Calling all ministers

No-one wins an election by promising to cut NHS spending but I fear the folly of ring-fencing NHS spending will become clear as the scale of the cuts required in other areas emerges.

Why so down on the "Peace Pod", Nick? Sounds rather a nice idea.

Nick

All the fanfare about cuts that the press relate and the "need" by the Treasury and coalition for savings is contradicted by not seeing tangible differences in how public services do their thing. I am being treated as an outpatient at Stoke Mandeville Hospital and by the numbers of patients and hours open (from 7:30am) it is hard to see how they could treat more patients than they do at present. Believe it or not one of my appointments was on a Saturday!

I know the NHS is ringfenced by the coalition but as an example it contrasts jarringly with what news reports are saying. I also am at a loss to comprehend if total government spending will rise by 15 percent over 5 years, where do the projected cuts of between 25 and 40 percent come in - something does not add up.

Or are the cuts of 25 to 40 percent pertain only to something (hitherto unknown to the great unwashed before this GE) called the "structural deficit" whatever that is. Is this just a case of more new jargon just for the sake of new jargon? It is almost apprpriate to say "how very New Labour!"

The cutting strategy is political suiside...you cant try and put right 15 years of overspending in 5 years...you will squeeze the goodwill out of the British people...have we learned nothing? POsted by garden lights

I do not think that "coalition's hard man" is quite the correct description.

Pickles might just be a Public Servant - in the sense of the phrase that we thought had gone forever - that is, somebody who realised he/she is spending tax-payers money and every penny needs to be carefully accounted for.

Pickles is not implementing 'cuts', he is obtaining maximum value-for-money from tax-payers who are generally still being fleeced by Government.

It will be interesting to see how Pickles now will assist town halls as promised freeze their council tax when they are likely to be facing 25% (probably more) reduction in funding. The answer is that services (not management) will suffer slash and burn and local authority finance directors will pretend the enormous costs of severance do not exist.

Breaking news!

The Treasuray has agreed budgets with 5 departments, including the Treasury!

Wow! Reaching an agreement with yourself! bet that was a hard negotiation for the tresuary team!

Let us hope they do not start another war like Blair and Thatcher. We need Trident, the aircraft carriers, the destroyers,the submarines, the aircraft and the boots on the ground. Reports show Russia and China have access to the USA power grid etc and Russia has lauched a nucular attck on England to kill one man. Meanwhile their nucular bombers are still being intercepted by the RAF, for the time being.
Financial Crisis? How much will a new war cost?

Took long enough to get down to the business of cutting government down to size. Seems one of the councils is going to outsource all it's services, I hope all of them follow suit then we just might get value for the ubiquitous community charge which councils seem to think they can use to rip off the public to their hearts' content.

what a great man eric pickles is. he has earned his place at the star chamber. im sure the decisions he makes that will cause misery to many will be well thought through. to help his relaxation on his way home, he can sit comfortably in his 70k chauffeur-driven Jaguar XJ with luxury leather seats that he traded up to.... from the £20,000 eco-friendly Toyota Prius of Labour predecessor John Denham.
evidently eric calls the car his new "we are all in this together wheels"





its a great time to be a tory.

"On arriving at his new department, he let it be known that he was less than impressed with their purchase of a two-storey "Peace Pod" costing over £70,000."

Strange, because he didn't have a problem with spending the same amount on replacing his ministerial car with a Jaguar XJ.

Peace Pod over £70,000. But how much over Nick? Are we talking Pounds, Hundreds of Pounds or Thousands of Pounds.

By the sounds of it Eric was less than impressed that the Peace Pod cost more than £70,000 but was presumably impressed that it cost less than say a £1m.

I'm a big fan of Mr Pickles and thought he was harshly treated by the Telegraph regarding his expenses. Looks like the perfect choice when it comes to getting value for money.

Ummm which minister has been heard shouting at civil servants that he wants to crush the civil service?

Or throwing research which contradicts his opinions shouting don't bring me your socialist lies?


Jabba the Hutt

Lefty10

' he can sit comfortably in his 70k chauffeur-driven Jaguar XJ with
luxury leather seats'

Yeah, but at least he's only got one Jag.

Didn't we once, long ago, fight a civil war and end up beheading the Head of State to stop unaccountable and oppressive Star Chambers?
They do say that history repeats itself. In which case Dave had better start reconsidering. Fast.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

If it really is 70 grand for either, I'd say the Peace Pod represents better value for money than the Jag. Bigger bang for our taxpayer buck with the Pod.

14. At 7:24pm on 23 Sep 2010, jobsagoodin wrote:
Lefty10

' he can sit comfortably in his 70k chauffeur-driven Jaguar XJ with
luxury leather seats'

Yeah, but at least he's only got one Jag.
======================
and remeber that the Jag is made in the UK

15. At 7:27pm on 23 Sep 2010, Idont Believeit wrote:
Didn't we once, long ago, fight a civil war and end up beheading the Head of State to stop unaccountable and oppressive Star Chambers?
====================
but surely this 'Star Chamber' is accountable - there will be an election soon!

Bloated tories fighting to out do each other in putting people out of work.

I see their support has dropped from landslide levels a year ago (11-12% ahead), now down to level pegging with labour.

Level pegging with labour!!!

After Brown's record, that is a shocking comment on the tory government Clegg imposed on us.

"We're All in this together"

Has there ever been a more duplicitous political Sound bite than that?

So Eric swans around in his jag at our expense even though a ministerial car alredy existed.

Ims sure Eric, George, Dave (and Dave's Butler, Clegg) will feel share the pain of the thousands they're about to put on the dole and a double dip emerges......Look at the Cuts to recession route and how its worked for Ireland!!!!!!!
Ireland's Austerity Package of Cuts was praised to the skys by Tories, particularly Osborne..........OOOPs George

and what are the results for Ireland?

