the usual "tax the rich".

Just been on the news that the EU has said that the UK economy will grow strongly in the 2nd half of this year and avoid a double-dip recession.

= Conservative WIN!

When pushed on his alternative solution it was the usual "tax the rich".

That's just crazy talk. Everyone knows it's down to the poor to get us out of recession.

"tax the rich"

How do we define rich? Anyone not on benefits?

yes imagine that taxing the rich and wealthy when you can punish the poor , thos eon benefits and people who need public services. What a total idiot thank god we have privately educated, inherited titled landwoners, and millionairres to lead us out of this rather than a crackpot like Bob ...I mean what does he know about ordinary people he should indeed enter stumpy Johns real world of which our decision makers are clearly fully immersed.

The response was as inevitable as Tories cutting services. Whilst you cite the economy there are still choices - Obama has not done this for example. Any historian care to name the last Tory govt NOT to cut services immediately after election? It is pre 1970.
EDIT:

How do we define rich? Anyone not on benefits

Exactly trailmonkey.

It was the poor who got us into this mess, surely they should suffer
disproportionately to get us out? 🙄

The Tories are just using the recession as an excuse for a bit of social engineering again:
Everyone going to Uni, even poor people? They might realise that there's more to life than menial servitude - we'll soon put a top to that!
Libraries? Hotbeds of social radicalism, built on prime real estate etc etc.

What's really scary is that it's barely 25 years since this happened last time - how soon we forget.

Any historian care to name the last

time the Labour party left government without leaving a massive hole in the budget and the economy in a mess?

As I see it (coming from a highly unionised environment that the government have promised no cuts to (that'll be £12million over next 5 years then!))...

Cuts are needed. No one wants it but we're in a hole, and digging wont get us out. There are plenty of places cuts can be made, its easy for most people to see where the waste is, and anyone with any opinion can identify massive money pits (war in Afghanistan anybody?) However, its the government also have to awkward balance of trying to cut everything, without upsetting anyone (I.e voters, who are a fickle bunch, who will vote the coalition government as soon as "Their" industry/environment/lifestyle suffers.) Also, big sweeping cuts are great at saving money, but if they cut too much, it'll just be twice as much to replace things when we realise we need them, for example, we have managers that don't appear to do very much. So lets get rid of some so there is only one per department. The manager left over kicks off about doing twice the work and demands more money and probably gets it, then leaves for a different job where they can get the same money for less work. MY company then has to recruit a new manager on a higher wage than the last one to be competitive with the market and so it ends up costing more. (this is usually the NHS way IME).

So back on topic, cuts are needed, and sadly that means the public sector is going to get it, which the electorate wont like.

I'm saving up for a new house at the moment, that means no foreign holiday, we sold my car (i did get a new bike), less going out and generally cutting costs around the house. Its hard, but I can see a goal, I know that the money is adding up and I really want that new house, So why doesn't the government come out and say "here are some big cuts... e.g bin collection once a fortnight, street lights off after 3am, subsidies to bus &train companies reduced etc For 18 months. If people knew that slight hardship would end on a set day then they would hand it better IMO.

With the cuts we're experiencing, which will probably mean, work harder, rest less, rubbish kit. If they told me I have to work a bit harder for the next 6 months, but at the end of that 6 months I get a shiny new bit of kit, or a new vehicle to play with (though prefer the older ones anyway cos I'm retro) I'd be happy.

So the point of this little essay? I should probably get back to work!

Tron , good point to be fair, parties do tend to get voted out when the economy is poor but it is harder to argue they AIMED to do this deliberately. We could debate competencey to run the economy. My point is this is just normal tory practice. I assume even the most right wing person does not blame Labour for the current world recession or the 1970's oil crisis.

its easy for most people to see where the waste is

If people knew that slight hardship would end on a set day then they would hand it better IMO

Tron , good point to be fair, parties do tend to get voted out when the economy is poor

I'd say the pattern goes something like this:

Labour govt come in, eventually screw up the economy, get booted out.
Tories fix it.
Eventually people decide they can afford to be "nice" again.
Labour get elected again and we go back to the start.

