'Do you support public spending cuts?' poll discussion

hayleythedaisy

I think there are other areas to cut from before public services are effected. As others have mentioned, the charities overseas, the benefit system, and the government themselves all cost far too much at present to name a few.
And I would also compare it to personal budgetting... if I had a deficit of wages and spent £15 a week on charity, that would be first to go... if I then spent another £15 a week bailing out my friend who didn't work that would be second to go.... and if I spent £15 a week paying my boss that would be next! If that wasn't enough, then I would consider what else I could cut!

chrissie55

It's not a trim or a haircut that the ConDems are proposing, but SCALPING the Welfare State, starting by attacking people with disabilities, & blaming unemployed people for unemployment. Without regulation, the 'free' market will always make a big mess. Privatisation sounds so efficient, till you consider the state of our taxpayer-subsidised railway network......

ScarletBea

I think the people that voted No think that money falls from the sky.... indefinitely...

astralbee

I have worked in the public sector for 17 years now - for the DWP, Inland Revenue, and the NHS. Nobody can deny that there is tremendous wastage everywhere you look in the public sector.

The DWP have some staff sat idle because their jobs are easy and go unchecked, meanwhile other staff are being overworked to the point that they go off on long-term-sick with stress during which time the tax payer pays for them not to be at work. Political correctness has driven the prescription of benefits to the point where the government are scared to challenge entitlement on medical or residency grounds for fear of reprisal from disability and ethnic action groups, so millions are paid out to persons who actually have no legal recourse to public funds. A few years ago they installed expensive colour laser printers around the country solely to print giro cheques in black ink only. Recently one department I know dumped thousands of pounds worth of printer paper into a skip because they bought the wrong weight for their printers and could not send it back.

Inland Revenue have one wing of the organisation taking money off people, and another (the Tax Credit Office) giving it back.

The NHS has people on the payroll simply to tell us all to eat more fruit and veg. It puts expensive computer equipment on the desks of mobile nurses who are at their desks for about an hour a day and prefer to write things down anyway. Hospitals don't just have managers, they have 'executive directors' who command massive salaries and massive cars. Some of these directors are also "non-executive" and get almost as many benefits for showing up to a couple of meetings per month.

Since government departments were made responsible for their own budgets in the 1980s in an attempt to make them more competetive, the reality is that EVERY department goes on a wild spending spree every March to use up any budget saved because if they don't use it, it gets cut; and it is this culture which has spiralled out of control.

Cuts are needed, but there shouldnt be any need for job losses when there is so much wastage on goods and top heavy senior management. Sorry if you disagree, but I'm only reporting what I have seen with my own eyes.

zierisaver

2.6 million people in the UK are on incapacity benefit - roughly 1 in 20 of the population. In Scotland this jumps to more than 1 in 10. Can anyone really say that this accurately reflects the state of health in this country? It's a joke and something's got to give. It's ok blaming "the bankers" for the state of the economy, but that only reflects a tiny part of the problem.

For me a huge problem in this country is that so many people are unprepared to work. It angers me so much and effects everyone - not only taxpayers, but also genuine claimants.

Something has to give, and has to give quickly, or this country will go to the dogs.

angelizz

Those of you on here screaming "tax the rich, tax the rich" really don't understand economics do you? There is already a 50% tax on those earning over £150,000 a year. Don't you think that is pretty high already? If you keep on like this then it will destroy people's ambition, remove the rewards and what will spur entrepreneurs to make money in this country?

Other than the financial sector, what does this country really forge ahead on, from an economic point of view? Yes, the 'bankers' nearly brought the entire banking system crashing down, but do you know that 25% of the entire corporation tax in this country comes from the Square Mile of the City of London? What do you think pays for the public services in this country? Keep screaming about taking money off the banks and they will move abroad, taking with them the huge amount of tax that we levy on them.

Money has been wasted left right and centre in the public sector. Did you know that the British Potato Council had a budget under the Labour Govt of £6.5m last year? To encourage us to eat potatoes????

Yes, the merchant bankers hold a lot of blame for the current problems with the economy, but don't be blind to the other failures of the Labour Govt.

dolly47

CapricornLass wrote: »

TR8, could I give you a couple of facts regarding civil servants pay and pensions?