• Irish unemployment is 12.5 per cent;

• The country is experiencing deflation at –6.6 per cent;

• GDP has fallen 7.4 per cent over the past year and 10.5% from its peak;

• And despite the cuts they have still had their credit rating downgraded.


Same old Tories

10. At 6:39pm on 23 Sep 2010, lefty10 wrote:

what a great man eric pickles is. he has earned his place at the star chamber. im sure the decisions he makes that will cause misery to many will be well thought through. to help his relaxation on his way home, he can sit comfortably in his 70k chauffeur-driven Jaguar XJ with luxury leather seats that he traded up to.... from the £20,000 eco-friendly Toyota Prius of Labour predecessor John Denham.
evidently eric calls the car his new "we are all in this together wheels"

its a great time to be a tory.

=========================================================================

Oh you are so right Lefty, a great time. I am cheering almost every day. Brilliant Brilliant, Brilliant!!!!!!!!!

Keep the cuts coming......

Hooray!!!!!!!!

I always knew the man was king of spin. This is what he plans to do. Cut the budget to the DCLG which means that less money will go to those nasty over spending local authorities. Excellent.

At the next lot of local elections Labour will make gains - the opposition usually do quite well in between general elections. That will mean a few more Labour Councils. No problem. With less money there will be reduced services and the councils will get the blame. But as they are Labour Councils it just proves that Labour aren't up to the job. Claims that it was the fault of reduced government grants will fall on deaf ears. In the long run Labour look bad (not that they need much help) and the Cons or LibDems appear good.

Cuts made when it is another elected body which has to deal with the real cutting is easy. Now if Eric had been given the MoD or the DWP I don't think that he would be such a hero. The star chamber reminds me of the Generals and Field Marshalls at the start of WWI - we all know how well they were connected to reality.

We have to reduce our budget, but let's do it by prioritisng what we want until we can afford no more. If we cannot afford some services we already have, then so be it. The objective is provide services we need and can afford, not to make cuts as an end in itself.

That Star Chamber composition (people who've already caved in) sounds suspiciously like jury stacking by the prosecution. You only get on if you've been seen and heard making an enormous fuss about how we're too soft on criminals ... shouting "they always get off!" and waving your arms around.

21. At 8:22pm on 23 Sep 2010, Eatonrifle wrote:
Ireland's Austerity Package of Cuts was praised to the skys by Tories, particularly Osborne..........OOOPs George

and what are the results for Ireland?

• Irish unemployment is 12.5 per cent;

• The country is experiencing deflation at –6.6 per cent;

• GDP has fallen 7.4 per cent over the past year and 10.5% from its peak;

• And despite the cuts they have still had their credit rating downgraded.
==============================

Yep, coming soon to a disunited kingdom near you.

Yada yada yada.

Eric is a tough guy. The star chamber is nasty.

Is that it? At a time of immense drama in UK political life. Is it just me or does this blog post seem a bit ... well ... meaningless.

21 Eatonrifle

Ireland's Austerity Package of Cuts was praised to the skys by Tories, particularly Osborne..........OOOPs George

and what are the results for Ireland?

• Irish unemployment is 12.5 per cent;

• The country is experiencing deflation at –6.6 per cent;

• GDP has fallen 7.4 per cent over the past year and 10.5% from its peak;

• And despite the cuts they have still had their credit rating downgraded.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Ireland's unemployment rate has been on an upward trend since early 2008 and its GDP has been falling since 2007.

S&P reduced Ireland's credit rating from AA to AA- because the cost of their banking bail-out package has been increased further and the national debt forecast for 2010 has been revised upwards to 113% of GDP (2009 was 64%).

There is no evidence to suggest that any of these are a direct result of their austerity package, although I guess the credit rating may weaken further if the austerity package leads to more sluggish growth in the short term.

Pickles
Osborne
Maude

Help !

Hit the nail on the head there Cass. Drama and making a crisis out of it seems to be one thing the Coalition excels at. Who said the days of spin are dead. Don't deny us our bit of fun and humour. Like when Mr Clegg said in a recent radio interview that the coalition's cuts weren't that deep as they weren't that different from what Labour planned to do. Right, so you saved us from profligate Labour so you could do something 'not that different' from what Labour would have done. Gotcha. Makes perfect sense.

I have just seen the latest Robin Hood film - does King John remind you of Gorgeous George Osbourne - similar tax the peasants ruthlessly regime.

We are in this together, we will all suffer equally - no doubt some will suffer more equally than others, especially the weak, infirm and the less well off.

Pickles has called those in the soon-to-be-abolished Government Offices for the Regions, staffed by citizens of the central departments, as 'agents of Whitehall'. His hatred of them seems to be despite the fact his own department is still heavily reliant on them for guidance, advice and briefing for him.

Agents of Whitehall? Hardly. But he is definitely an agent of Fray Bentos, Pukka and Ginsters.

AS71.

Have to disagree on Ireland.

They took austerity measures early (three budgets I recall) which at the time was praised by many. And Osborne now followed by Clegg et al have bought this hook, line and sinker.

Some, however, warned of the risks...and it looks like they were right.

The austerity has choked growth...they are now considering further austerity locking the economy into the death spiral.

Someone should send Osborne a copy of Keynes' General Theory...he should pay special attention to the paradox of thrift.

I can never forgive Pickles for freezing Han Solo in carbonite.

Interesting that there is a new female cabinet minister. Why had I never heard of Frances Maude? And as for Francis, has he been sacked or what?

21. At 8:22pm on 23 Sep 2010, Eatonrifle wrote:
"We're All in this together"


'what are the results for Ireland?

• The country is experiencing deflation at –6.6 per cent;'
--------------------------------------------------------
We could do with a bit of that over here ...

20. At 8:22pm on 23 Sep 2010, jon112dk wrote:
Bloated tories fighting to out do each other in putting people out of work.