Cuts on the scale Cameron wants are not needed, far greater than anything ever done before, far greater than any other country in the world is doing and will do enormous damage to the economy and the social fabric of the country.

The budget needs to be balanced but you do not do this by putting a million people on the dole - all that does is decrease tax receipts and increase the welfare bill.

Cuts could be done in much less damaging ways - stop the foreign adventurism, cancel the vanity project that is new nukes.

Taxation could easily be raised - we are a low tax low public spending country compared to our competitor nations. To cut instead is a political decision. There is no imperative for cuts.

Cameron with his allies in the press have created this panic about the state of the economy that is simply untrue - and is then using it to drive ideological cuts.

Remember we are a low tax, low public spending economy and no one else in the world is cutting like this.

TJ, you put far too much store in the differences between political parties. All of them tend to have spending plans within a few % of each other. They're not that different.

My personal view is that running the economy is much like managing inflation - expectancy, ie, general public opinion, is actually more important than any other factor. If the public think the books don't balance, you need to make it look like you're balancing them, because ultimately, it's consumer confidence and the propensity to spend or save that will kill or cure the economy.

Tories fix it.

Hello. Yes.... is that the public sector speaking? Jolly good. We've got the real world on line 3 for you

The cuts are needed. I don't think anyone can dispute that. But I think there are too many in the Tory Party who are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of a return to the 'Good Old Days' when they could use their paramilitary police force to beat the working class oiks up on picket lines with impunity.

Know your place peasants

Did someone just suggest Bob Crow lives in the real world? His salary in 2009 was £133,183 plus expenses and travelling costs. This is the bloke who called a tube strike over the sacking of a London transport employee who was on long term sick due to an ankle injury but was still able to play squash (pretty sure squash is harder on ankles than driving a tube train). Bob Crow is many things, living in the same world as the rest of us is not one of them.

If he's one of the flag bearers for the general strike I can't say I'm too confident that the goals are as open and clear as they suggest.

Tron -

If the public think the books don't balance

the economy needs to be rebalanced - but there are many choices of how to do this. Massive cuts is not the only option.

binners - Member

The cuts are needed. I don't think anyone can dispute that.

Of course we can. cuts [i]on the scale proposed[/i] are certainly not needed.

Show that the cuts as proposed are needed please.

The panic over he economy has been deliberately created by the Tories and their allies in the press to justify the cuts.

I didn't realise the likes of the IMF & World Bank were in the Conservative party's pockets.

TJ. Even by your standards, you've got it on you today dear. 🙂

I didn't say 'cuts on that scale' were necessary . I just said cuts are needed. If you recall, labour were still proposing some pretty drastic cuts anyway.

I think the main motivation for the tories is political though. And the old school union idiots are rising to the bait and spoiling for a fight. They haven't got a snowball in hells chance of coming out on top here, I'm afraid

Personally i think we are all doomed haha 😆

Real wealth is generated from digging things out of the earth, farming and manufacturing.

We used to make loads of stuff, what do we make now?

We should try to encourage hi-tech manufacturing here but it doesnt seem to be happening.

The economies that will bounce back quicker are the more balanced ones and ones that still have a manufacturing component, like germany.

oh and why do the French and Spanish own significant parts of our water/energy supply industry - doh

We used to make loads of stuff, what do we make now?

We're still one of the world's leading manufacturers. It's just that everyone goes around saying "We don't make owt anymore. Disgusting." to the point that everyone believes it.

Our exports have actually fallen less and bounced back quicker than Germany's...

I still believe we will have riots on the streets before Christmas, however right or wrong the cuts may be

The head of the TUC was on the Beeb this morning saying that there was no need for any cuts at all. When pushed on his alternative solution it was the usual "tax the rich

Usual political ideology innit. That's basically the difference between left and right.

Cuts - yes. Savage slash and burn hastily planned and executed - no.

Is anyone else quite looking forward to a bit of good old-fashioned argy bargy though? We haven't had any of that for ages. We need a good old class war. Petrol bombs and all that.