1. Did you realise that almost 2/3rd of all the civil servants in the country earn less than £25K? And that 48% earn less than £18K? The public sector pensions only pay out 1/80 for each year of employment, and their members have to pay contributions into that, sometimes as much as 6%. I let you do the maths, but the results are hardly gold plated, are they, even if you complete 40 years. And most people have less years service than that.

2. The main public sector pension scheme was overhauled five years ago to ensure that it was affordable, and that it would continue to be so in the next fifty years. Who said the final results were affordable? HM Treasury.

3. What about all of the unpaid/evaded tax - mainly by the likes of David Cameron's millionaire cronies? The total outstanding would make a HUGE dent in the national debt - if it didn't clear it altogether. (The main reason is that the Inland Revenue has shed its staff, so it hasn't enough people to collect it - nor, for that matter, to sort out the current mess that the new computer system has put them into.)

4. This is the one that I really would like an answer for. Could you please explain why civil servants are to be singled out for having their pensions capped? i seem to remember a certain person retiring from RBS on £750k pension A YEAR after almost bring the bank to its knees and which civil servants (as taxpayers) had to bail out. Why should he and his ilk be protected?

The Local Government Pension Scheme is always quoted when referring to unsustainable gold plated pensions but anyone checking the facts will discover those figures are based on the premis that all its members retire at once. Unlike some, not only do we contribute to the scheme but also the majority of staff do not have large payouts, unlike senior management.
As a Local Government Officer can I point out that not only have we had payrises of less than 2% for a number of years the majority of us are not eliglble for bonuses or overtime, the most we have ever recieved in our Authority is an hours flexitime credit towards Xmas lunch. I agree that there need to be cuts, preferably in those high paid executives who do have gold plated pensions, but not the blanket cuts Local Authorities are planning because of forcast budget cuts . What will happen when education suffers for lack of teaching staff, hospitals have massive waiting lists due to lack of nursing staff or another child dies due to lack of social workers. This government is setting up local authorities to fail.
Just one last point thousands of workers in the private sector have jobs that rely on contracts from Local Authorities so if the councils stop spending what do they think will happen to their jobs?

Dave80

As a public sector worker I agree with comments from fellow public sector workers there does tend to be some waste and some cuts are needed, which are currently happening at my place of work and this does involve front line services. The majority of public sector workers don't get gold plated pensions even for the hefty contributions you have to make each month, we don't get anywhere near the good deal that MP's get, we actually have to turn up to work and work hard, we don't just get paid in a day what the average person earns in a week for purely just turning up, nor do we get paid expenses for having a second home closer to our place of work...maybe Mr Cameron should look closer to home.

I also can not understand the need use £12million pounds of taxpayers money to fund the Pope's tour, what will his visit actually achieve? Whereas £12million pounds against the nations debt would actually achieve something!

The red tape and restrictions placed on us by European policy must cost millions surely there are big savings to be made here, mind you if you try and stand up to anything you are branded a racist, politically incorrect or breach someone's human rights.

angiebhfx

fordy wrote: »

Cuts should be carefully applied to the benefits sector.

Start with alcoholics and drug addicts who are claiming sick benefits to avoid work. They should have all the help they need to break the cycle of addiction, but no way should that addiction be funded by benefits.

16 year olds who aren't in education or already working should be put to work in an "home guard" of sorts. National service if you want to call it that, they will be in PAID EMPLOYMENT, paying tax and NI back into the state, they won't be allowed to roam the streets causing chaos and committing crime.

If you aren't working and not REALLY trying to get a job, you will have to work in the community for your benefits.

If someone is genuinely sick and incapable they should be left as they are, not persecuted by some idiot looking to make a name for themselves.

I know its been said before and it will be said again but its simple common sense.

How many millions could be saved by doing this? All the parties have attempted this over the years with no real success. Now there is a damn good reason to do it properly and make it work. Too much money is wasted on the benefits sector when it comes to unemployment.

I am gobsmaked, I will say no more

angiebhfx

srtman wrote: »

Over the years the public sector has employed to many people to such a degree that there is more money going out (salaries, pensions etc) than what is coming in(taxes). I tend to compare it to household expediture eg if your wage doesnt cover all the bills you are in trouble so you have to make sacrifices. Cut back on spending, go out less etc etc

A countries economy can not and should not be compared to a household budget, it just isn't the same.