I see their support has dropped from landslide levels a year ago (11-12% ahead), now down to level pegging with labour.

Level pegging with labour!!!

After Brown's record, that is a shocking comment on the tory government Clegg imposed on us.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can see you are clearly impressed with all that they haven't actually done yet.

I've no political axe to grind (and the 70K Jag seems, at best, a mis-jugement) but anyone who gains a reputation for attacking over-spending and waste gets my support.
Somebody has to bring a halt to the profligacy of the last government and if that's chubby little Eric, so be it.
If we see an end to the "Millenium Dome" approach to the disposition of my taxes I'll be quite content.
£120K a year for a press cuttings service!! How many other departments are doing the same thing? How many county and local authorities?
What an absolute waste of tax-payers money.
If Eric really got his teeth into this subject I reckon he would leave quite a few civil servants in a bit of a pickle.

I see on Panorama that Francis Maude has finally realised you don't have to pay, "telephone number saleries" to get the right people for the job. They will be happy to do the job in the public sector as long as they see they are allowed to do tghe job.

Has he told the private sector this, that he will be introducing a maximum wage across the board?

Maybe, as the measure was the salary of the Prime Minister, perhaps the maximum wage should be set at, 150k.

This current subject of Pickles, is interesting in that the last Prime Minister was continually criticised for his bullying tactics and now it seems it is a necessary trait for getting things done.

When did this change come about?

Nick Robinson.

"Pickles has already won himself a reputation in Whitehall for the gusto with which he has attacked what he sees as over-spending and waste."

https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/question_time/7967561.stm

and who said a leopard can not change his spots. :-)

This sounds like Push-Me-Pull-You politics. It begs the question, just who is the real Chancellor?

A coalition can only work if the partners are working together. The Lib Dems (and Vince Cable in particular) seem to have their own socialist high tax, anti-business agenda. What a surprise.

Lib Dems have even less support than than the discredited Labour party, but here they are calling the shots.

You don't have to pay enormous salaries to get people to do certain jobs!! Look at what one person who is paid only £142,500 can do.

Fabulous value for money or 'if you pay peanuts you get monkeys'?

#41

You don't seem to understand one advantage of a coalition. If you have a single party ruling we are told 'this is the way things will be'. With a coalition we sometimes see a discussion that is happening within government. In the end they are working together but it doesn't mean that they always have to agree with each other straight away. Vince Cable was only articulating what many people in business know to be true - ask many farmers about their profits and then look at Tesco's profits, ask Cadbury workers at Keynsham who got duped into supporting the Kraft take over. As for 'socialist high tax' such a comment seems to show a lack of understanding of the problem - it is a meaningless statement. When cuts are made, services will still be paid for by taxation. However even if the cuts are made to a level which 90% of the population finds unacceptable, there will still be some who could apply the label 'socialist, high tax'.

craig

The big problem with Ireland (and the reason for the deflation) is the the entire economy was driven by property, we have also been hit but our reliance on construction was not as high as that of Ireland

The deflation has come about because they have had to take massive hits on property losses. My missus is from Ireland and house prices have dropped by over half where she lives. Just near her parents house there is a new development - the original price of a semi was 350,000 Euros. You can now have one for 149,000 (recently one went for 140,000)

That's the reason they have been struggling. We haven't seen anything like that here in the UK, but our property needs to adjust a lot more yet!

Ireland has taken everything at once, but they are bouncing back (slowly) they had all their eggs in one basket, they are starting to recover now and partly because they have taken a massive deflation of property. You can afford to buy a house now, but many are left with houses they can never move out of because of negative equity - they payed way too much in the first place

So, it seems that Pickles is not as tough as he tries to make out. This government, elected because they represented change, has decided not to hold a revaluation of properties until after the next election. That on top of not making a decision over trident until after the next election. What else will they postpone?

1 AS1 is absolutely right that ring fencing the NHS makes no sense in efficiency terms. The NHS had 7% per annum real growth for a decade but its productivity performance was dismal -transferring reources to the NHS was a way of reducing growth and productivity growth in the economy as a whole. A huge chunk went on even higher pay for already over rewarded (by comparison with hospital doctors and nurses) GPs -if you dont believe this have a look at the Panorama data on the highest earners in the public sector , a huge chunk of those earning more than the PM are GPs -remember this is at the time most of them withdrew from providing out of hours cover causing a huge extra cost to be borne. Bizarrely, these 'investment bankers of the public sector' are to be given greater control of the NHS budget by Mr Lansley. Why on earth in a time of economic stringency would you hand a privileged position to a sector that has performed so poorly. At the end of this process I predict we will find the NHS is still performing poorly (history shows major reorganisations reduce productivity for a considerable period) and will have eaten the rest of the public sector, and thus reduced the productivity of the public sector as a whole. Really sensible first spending round by ConDems!

All those trying to link our position to Ireland are conveniently forgetting that the Irish are tied to the Euro and therefore have not benefited from the currency devaluation we have. Doubts over the PIGS is more than compensated by the continued economic strength of Germany.

As a result, the Irish economy is increasingly uncompetitive - particularly compared to Germany which enjoys a currency which is weaker than it would be based on its economy alone.

#44 eye-wish

Labouring the point somewhat there - I don't remember Council Tax revaluation being a change the country was hankering after.

Here's another change that the supposed reforming coalition aren't making either - the door to No.10 is staying black. Those dithering ConDems! where will it all end?

21. At 8:22pm on 23 Sep 2010, Eatonrifle wrote;
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

Apples for apples.

Ireland is a basket case. It's debts dwarf ours in proposition. They have more bad loans on their books from their banks than their GDP. They have a property portfolio resulting from their bank's loans to developers and individuals that makes them one of the largest land owners in Europe. Unfortunately they are still having to pay for the majority of it and its value has dropped considerably.