Recent protests (if we discount islamic nutters) have been a real dissapointment. Bordering on being a bit gay, to be honest. Marching in silence to protest about wars. Bloody hippies!!!

We need some Poll Tax style stuff. Police batton charges. Setting fire to Macdonalds. That type of thing. The youth of today have never had the change to really enjoy this facet of life. And its the lack of this traditional outlet that has lead to the increased crime rate. I'm convinced of it

We used to make loads of stuff, what do we make now?

Satellites, aircraft bits, scientific instruments, lots of cars - and a load more stuff besides. Most of what we make is high tech.

Fair enough Binners.

What I do find interesting is from the union side they have realised they need the support of the general public and can go no further than that support will take them. Unusual one that.

This is the phoney war. After the Lib Dem conference we will see how its going to unfold. I personally think the chances of the coalition lasting 5 years is very low and hopefully this will prevent the worst of the idiocy

What we need is genuine cuts, cuts that us the public vote for,we need the council workers to actually work a full day,for management to actually manage, not just have some manager title on their door.

We could save a load by sacking all paid for union reps, if the council wants a union rep, the union pays for him/her, not the council.

Then do we need assistants, and deputy asistants to the director, of paper clip recycling etc, these jobs really do exist,paper clip recycling may not as yet.

Also the unions will scare the crap out of the poor and elderly by saying youre going to loose your care worker, free meals, transport etc, not were going to get rid of non essential overpaid empire builders,that are employed in all coucils,and governmnet depts.

CJB 1994.

marched, fought, lost, end of.

Planned Government spending over the next five years

2009-10 (Last Labour year) £669bn
2010-11 £697bn
2011-12 £700bn
2012-13 £711bn
2013-14 £722bn
2014-15 £737bn (£68bn or 10% above Labour level)

Which apparently, according to TJ, is a 25% cut!
The veracity of any claim of "cuts" is based upon assumed inflation, if the BOE can get inflation back within its 2% target (which of course wage control is a major part of!) then there is almost NO reduction in real terms spending through the course of the parliament - its all based upon an assumed inflation calculator.

As I've asked Tandem(chickenlittle)Jeremy before, and he has yet to answer: [u]a quick reality check[/u] - if I told you that you were not going to get a payrise for the next three years, would you run around saying to all your mates in the pub that I was giving you a 12% pay cut, and if you did, would they think you were being hysterical and alarmist?

zulu - you are an offensive clown with no grasp of reality.

Cameron and Clegg have repeatedly said they are intending cuts of 25-40% in most government Depts. So they are lying are they?

Project - you cannot have cuts on the scale intended without service reductions. its simply not possible. The numbers don't add up.

Can't we just cut'n'paste a link to the previous threads going in circles around the same argument and save everyone the trouble of re-posting ?

It's like bleedin Groundhog day on here sometimes 🙄

Woody - As an alternative we could force the usual suspects to settle their differences like men. By gladatorial combat. While we all form a baying mob

epicsteve - Member
The head of the TUC was on the Beeb this morning saying that there was no need for any cuts at all. When pushed on his alternative solution it was the usual "tax the rich".

He also said more people in employment = more taxes, but that to achieve that the governemnt had to borrow more.

Excellent idea Binners.

We could charge and give the proceeds to a non-politically affilliated charity 😉

[i]Also the unions will scare the crap out of the poor and elderly by saying youre going to loose your care worker, free meals, transport etc, not were going to get rid of non essential overpaid empire builders,that are employed in all coucils,and governmnet depts.[/i]

Probably because to some extent it's true. I guess most of the overpaid empire builders also have budgets, and when they are told to cut their budgets by 25%, are they going to make themselves redundant, or someone else beneath them?

Yes the UK's Labour Government caused the world economic slump obviously.

The problem as I see it is that a new Government has up to 5 years to do their job before they may be out of power. I feel this means that as with this Gov they just come in and make sweeping proclamations. I'd have thought you'd need 5 years to realistically study where money is being spent and where it could be efficiently saved, and study what effects the cuts would have (not just assume that they will fulfill your wishes).

