Comments on: Labour’s cuts

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 18:42:52 +0000

It makes your blood boil, fining people for doing what the Reveue used to do on less money, without the multi billion pound computers and half the staff. I’m in finance, the FSA is another racket. If you want protection then forget it they aren’t interested in the public. They are interested in creating teh so called tick boxes and if those pointless tickboxes that don’t affect the public aren’t ticked on time there comes the big fines that get loaded onto charges or taken of dividends. Pointless layer of admin with no benefit but to earn fines.

By: ManicBeancounter

ManicBeancounter — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:54:46 +0000

I quite agree that across the board cuts do not work. But the current philosophy of teaching has resulted in huge increases in costs (and workload for teachers), with little marginal benefit. Indeed, in some respects we are failing the needs of the better students by having GCSE and A levels that are insufficiently demanding.
This is why we need a more basic level of teaching (less items are are labour-intensive for the staff) and then concentrate the extra resources on the specific needs. You therefore can both save on costs AND improve standards. It is looking to get better returns from the resources available. That is using the talents of the teaching staff to best effect, to produce the well-educated and socially literate young people.
This is not to say that we have all the answers, and the same approach will not be the best for everyone. That is why we need a plurality of approaches, with the state stepping back, to the regulation of minimum standards and providing the funds through a voucher based system. It will be difficult to achieve, as it is more humble (the latest fashion is not necessarily the best), but when mistakes are made they will a) have lower cost implications b) will not affect a generation when an experiment goes wrong. We can also learn through best practice and exchange of experiances, and not be subject to the whims of spin doctors.

By: alan jutson

alan jutson — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 17:14:35 +0000

Jon

If you notice we now have to pay postage as well.

Ok if you only have to send forms once a year,

But in the construction industry we have to fill in forms each month, even if they are a nil return, these go to two different offices, so two lots of postage each month.

In addition because the forms cannot be folded, they have to go in a large envelope, and so you pay for a large envelope stamp.

The new CIS tax system has far too much paperwork, we now have a minimum of 4 sides of A4 per month even for a nil return.

Its got bonkers.

Oh forgot, if they say you are one day late, they automatically fine you £100.00 and you have to prove you are innocent.

4 times in the last two years they have they suggested I was late, and fined me £100.00 until I sent them the proof of postage.

Then on appeal all fines were cancelled.

Innocent until proven guilty !!!! Not any more !!!!!!

By: Mark Williams

Mark Williams — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 10:54:06 +0000

You may well be right, I couldn’t possible comment, but the implication of an across the board cut without looking at specific needs is either that it won’t work and is a futile gesture, or that the capacity for cuts will be much greater in some cases.

By: Adrian Peirson

Adrian Peirson — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 19:41:24 +0000

I haven’t read your post Mr Redwood, just the Headline, but knowing how they operate now, these cuts will be implemented in a wat that further weakens our country, it’s independance, its civil order and our sovereignty.
I suppose It’s a bit like being a criminal psychiatrist, I know what they are up to.

Tell me I’m wrong.

Tomorrow, just give me the headlines and I’ll tell you what they are doing.

By: Jon

Jon — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 18:38:17 +0000

John this gets me more worried. When the Inland Revenue spent billions on a new computer system to save money they doubled their staff and got the population filling in their own tax returns.

Browns was of saving money is to borrow, PFI, loading debt into the future. I don’t want them to do anything other than call an election.

By: Stuart Fairney

Stuart Fairney — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 17:55:49 +0000

Do you honestly believe that either Iran or North Korea are a credible threat to the UK?

If so please describe how they could attack us and why they would do so.

By: ManicBeancounter

ManicBeancounter — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:33:48 +0000

The problem with schools is that perhaps 80% of the costs are salary costs. These have not only risen in real terms, but the number of staff has increased. In primary schools, most classes have not only a teacher, but also a teaching assistant. Then there are various support workers, for special needs, reading, language needs etc. Compared with when I was at primary school in late 60s / early 70s, the staffing has almost doubled per child. Also, the teachers have to spend much longer hours preparing for class. If there had been a massive increase in standards then it could be argued as money well spent, but there has not.