So how does this compare to us.... it doesn't, but once again why let facts spoil a good yarn.

So by inference you want us to continue with the last governments spending. The only problem with this is that we would have to borrow even more end plunge us further into debt. But lets not worry because we will create more jobs. The only issue is that we are paying for them with wooden dollars. A dollar that will be worth less due to a run on our currency and due to the fact that inflation will take hold.

But hey look at Greece that was doing as you want us to do, look how well they did.

Come the revolution brother we will all have a "Peace Pod" to contemplate where it all went wright...........

Yes I'd like to see an end to the individualistic cult of the high flier - people who supposedly need enormous sums of money to take senior positions in organisations and are supposedly "worth it" due to the enormous personal impact they can have. Maybe one or two are, but it's mainly a self serving con trick perpetuated by the head hunting industry. Point applies to the public and the private sector, so let's address it in both.

45. At 08:54am on 24 Sep 2010, TSArthur

Interesting that you feel GPs are overpaid compared with hospital doctors, at c. £100k

When the MOD used NHS surgeons in Iraq/Aghanistan they agreed to compensate them for income lost. Payments were as high as £300k (annual equivalent). The surgeons were claiming not just their NHS pay, but also their private income.

Prior to the new GP contract one local PCT was offering c. £55k to fill a GP vacancy but could not recruit for nearly a year. Any guesses why newly qualified doctors were not choosing to be GPs?

Not entirely sure I agree with all this, but I hear every day that you have to pay private sector chief execs £2.1m and give spiv traders a £1m bonusses, otherwise you can't recruit 'the best people'

Irelands case is much more interesting than just an economy driven by property, I believe. Ireland itself did boom at first through attracting business by a well educated workforce, low operating costs for business and competitive wages for workers. House prices began to rise as demand was in the Market for housing to accommodate the new influx of immigration. However they failed to recognise just as Britain and the USA did, that the World economy was changing. At the same time Ireland failed to see that the new Countries entering the EU would be their competitors, in the same Market. As the wealth was created in Ireland at this time, it was wasted on increasing overspend in the public sector and benefits which the Country could not afford, producing deficits. They then fell into exactly the same problem as Britain and the USA. A boom based on housing, easy credit and consumer spending. All very much encouraged by their Government. The crash therefore was inevitable just the same as Britain and the USA. However Ireland ended up with too much housing stock, thus the great drop in prices, whereas Britain does not have enough.

However unlike Britain they have decided helped by the EU to take this problem of the deficit in hand. There was resistance at first from public sector workers, so just like Britain the private sector took the hit first and higher taxation began to take its toll. However they are now back on track. Ireland still has many more advantages than Britain for the outlook of its economy and if they do, by quick sharp cuts reduce their deficit to 3% of GDP by 2014, which seems to be their aim, they may see some kind of recovery from disaster.

#20 GB could have joinded NC but he new wha twas coming the game was up
and labour did not want to be the one to do the cuts, casue it makes them look bad you know, so yet agian they leave it to the tories but this time they have the LD's
hope there is an election soon , with a tory magority, with LD's 200 seats and labour nowhere to be seen

#47 cd

Well I'm sure that we will all enjoy this government putting off decisions that we don't hanker after. Like losing our jobs because of cuts in spending perhaps.

26. At 9:15pm on 23 Sep 2010, Cassandra

agree with that comment,

Man ideologically inclined to make large cuts in public spending agrees to make large cuts in public spending by his department.

#52 ir35

............and then you woke up?

#54 W N

It's interesting to me that someone, like Eric Pickles, who shows signs of a life of over endulgence, should be putting the case for cuts.

Surely the first cut he must consider is his food intake, then we could take him seriously.

#10 lefty

I don' think you can by an XJ with cloth seats to be honest, he HAD to go with the leather :)

I don't class the Prius as that eco-friendly really, minerals for the batteries are mined in Canada (open cast, nice) then shipped to Japan for manufacture, then shipped to the UK to be put in the car. They must have the largest carbon footprint to manufacture!! But that's another debate for another topic

Given the choice between the Jag or the peace pod? Not sure - i'd have to see the peace pod....if it comes with leather upholstery and climate control then I could be tempted......

We accept cuts are inevitable and I don't blame people for wanting to protect their jobs and conditions, but there is too much scare-mongering going on. All this "it will be the front line staff that goes and the managers will look after themselves" is totally untrue where I work. The cuts already announced affect more senior posts and the process is open and transparent. Of course a lot of people prefer to muddy the waters for political gain but as a public servant I am aware that things could be done more efficiently and if the services are given time to adjust their ways of working, consider each post carefully before replacing staff that leave by choice and focus on the needs of the community instead of doing things the way they were always done, it can only be for the good in the long term.

#51 sc

Competitive wages for workers? Does that go for those at the top?

Francis Maude believes that you don't have to pay, "telephone number saleries" to get the right people.

I agree with that so will we be seeing CEOs taking the lead on wage reduction?

mightychewster #57.

since Mr Pickles girth has already been commented on, I now wonder whether he had to have a new car since the Prius seats (and doors!!) might have been too small to sqeeze in.

50 jon112dk. I agree that the NHS was struggling in some places to recruit GPs before the new contract. However, recruitment problems generally had an awful lot to do with the fact that the rapid growth in NHS funding began in 1999 (so NHS had money to spend), but the 40% expansion in the Med School intake only took place in the same year -it is only now after a decade that the first (of what will be huge wave of new entrants to the profession) are becoming fully trained ready to be GPs. In fact the growth in UK trained numbers is so great that were it not for the facts 1) that the number of overseas recruits to hosp. training grades has been squeezed, and 2) a lot of younger docs seem to be working part-time, we might be hearing stories about medical unemployment -with a drop down to !% per annum growth in spending this may be coming in any case.
However, even if it was right to raise pay in 2003/4 to attract new GPs to go from that proposition to 1465 GPs been paid more than the PM (on £142,500) makes it look likely someone seriously lost control of the pay negotiations. That does not fill me with optimism that the protected budget of the NHS will be used efficiently.
Sadly,what is payed in spiv land will not be considered by Star Chamber, but the fact that 1 GP costs the same as 2 Registrars 4 nurses,and 4 teachers and policeman should be.