It is never going to happen though and we will just keep banging from one extreme to another.

TJ, you continue to spout your chicken little "sky is falling" bullshite

The coming "spending cuts" are being described - even by the government itself - gives people the idea that public sector departments are suddenly going to have 25% less money to spend - since that's what it would mean to a person if they received a 25% pay cut.

But of course it means no such thing. In fact public sector budgets will increase every year for the next 5 years, it's just that this will have (after accounting for inflation) about 2-5 % less buying power each year. The point is not that there aren't real terms cuts, but that the language being used to describe them makes them sound far worse than they are.

Are you catching on? There'll be no "cuts". There never are! The government are talking it up to try to reassure the markets and shore up the pound, but they'll never have the guts to take on the massive and long term restructuring of the public sector that is needed.

"Cuts" are now being defined as any failure to adopt large budget increases. And it seems a proper English usage has disappeared - If your salary in 2006 were £20,000 p.a., and your salary in 2010 were £20,000 p.a., would you say that your salary had been "cut"? Of course not, or, rather, you might say that, but you would be talking more nonsense. IF there had been inflation over that period, your purchasing power would have been cut, but not your salary.

[i]Cameron and Clegg have repeatedly said they are intending cuts of 25-40% in most government Depts. So they are lying are they?[/i]

I'd understood that plans had been asked for, working on both 25% and 40% cuts. This seems very sensible, even if you only end up cutting 5-10%, as the best/fairest way to cut is to stop doing the pointless stuff, rather than have an arbitory 10% across the board.

And lets be honest, most departments could cut 5% without really trying...

I'm with Binners, lets have a battle to see who is right! Singlespeed v gears, rigid v suspension, righties v lefties. Smash smash smash, stamp, twist aaaaaggggggghhhhhhhh!!!!

Whilst it is true to say that Germany is not cutting public expenditure as much it is only because they have a far lower budget deficit than us. What we and they are trying to achieve by the planned cuts is a reduction in the deficit to about 3%. As can be scene from [url= http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2010/09/german_finance_minister_defend.html ]this article[/url], the Germans think Cameron is on the right track.

The idea we "don't make anything any more" is nonsense. We make lots, and are a world leader in so many areas (I mean, even the world's most tedious "sport", Formula 1, employs 30,000 people in the UK).

What we don't make any more are heavy industry items that require a large workforce, hence no mines and a small number of shipyards. Effectively, the nation has had to upskill to compete in the post-industrial era.

All this is fine, but put it against a backdrop of:

1. Global financial crisis (for which all Britain's governments since the Big Bang are partly responsible); and
2. A fundamental ideological difference between the (remnants of) the Labour Party and the (apparently newly electable) Conservative Party*.

We have been convinced that cuts must be made. Why? Simple: the only control any government has over the economy is (1) the amount of tax it takes and (2) the amount is spends on public services. It can do nothing else to influence it, other than pretending when fiddling about with inflation targets, etc. So, if the gov't can't raise tax as it is deemed electoral suicide post-Thatcher (though, ironically, her cutting of the higer rates of income tax to 40% actually increased the net take), they have one option: cut public services.

The rhetoric from all parties has been "cuts are necessary", and we've all bought that so far. A recent Mori-Ipsos poll has shown that 59% of people are in favour of cuts. The trouble is, 59% are also against the VAT rise. What this seems to suggest is that people approve of cuts in the abstract, but will not when it directly affects them.

There is a significant dowanwards shift in the general standard of living on its way. Very few people have grasped this, and so the sense of pain we will feel when cuts do affect us directly will be even greater. If the unions manage to prey on that feeling at the time, there will be trouble.

*I'm not going into that now - the whole sense of ideology is fascinating, but the subject of another essay another day.

TandemJeremy - Member
zulu - you are an offensive clown with no grasp of reality.

Cameron and Clegg have repeatedly said they are intending cuts of 25-40% in most government Depts. So they are lying are they?