To save the real money we need a change in thinking about teaching, which includes productivity. As a result we could spend less and achieve higher standards.

By: ManicBeancounter

ManicBeancounter — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 13:22:52 +0000

I believe that calling the police may be the way to diffuse the situation. People do not always get it right, especially in the heat of the moment. The role of the police is to stamp their authourity on the situation and restore the peace.
More important is the time the police spend in filling out reports of arrests. This can serve as a deterrent to the police against arresting, but more importantly in using up valuable time in non-productive tasks. Social workers in the case of Baby P were shown to spend too much time in meetings and on paperwork, and too little time with clients.

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:20:52 +0000

No mention either of the costs of IT surveillance causing increasing loss of privacy; Britain’s reported to be the most ’spied on’ country in the world; it hasn’t reduced crime.

Likewise, only time will tell whether a system of inoculation and ID database is implemented by government on the basis of a flu virus.
Cost to taxpayers ???

Taxpayers are routinely misled by this government.

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 11:04:30 +0000

The question is has the invasion of Iraq & Afghanistan improved or lessened our national security ?

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 08:28:56 +0000

Coincidentally, OpenEurope today reports strong opposition (70%) of Germans to EU proposals to weaken a country’s Parliament – part of the Lisbon Treaty. A very firm stand is being taken in Germany and their Ambassador urges ‘British MP’s to ‘wake up’.

Nulabor ALWAYS achieves it’s aims by ’stealth’ – media spin and manipulation.

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 08:12:42 +0000

According to reports, contracts have already been signed for the highly contentious ID database at monumental cost to taxpayers.

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 08:09:38 +0000

Laborites seldom find Conservative success in elections ‘encouraging’.

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 08:07:11 +0000

Campbell reportedly works at BBC.

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 08:06:05 +0000

Indeed, left wing biased BBC programmes are all designed to make ‘people think’, i.e. social engineering.

Crimewatch, a constructive aid to the police has been abolished.

By: jean baker

jean baker — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 08:02:52 +0000

Nulabor inherited 12.5% economic growth from the Conservatives and free enterprise flourished. Under this government, – 30% growth and worsening, along with the biggest deficits this country has encountered.

Cutting and abolishing quangos is one of many obvious solutions.

By: Javelin

Javelin — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 06:25:57 +0000

Basically they have been forced to push through 35billion. The question is, what is forcing them?

I think advice will have forced them. A bond aution hasn’t failed yet. I think the advice will have come from several sources in Government. I think those advisors will have spoken to traders on the sales desks in the primary bond houses and those traders will be giving them information on what foreign funds are saying and what the credit rating agencies are saying.

I think the advice that will be given is that unless significant effort is made to cut spending that investors will not be prepared to pay AAA rating on UK Gilts before next May.

By: Manicbeancounter’s Weblog

Manicbeancounter’s Weblog — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 23:03:22 +0000

[...] July 24 by manicbeancounter According to John Redwood, the Labour Government has plans to save £35bn a year. I posted the following [...]

By: ManicBeancounter

ManicBeancounter — Fri, 24 Jul 2009 22:19:42 +0000

It is good news that the government is allowing for value for money as a consideration. But after twelve years of government, it is a bit late.

A bit of quick beancounting might put this into perpective. If these are mostly savings they could have made earlier, and assuming they have always been a constant percentage of government spend, then labour’s delay has cost the taxpayer around £325bn. If it has only built up since the spending hikes in 2001, the figure reduces to £150bn. However, for the government to admit this lower figure would be to admit that a large part of the spending increase was money down the drain.

Another way of looking at the £35bn is to divide by the number of Labour MPs. It is nearly £100m per MP. This level makes the financial amounts of MPs expenses seem trivial.

But even this annual £35bn only scratches the surface between the best value that can be theoretically achieved and the current situation. There is a lack of dynamism in government in changing service provision to the changing requirements; a lack of expertise in matching real individual (or local) needs to the money available; and a total lack of thought in relating costs to benefits for new initiatives. Add to the mix the strong interest groups in protecting the status quo, and many statutory encumbrances that add little value but a lot of grief, and you have the opportunity to spend a lot less, whilst improving the welfare of society as a whole.