#58 EoG

Could you drop the "public service" tag for your work.

You choose a career in a field for paid employment which as a society, we pay for through taxation.

You would be offering public service if you did free of charge, as a service to the public.

I'm not trying to belittle whatever job of work you do, it may be of great value to those who use the service you provide, but people who provide a public service are those who do things for nothing.

People who run voluntary youth groups and the like or maybe those little old ladies who collect money outside M&S for the Salvation Army. They provide a public service.

This seems a bit one-sided. I think it is absolutely necessary to get rid of things such as the "Peace Pod", but there must be significantly more cuts to staffing which will be less black and white. Why aren't these being reported?

Pickles hasn't helped his popularity by apparently demanding that everyone goes back to the old days of having to address him as "Minister". Seems a bit egotisical and unnecessary.

49 saga

I agree with you that a lot of high earners in the private sector are probably not worth it, but this is surely a matter for the shareholders of the companies in question to sort out.

Banks will generally not lend to a business owner who has not put plenty of his/her own money into the business. This is logical, if the business owner lacks the confidence to invest, then why should a bank want to invest?

It might be an idea for shareholders to place a similar requirement on applicants to be senior managers in a listed company. Invest x% of your existing personal wealth in the shares of the company before taking the job. Unfortunately, most shares are held by institutions who are incredibly passive when it comes to tackling excessive boardroom pay.

High pay in the public sector is a slightly different issue.

The public sector is often effectively a closed shop, with top jobs generally going to insiders in the public sector. Yet we are told pay must be comparable to the private sector as they are trying to recruit the same people - they are not. In addition, they are a monopoly supplier of services and are largely only responsible for implementation of strategy set by elected politicians. The "virtual council" model being looked at in Suffolk is an interesting way of trying to reduce the cost of delivering council servies, no wonder the unions aren't keen.

61. At 10:26am on 24 Sep 2010, TSArthur

Hi - I agree with a lot of what you say. Particularly I was very uncomfortable with the way in which GP pay nearly doubled at the same time as they actually did less for patients - eg. out of hours. I was also aghast at the way the bill was suddenly dropped on the NHS, creating a mini melt down in the finances.

All the same I don't think a registrar is a fair comparator for a GP and nurses certainly are not. If you accept that general practice is a medical specialty in it's own right then the comparator grade is consultants.

I would also stick by the point I make about double standards. Under tory philosophy, market forces in the labour market, the need to 'reward the best talent,' the need to pay massive bonusses to motivate etc etc are fully accepted - but apparently not for any one directly employed by the government. (Indirectly paid by the tax payer - eg construction companies, drug companies - is apparently OK again)

Don't forget the tories are about to put control of £80bn (!) of NHS money into the hands of GPs - self employed clinicians with no management, administrative or financial credentials. Now that really doesn't fill me with confidence.

#60 jr4412

That is a very good point. So the government could offset the cost of Pickles' need for a juggernaut by providing little Gideon Osbourne a Smart car. Not very appropriately named for him but sized for his ability at least.

56. At 10:05am on 24 Sep 2010, eye-wish wrote:
#54 W N

It's interesting to me that someone, like Eric Pickles, who shows signs of a life of over endulgence, should be putting the case for cuts.

Surely the first cut he must consider is his food intake, then we could take him seriously.

-----------------------

That would be a fattist comment surely? repeat after me, I must not be ist I must not be ist.

What and how he chooses to indulge himself in his personal life is entirely irrelevant unless he happens to take over the health department or start lecturing the rest of the population on the dangers of obesity. I doubt either of these is very likely, we are done with nanny state I understand. So long as he takes personal responsibility for his own choices, it is no one elses business.

The comments on his selection of ministerial car and it's cost compared to his predecessor are far more relevant if that is the case - increasing cost to his department for his expenditure whilst lecturing about cutting costs to everyone else would of course be entirely hypocritical and thus should be exposed fully.

The esteemed Mr Pickles would appear to be a prime exemplar of that age old saw "don't do as I do, do as I say".

His other "great" innovation is to do away with the NAO. Why? There one has a body with no vested interests other than seeing where the money is spent, and for whose benefit.

What we now have is a competition between the large accountantcy firms to see who can provide their "services", for a profit of course, involving, as it will, lots of tete-a-tetes with the departmental decision makers et al over drinks etc.

Having worked for a blue chip, I know how these audits work. Sure, if they find blatant illegality, they will report it. However, where the issue is more opaque, one sees the "dance of the accountant" in all its splendour. Lots of euphemisms and hints about how things could be "tidied up".

For, let us not forget, it is not in the interest of the auditing accountant to upset his client by hauling his backside over the coals for every little misdemeanour, or questionable expenditure. After all, the larger the client, the larger the fee (very useful in this time of financial retrenchment), and they don't come much larger (or prestigious) than a government department.

I wonder how many friends Mr Pickles has amongst the large accountancy firms?

Good grief, have just seen what they gov is planning on cutting. Surely they can't be serious?

They want to get rid of Visit Britain? Yet they believe that inbound tourism is vital to our economy? Who on earth is going to promote this country if not Visit Britain?

They want to get rid of the Environment Agency? Just like that? Do they really think that this agency is of no benefit whatsoever?

If proof were needed that the likes of Pickles are going to far with cuts, this is surely it.

#67 W N

His over indulgence show a lack of credibility in judging the need for cuts. If he can't look in the mirrow and see there is a need to cut out waste, how will he do it when looking at the accounts?