[b]Project - you cannot have cuts on the scale intended without service reductions. its simply not possible. The numbers don't add up.[/b]

Posted 21 minutes ago # Report-Post

But we can and must cut the wastage, the blatant laziness, the empire building thyat has been allowed to go on for to many tears.

So what do myou expect, a single fireman to be sent out with a motorbike to a fire, already happening in Liverpool.

PCSO,s instead of real police officers,

Foreign imported staff to care for the elderley,some who cant sp
speak english,

Heads and directors of departments, with assistants and deputies,that have no contact with the public,

Mayors and their parlours, somebody having a laugh,along with chauffer driven cars,

Public buildings floodlite all night,

and theres more.

So what do myou expect, a single fireman to be sent out with a motorbike to a fire, already happening in Liverpool.

It's easy to take examples like that out of context when the reality is that both the above can get to situations very quickly and assess the need for additional services. Is it always really necessary for a whole fire or ambulance crew to attend a minor road bump when they could be more usefully deployed elsewhere?

Unforunately these are only 'low level' savings. The real savings are to be made in the obvious areas such as top heavy management, 'benefit scams', tax dodging, government waste, etc.

All this can be achieved without any reduction in services to the people who [b]really[/b] need them. Unfortunately to implement them, and this is true for any government 'plan', a new raft of departments will be brought in to oversee the schemes, completely negating any saving or improvement in efficiency which could have been made.

Surely if we just killed all the elderly and infirm, then possibly the unemployed, we'd be out of this pickle in no time

Surely if we just killed all the elderly and infirm, then possibly the unemployed, we'd be out of this pickle in no time

I believe that's DC's next strategy, he's currently working with Lady T on a method for raising the dead. Genuine Social Darwinism will ensure that only the fit and well connected can survive the zombie hordes.

Are you catching on? There'll be no "cuts". There never are!

So you are saying that departments have been asked to find 25% savings, but they won't actually get implemented?

Good news if that were the case. And an interesting tactic.

Simple: the only control any government has over the economy is

Not really true. You can set things up over the longer term to encourage certain kinds of outside investment, and not just through tax breaks.

What this seems to suggest is that people approve of cuts in the abstract, but will not when it directly affects them

Not entirely unreasonable - the VAT rise will really hit very poor people, but the rich won't give a toss. You'd be forgiven for thinking that was unfair, surely?

For my two pennies I am welcoming cuts to civil service back office, far too many people on an easy ride. I know many people just 'hanging' around for their severance pay, which due to length of service and over the top beneficial terms (union negotiated) are likely to get 6 figure payouts (for middle/senior mgrs). It's bred a negative culture of people actually desperately trying to get voluntary every time it pops up as some form of lottery win.....sadly it;s cheaper to keep these skivers on moaning and drinking coffee than it is to actually get rid. So the Civil servants that'll go will be the younger, shorter service (not on the super ridiculous terms), the ones who actually do the work....

Apparently we've also got over a 100 contractors on site at an average of £800 a day due to the fact salaries are so low so they cannot recruit perm senior roles, but somehow a grand a day is ok for a contractor many who've been there for longer than I have (3 years)??? Different line on a spreadsheet I suppose.

There are so many places where money could be saved before they hit policing/fire etc....

/exit rant mode/

So you are saying that departments have been asked to find 25% savings, but they won't actually get implemented?

I think his point is that the cuts are in real terms - ie, adjusted for inflation. Simply not increasing budgets in line with expected inflation each year is in effect a cut.

As for the VAT increase, it's well known that it will hit C2D&E hardest. I'd be interested to see how an average individual ends up overall considering the changes to income tax thresholds, which should help C2D&E the most...

Apparently we've also got over a 100 contractors on site

It's WAY WAY cheaper than getting a consultancy company in though, and way the hell more productive. They are contractors because they just can't employ 100 permies and potentially have them hang around for 20 years or have to do massive redundancies in 5 years.

Where do you work? I only ask because I used to be in a very similar position and am now contracting for an SI on a govt project, so I'm interested in how this works. PM me if you want.