His first action in multiplying the cost of his ministerial car, as you say is a sign of lack of judgement.

Of course he will be expecting the rest of us to shoulder the effects not himself, which just makes the phrase, "We're all in this together" sound a little hollow, doesn't it.

eye-wish #66.

:-)


PaulRM #68.

"His [Eric Pickles] other "great" innovation is to do away with the NAO. Why? There one has a body with no vested interests other than seeing where the money is spent, and for whose benefit."

now, now, we wouldn't want to be able to hold our government to account, would we?

seriously though, you make an important point here. just when we need greater transparency and accountability (as demonstrated by the MPs expenses scandal, the BAE Saudi bribes case, and numerous others), the new 'people friendly' administration appears to work hard to increase the scope for graft. 'Animal Farm' and all that, methinks.

#56 E-W

Surely you are not having a dig at Mr Pickles 'stature' are you?

I'm sure he's extremely experienced at making cuts:

Roast beef, pork and lamb spring to mind!!

:-P

#22 And I bet John Denham called his Prius "Ethelred".

There are some pretty daft comments here from people clearly desperate to find fault for purely tribal reasons. He has to have a car. He isn't allowed to use it a lot of the time (which is overdoing it tbh I want to see these guys working not walking). It's British not Japanese. And... where did yo get the £70k figure from? Unless you're including the cost of armouring it, extras etc - price is about £50k normally.

The fact is that a "peace pod" being spent by civil servants on themselves at a time of austerity id a disgrace and Pickles is quite right to be angry. For those of you who are trying desperately to justify it, ask yourselves how it would feel if it were your beloved Labour ministers doing the same thing. And then note that it would have been they who signed off on this and other items like it. That is not providing jobs it is making a feather bed when people in the private sector are working in conditions that are increasingly like battery chickens.

#3
I understand "structural deficit" to be that part of an annual deficit in public spending which is "long-term" rather than the shorter term "cyclical deficit" which results from an economy performing at a low level. Because it is long-term and will not automatically disappear when the economy picks up it needs govt action to deal with it. I think that of the total annual deficit of £150bn roughly two thirds is structural.
#4 I do not think that the govt is attempting to put right 15 years of overspending in just 5 years. This implies that debt will be repaid whereas what the govt plans to do is reduce the overspending over the next 4 years in order to eliminate the structural deficit by the time of the next election in 2015. So overspending will continue as eliminating it in one year would be too painful.

eye-wish @ numerous

A maximum wage of £150,000 would be an unprecedented (in the UK at least)act of economic vandalism.

Most financial markets would move from London. At the moment financial services contribute over 60 billion pounds in tax to the UK economy. Not all would be lost, but a sizable proportion would be.

Many legal, accountancy, management consulting, and IT firms would follow them.

The effect would be multiplied throughout the UK economy.

No multinational's head-office would be based in the UK.

A large sign would go up: "Closed for business. The Politics of Envy now!" Inward investment would be deterred. Capital would flee the country. Interest rates would rise and the UK would default on its debts.

The UK would become a low-skilled, low wage economy.

"Popular culture" would be destroyed. The Premier League would operate at the standard of League 2. No popular musicians would live in the UK. No Simon Cowell.

Apart from the last point it's not exactly a good idea. Is it?

Sounds good, a catchweight contest between Eric 'The Mauler' Pickles and Ian 'Wont take No for an Answer' Duncan Smith. Three falls or a submission for a winner! A case for live TV coverage if you ask me.
Regards, etc.

johnharris66 #75.

""Popular culture" would be destroyed. The Premier League would operate at the standard of League 2. No popular musicians would live in the UK. No Simon Cowell."

my heart bleeds.

the UK's lacksdaisical approach to reforming international finance and to cooperating with our EU partners is but one of the reasons why transnational capital has all of us over a barrel; perhaps a deliberate turning away from the politics of greed (and no, that does not imply envy) would be a solid first step to rectify the problems caused by unfettered capitalism, and since the UK is a major player in this 'web of deceit', it could help bring about real change -- the sort of change the people would benefit from.

AS71 @ 64

Silly pay for the top bods is harder to tackle in the private sector, yes (although I'd hope we can get our heads around measures, either regulatory or via taxation, to address the bank bonus issue). For the more general problem, shareholders need to wake up. Wonder who they are, the shareholders?

Good one, this, for flushing out the tribals of either side.

£70k gets you a Peace Pod for the staff or a Jag for Pickles.

If you're livid about the Pod but not about the Jag, you're a tory tribal. If you're livid about the Jag but not the Pod, you're a lab tribal. If you're livid about both, you're a big spoilsport. Bit of a party pooper.

Me? I'm happy. Good for the staff to have a Peace Pod (wish I had one), good for Eric to have a Jag (although not ditto since I find them rather golf club). I have an old Citroen - running very nicely thank you.

I notice that some of the previous comments refer to the situation in Ireland and imply that Eric Pickles's policies and plans could lead to a similar situation here. However I have been reading that Ireland's austerity has been somewhat less pronounced than many thought on notayesmanseconomics blog.
"As more information has been released about matters such as the Croke Park Agreement where in effect Irish public servants were promised that austerity would be temporary one has to now question as to how austere Ireland’s plans actually are."
As ever politicians say one thing and do another.
https://notayesmanseconomics.wordpress.com

70. At 11:15am on 24 Sep 2010, eye-wish wrote:
#67 W N

His over indulgence show a lack of credibility in judging the need for cuts. If he can't look in the mirrow and see there is a need to cut out waste, how will he do it when looking at the accounts?

His first action in multiplying the cost of his ministerial car, as you say is a sign of lack of judgement.

Of course he will be expecting the rest of us to shoulder the effects not himself, which just makes the phrase, "We're all in this together" sound a little hollow, doesn't it.

==================

Why the fascination with his physical appearance, it is really irrelevant, you focus is making me sound like a Pickles apologist which is making my skin crawl - he is the face of the unacceptable nasty party brand of Conservatism and a particularly odious example of it.

That Mr Pickles has been amongst the first ministers to make substantial cuts and changes in line with his political philosphy is evidence enough to show your point is incorrect. Tackle ball not the man.

The issue to take with Eric Pickles is that he is ideologically driven and therefore in making changes and cuts is entirely likely to over do it and make a hash of it. Outsourcing the NAO to private practice is a potential disaster driven solely by ideology and inevitably is open to the csuspicion that it is solely quid pro quo for the large donations of money and services in kind made by the big accounancy practices to the Conservative Party during the time Mr Pickles was Chairman of the party.

Since the accountancy and audit profession has singularly failed to prevent any of the main frauds or company collapses, contributed to the obvious dodgy counting that suggests PFI is cheaper than other funding alternatives and undervalued those contracts such that a extremely profitable secondary market was generated.
It also belies that where in some areas this privatise audit approach has been taken already under the last government - e.g. in some NHS trusts, the results have been poor with higher costs and rapid increases in the salaries of previously state employees now private contractors yet still solely taking money from the public purse.
Replacing lost private sector income by taking on public spending to maintain profits is not a good reason to privatise the audit function.

We're all in it together is just a cliched slogan, and like all such cliches is hollow to begin with no matter who spouts it, you can read what you like into it.
You could take it that already Mr Pickles has taken a 5% salary cut and thus is certainly in it with us.
Or
You could also take the view that because the effect of that is just decideing whether to have caviar on toast or smoked salmon on toast on his salary whilst an equivalent cut for someone less well off would be choosing between having toast or not having toast - clearly different and therefore he is not in it with us.
It doesn't really move any discussion forward any to argue around what a slogan means.

Few can be naive enough to think everyone is going to be affected to the same extent with the same choices as a result. You should rejoice that there is a coalition to restrain and mitigate some of these cuts which would have been harder, faster and much less balanced (the threshold rise for example will help some lower paid which certainly was not gong to happen with a Conservative only government).

Perhaps had previously Labour ministers not let their departments get carried away with such luxuries as a peace pod then Mr Pickles would have less obvious examples to use when trying to justify what he is cutting. It is easy to throw out the peace pod example to highlight waste but if there was not such waste to begin with then he would have a harder time finding examples to justify his ideological based cuts.
Not easy to justify cuts when the only example available is say cutting bus passes for the elderly as the most wasteful spending to be cut? Very different if Labour had avoid providing so many easy examples from it's time in office.

75 johnharris66

I agree, it is for the owners of a business to decide how much their employees are worth paying, not government.

The role of government should be to position the UK as one of the best places in the world to do business. This requires competitive tax rates (corporate and individual) and a clear message that the UK is open for business and that entrepreneurs will be warmly welcomed.

I would like to see a minimum work requirement enforced on those who are able to work and claim benefits though. Divide benefits by 90% of minimum wage say (capped at 35 hours per week) and make this a mandatory requirement for continuing to receive benefits. Work could be conducted for registered charities or public bodies, with time off to attend job inerviews etc.

#78 Saga

The big problem with the shareholder perspective is that they aren't really bothered about remuneration unless the company starts losing money - then they are acutely aware!

I agree that some salaries are extreme - the issue is that if you reduced that salary and split the savings amongst the shareholders how much would they gain? less than 1 penny each I would reckon. This means that they never really care how much the top man earns as long as he makes profit

I'm not saying this is morally right - but it's just how it works, shareholders aren't bothered as long as the ship is running

I would say that large corporations have a duty to pay sensible remunerations, and I think that by and large most outside of banking/financial services do. I used to work for one of the largest telecoms providers in the world (Gordon Brown was famous for throwing them at walls!! allegedly, ahem) and the main man imposed a travel clampdown when the recession hit (ie no travel unless vital for business) and absolutely everyone flew economy class without exception

I see the problem here being more tied with high risk/high gain businesses like financial services, but herein lies the inherent problem that they always go where they can make the most money. If you take away that then they will relocate. This doesn't bother me personally but they contribute a massive amount to the exchequer each year, which does matter to us all - whether we like it or not

77. jr4412

the UK's lacksdaisical approach to reforming international finance and to cooperating with our EU partners is but one of the reasons why transnational capital has all of us over a barrel

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Our EU "partners" would love to undermine London's position as Europe's premier financial centre, as it would benefit Frankfurt and Paris.

You seem to be suggesting that we bite the pillow rather than putting up a fight?

Whistling @ 67 wrote:
That would be a fattist comment surely?

>>

This doesn't work in writing, but ...

Reminds me of the Jimmy Carr gag. A large woman comes up to him after the show and says, 'I didn't like your jokes about overweight people. I think you're fattist.' To which Jimmy relies, 'No, I think you're fattest.'

Nigel Lawson made cuts in public spending and subsequently lost a lot of weight. Perhaps the two are connected, but I doubt it.

AS71 @ 82 wrote:
The role of government should be to position the UK as one of the best places in the world to do business. This requires competitive tax rates (corporate and individual)

>>

Vindictively high tax rates may well affect investment decisions, but provided taxes are within a sensible range, they aren't a big factor. Much more significant is the skill level of potential employees. No company would relocate to a country which could not meet its skills requirements, however low the tax rates were. This is why few multinationals have their head office in Montenegro, despite their corporate and personal tax rates of 9% and 15% respectively. Transport and communications infrastructure are also a key factor.

johnharris66 @ thought provoking arguments,
Certainly made me think. While not necessarily in the 'eye wash' camp, I don't think I could swallow your argument either.
Thoughts provoked went as follows. Financial sector contributes 60 bn pa Tax. Wonderful! Rolls Roces all round - well, at least for some. Every 10 -12 years or so money making machine splutters to a halt. Cue hundreds of bilions of vital support to stop armageddon etc - deficit and debt mushrooms. Send bill to general taxpayer, benefit receiver, pensioner etc. Overall result - all those 60 bns against massive cost of breakdown - about even.
Me, I'm all for the quiet life, cut out the middle man. Let the financial sector sling their hook. I'm not even sure they all would and I'm certain I could do without the stress they cause. Might even find a better way of making a living in the modern world without being over reliant on the financial sector and low wage service industries. Many of the countries who weathered the financial storm well weren't financial centres so it doesn't seem to be a pre-requisite for success. Of course the other alternative is that they decide to stay but play nicely in future. Would we believe them?