The problem with the public sector cuts is the useless gits that allow blatant waste of money in the first place (that the cuts are intended to target) are the same people that will decide what to cut so chances are the front-line stuff will get hit just as much as any back-room waste.

Are you catching on? There'll be no "cuts". There never are!
So you are saying that departments have been asked to find 25% savings, but they won't actually get implemented?

Sorry, I should have reworded my initial point as "There'll be no [i]significant[/i] "cuts". There never are!" Just minor messing around the edges.

Another problem with 'cutting the useless gits' is that it's practically impossible. Public sector will never work the same way as private, and the aimless retirement watchers are an unavoidable side-effect I fear.

and way the hell more productive.

Some contractors are most definitely worth what they are paid, but not all, some are rubbish even to the point of taking the piss. And again the place is so 'pc' you can't get shot of them till renewal time.

The whole culture is awful, my only hope is the cuts make a difference, but I think as other people on this thread have said I severely doubt it. Tbh once the market picks up I'll be back to banking 🙂

I'll pm you later on molgrips.

Efficiency and progress is ours once more,
now that we have the Neutron bomb
It's nice and quick and clean and gets things done.
Away with excess enemy.
But no less value to property.
No sense in war but perfect sense at home--

The sun beams down on a brand new day
No more welfare tax t' pay
Unsightly slums gone up in flashing light.
Jobless millions whisked away.
At last we have more room to play.
All systems go to kill the poor tonight.

Gonna
Kill kill kill kill kill the poor. kill kill kill Kill kill the poor kill kill kill Kill kill the poor…Tonight

[*chorus]
Tonight... tonight!
Behold the sparkle of champagne
The crime rate's gone
Feel free again
O' life's a dream with you, Miss Lily White.
Jane Fonda on the screen today
Convinced the liberals it's okay
So let's get dressed and dance away the night

While they…
Kill kill kill kill the poor 3x
Tonight... tonight!

Zulu - have you lost your tenuous grip on reality completely?

Clegg and Cameron both repeatedly state the level of the cuts - 25 - 40 % in most depts - NHS / Education / Overseas development will simply have static budgets - the rest will have these massive cuts. That is what the politicians organising it state will happen.

Its not tinkering around the edges - its massive programme of cuts without precedent in the UK.

That is what Cameron and Clegg state

TJ, if they've repeatedly said that in public, there will be newspaper articles. I'm not calling you a liar, but this is going round in circles.

Could one of you please prove the other wrong?

Some contractors are most definitely worth what they are paid, but not all, some are rubbish even to the point of taking the piss.

Ever worked with a big consultancy? 🙂

Its not tinkering around the edges - its massive programme of cuts without precedent in the UK.

Good, I've worked for the public sector and my god they don't half p1$$ money up the wall. Not just a bit here and a bit there, but evertywhere and all the time. It's quite incredible how much money you see wasted.

If you're good at what you do and provide good value then go do it in the private sector.

Clegg and Cameron both repeatedly state the level of the cuts - 25 - 40 %

[b]No[/b], they have asked departments to present them with [b]plans[/b] for "cuts" at those levels, options if you will - as I've already said to you, the MOD have plans for war with france, plans for nuclear war, and more than likley contingency plans for massive UFO attack - the mere existence of "plans" does not in any way indicate the likelihood of a particular thing occurring!

The Governments official budgetary plans detail a 10% increase in actual cash spend over the next five years. If inflation is less than 2% per annum, then like it or not that is [b]not[/b] even a [i]real terms[/i] cut in government spending.

Good, I've worked for the public sector and my god they don't half p1$$ money up the wall

So do the private sector mate!

Tron

All departments, excluding the NHS and international aid, have been asked to find four-year cuts of between 25% and 40%.

Mr Clegg told Radio 4's Today programme there were "difficult decisions" ahead but talk of billions being taken out of the economy immediately was misleading and only added to people's fears.

The cuts would begin in April 2011, he said, and would be "spread evenly" over the next four years - equivalent to an annual 6% budget reduction over four years.