AS71 #84.

"You seem to be suggesting that we bite the pillow rather than putting up a fight?"

not at all, if you cared to read on beyond the part of my post which you quoted, you'd see my suggestion.

82. At 12:48pm on 24 Sep 2010, AS71 wrote:
75 johnharris66

I agree, it is for the owners of a business to decide how much their employees are worth paying, not government.

The role of government should be to position the UK as one of the best places in the world to do business. This requires competitive tax rates (corporate and individual) and a clear message that the UK is open for business and that entrepreneurs will be warmly welcomed.
==============================

I would agree with that IF the 'business'...

(a) is not underwritten by the availability of government bailouts when they take dangerous risks

and

(b) the security of other citizens is not damaged by the actions of the business.

Unlike proper business - for example the thousands of small firms making real products/services - neither of those two provisos apply to the city of london spiv sector. Therefore I think government has every right to intervene.

If you don't like it then exercise your right to go elsewhere and destroy their economy next time round. I don't think the disunited kingdom can afford the damage for the small amount you actually contribute.

85. pdavies65

Like the joke :-)

I note that all the quangos being abolished are in England and Wales; I suspect that many/most of them are duplicated in Scotland.

A good way to save lots of money is to abolish all the wasteful duplication of government departments and other state bodies in Scotland.
(this is a personal opinion)

#86 PD

I agree but I think that the transport and infrastructure plays a massive part in this. Ireland attracted some huge business with their 10% corporation tax (Intel being one) but they wouldn't have gone there if the taxation had been 30% - they would have looked elsewhere

I think it's a balance, lower taxation with good communications and travel links. The UK has excellent travel and modern infrastructure plus a relatively stable government. Place like Montenegro don't have these - they could drop taxation to 2% and big business wouldn't go

#87 idont...

I still think that if we weren't a financial capital we would have been hit just as hard. Just because the institutions aren't based in a country doesn't mean you are invulnerable. The biggest problem we had was with RBS/NR lending too much and buying bad debt, if they didn't buy it from a broker in London they would have bought it from a broker in New York etc. On balance I would rather have the 60bn tax and take the financial hit than not have the 60bn and still have to bail the banks, there are many countries (ie Ireland) that aren't financial capitals and they STILL had to bail their banks, because they bought dodgy instruments via somewhere else

Sad but true

@PD

Giggle of the day award !! made me chuckle....

86 pdavies65

Vindictively high tax rates may well affect investment decisions, but provided taxes are within a sensible range, they aren't a big factor. Much more significant is the skill level of potential employees. No company would relocate to a country which could not meet its skills requirements, however low the tax rates were. This is why few multinationals have their head office in Montenegro, despite their corporate and personal tax rates of 9% and 15% respectively. Transport and communications infrastructure are also a key factor.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

You are right, however, there are plenty of countries who meet the criteria of skilled workforce, good infrastructure etc. Assuming a large corporation has drawn up a shortlist of such places, tax then can become a serious issue. Why else have firms been relocating their HQ from UK?

88 jr4412

AS71 #84.

"You seem to be suggesting that we bite the pillow rather than putting up a fight?"

not at all, if you cared to read on beyond the part of my post which you quoted, you'd see my suggestion

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

Do you want to expand on your suggestion?

Reasons to be hopeful.
I think the chill winds of reality are blowing through the Coalition. They may decide to err on the side of caution when it actually comes down to the real cutting. Perhaps I'm being over optimistic but I'm not sure that they're sure they've won the argument on cuts. Many of their statements seem contradictory. We must cut big v we're not going to cut that much more than Labour. People at the top grab too much for themselves v those at the top are valuable and the market decides their pay. Banks must be controlled v they'll leave if regulation is too tight. Sounds almost like they might be preparing for an each way bet in case the favourite doesn't romp home. After all Germany, ruled by the ice queen of austerity, even Germany introduced a massive state subsidised scheme to protect employment. Seems to be working quite well too.
Have they got the jitters? I would in their uncertain position. It's a very big bet.

Perhaps Pickles has cancelled the alledged CT revaluation because he is the size of a house and does not want to attract anymore personal taxation ?

89 jon112dkUK

Unlike proper business - for example the thousands of small firms making real products/services - neither of those two provisos apply to the city of london spiv sector. Therefore I think government has every right to intervene.

If you don't like it then exercise your right to go elsewhere and destroy their economy next time round. I don't think the disunited kingdom can afford the damage for the small amount you actually contribute.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

See 75, the city and services that rely on it make up a massive proportion of UK's tax take. If they left the country en-masse, the UK economy would collapse, as we are too heavily depndent on this sector.

78. At 12:14pm on 24 Sep 2010, sagamix wrote:
...Wonder who they are, the shareholders?

I'm a shareholder. And I assure you that none of the Boards of the companies in which I hold shares give a toss what I think.

jon112uk wrote:
"If you don't like it then exercise your right to go elsewhere and destroy their economy next time round. I don't think the disunited kingdom can afford the damage for the small amount you actually contribute."

A trifle personal, don't you think?

I try to contribute, in my own (very) small way, to the philosophical, cultural, and artistic life of the UK. Live, that is, not just behind a computer screen.