The article doesn't support your claim that Clegg or Cameron have said there will be 25-40% cuts, but that they've asked for cuts of that level to be worked out.

Find a quote - them actually saying it, not what the press office or a civil servant has said.

To be fair to Z-11 his figures are correct, you can see them on page 52 of the Red book, [url= http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/d/junebudget_complete.pdf ]here.[/url]

"After the spending round, we are still going to be spending £700bn of public money - more than we are now."

Nick Clegg, in TJ's above link.

Tron - what more do you want - thats a reputable source saying that clegg has said this.

Its all there in the media if you want to see it. If you don't want to see it you wont.

TJ, the article does not state that Clegg said cuts of 25-40% are on their way. It says a 6% annual reduction in budget over 4 years.

However, he did say "Some of the hyperbole I have heard is just preposterous ..." 😆

Tron - do the maths. 6% a year for 4 years?

If you don't want to see this you won't but it is there and clearly stated

all depts bar NHS, Education and international development will have budget cuts of 25-40% over the years 2011-2015. these budgets will be frozen) This is the stated policy of the coalition.

molgrips - Member
Good, I've worked for the public sector and my god they don't half p1$$ money up the wall
So do the private sector mate!

We're not paying for the private sector unless we choose to, though.....

😉

To promote transparency and understanding of the broad magnitude
of spending changes, Table 2.3 presents indicative figures for the overall level
of current and capital DEL spending in the years to 2015-16. These are based
on the OBR’s Budget forecast for AME, as set out in Annex C, which takes
account of specific AME measures announced so far. Based on these implied
DEL figures, and once the Government’s commitments on protecting health
and overseas aid are taken into account, other departments could see average
real cuts to their budgets of around 25 per cent over the four years. This
compares with the average real cuts of around 20 per cent for unprotected
departments implied by the March Budget. The final split between AME and
DEL will be decided at the Spending Review, and any further AME savings will
reduce the size of cuts to departmental budgets.

Para 1.40 of the Red Book, so 5% cuts over and above Labour's plans to unprotected departments.

So - you agree - 25% cuts to most government depts budgets.

The response was as inevitable as Tories cutting services. Whilst you cite the economy there are still choices - Obama has not done this for example. Any historian care to name the last Tory govt NOT to cut services immediately after election? It is pre 1970.

Is that Obama, president of the most capitalist economy ever, which operates around the basis of minimum tax and minimum services and benefit and gets away with it because even the truely destitute poor who really do NEED help appear to be brainwashed to believe that it's their right as Americans to be free and live or die by their own means? A country where many of those that needed free healthcare voted against it! You can't cut public services when you don't have any...

I certainly agree that 25% cuts are planned. I don't think Nick Clegg or David Cameron have actually said that out loud in public though. 😀

A country where many of those that needed free healthcare voted against it! You can't cut public services when you don't have any...

It's what happens when the wealthy get a total grip on the media and the politicians, many of which are wealthy themselves. The wealthy have been selling their dream to the poor (and they class the middle class as poor) "you too can be like us if you work hard etc", while they were pulling up the ladder behind them and by using words like "freedom".

This is where this country is going, we've been sold the same dream and as evidenced here there are many who have bought it.

pulling up the ladder

You mean like the typical Labour MP, who has kids in private school, or a house in a good catchment area funded for by the taxpayer, but vehemently defends the rights of everyone else's to go to shite comps?

Well that was fun. Really not impressed by the union leaders after listening to the soundbites on the radio this evening. Apart from the airline pilots union rep, breath of fresh air there, had the conference chairman showing his true colours when the stirrings of a real debate nearly got going. His response when he said they'd like to speak against the motion, you'd better be joking or something to that effect.

I'm not sure I like these unelected lobby groups championing civil disobediance, surely their whole purpose is to look after their members, not try and start riots.

We'll at least it'll force the government into another round of curbing the unions power, last time the right to secondary picketing etc. went, be interresting to see wht happens this time, especially as union membership is significantly down on previous levels.