Government borrowing up again

Thrugelmir

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Interesting though, there has apparently been an increase of private companies taking over public sector jobs. So basically, the public sector offering contracts to private companies. So this reduces the public sector head count, increases jobs in the private sector, but decreases the security for the employee, also increasing tax credits. Many of these ex public sector jobs are now, (again, apparently) carried out by self employed people / those on zero hour contracts working for the private sector.

Google Next Generation Shared Services Strategy.
Been in progress for some time now. BIS is working through the organisations under it's umbrella. DEFRA, DWP, Ministry of Justice, the UK Research Councils, Green Bank, Forestry Commission, Land Registry for example.

There's plenty of redundancies as well. In the main very attractive Voluntary Exit schemes. In the short term redundancy payments are costing money. Longer term the savings will come in reduced public sector pension payments. Many people are jumping at the redundancy offers. As can be up to 24 months salary depending on length of service. A rather short term view in my personal opinion. As overall remuneration packages in the private sector won't be as good.

michaels

Thrugelmir wrote: »

The rapid increase in personal allowance is now appearing an expensive mistake. In terms of lost income tax revenue. Difficult to balance popularity with austerity.

Expensive sure; whether or not a mistake is surely a political judgement. I personally suspect there are better ways of buying votes but economic theory wise if makes a lot of sense.

I fear the benefits bill issue is to a large extent down to the house building (lack of) policy diaster area. Too few houses means hosuing costs are bifd up and thus the low paid need extra benefits. Anywhere that house prices are above faeming land value plus build cost is clear evidnece of market failure in this case paid for to a large extent by the tax payer.

Thrugelmir

michaels wrote: »

Expensive sure; whether or not a mistake is surely a political judgement.

Not just political it's financial. The money has to come from somewhere. Ultimately market forces will always win. Irrespective of any one lever pulled.

Six months into the current fiscal year. The borrowing figures aren't looking particularly healthy. Perhaps we are finally seeing the reality as the fog of intervention lifts.

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Google Next Generation Shared Services Strategy.
Been in progress for some time now. BIS is working through the organisations under it's umbrella. DEFRA, DWP, Ministry of Justice, the UK Research Councils, Green Bank, Forestry Commission, Land Registry for example.

There's plenty of redundancies as well. In the main very attractive Voluntary Exit schemes. In the short term redundancy payments are costing money. Longer term the savings will come in reduced public sector pension payments. Many people are jumping at the redundancy offers. As can be up to 24 months salary depending on length of service. A rather short term view in my personal opinion. As overall remuneration packages in the private sector won't be as good.

Most of those in my area of the MOJ have taken voluntary redundancy and taken early retirement at the same time and then supplemented their income by taking a stress free part time job as well, perhaps most are now paying no income tax, less NI and VAT, where in their former roles they were?
I have no idea if real savings will be made in the long term, but I`m not sure that up to 10K (since 2010!) 'retired' prison officers now happily drawing an index linked, albeit actuarily reduced pension early was ever going to get Government spending or the deficit down.
With the ongoing problems in many public services now being realised, I cant help but think the austerity measures metered out by George Osborne might have been the mother of all false economies.

wymondham

N1AK wrote: »

You must be new to politics they're already promising tax cuts for 30 million people after the election. I can only assume the reason why it's for after the election is so that they don't have to explain exactly what it is or how it will be funded.

not entirely!


Surely this is the reason we never make any real progress... its nonsensical to offer cuts when you can't afford it. How refreshing it would be if some leader would just say 'hey guys, this is a mess, we can't afford it' but of course this would stop them being elected which takes priority over actually solving problems these days...

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

With the ongoing problems in many public services now being realised, I cant help but think the austerity measures metered out by George Osborne might have been the mother of all false economies.

From a personal viewpoint. The public sector lacks a complete lack of commercial focus. There have been attempts to create Shared Services within the public sector previously, but they've failed to deliver. Not just on financial levels but service levels, quality of output and customer satisfaction. With massive wastage of spend on technology. Transformation isn't always possible.

Tromking

Thrugelmir wrote: »

From a personal viewpoint. The public sector lacks a complete lack of commercial focus. There have been attempts to create Shared Services within the public sector previously, but they've failed to deliver. Not just on financial levels but service levels, quality of output and customer satisfaction. With massive wastage of spend on technology. Transformation isn't always possible.

Your post reads like a right leaning cliche from my viewpoint, however even I would suggest that public sector reform is needed and has happened, but I think we`re further down the line now. The question for the next generation is, do we want quality public services and do we collectively want to pay for them?

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

Your post reads like a right leaning cliche from my viewpoint,

My unusual work background has exposed me to a wide variety of situations and people over the years. As I've seen the good, the bad and the ugly. I would be equally scathing of an under performing private organisation.

Personally I'm not in agreement with the principle of outsourcing shared services. As why should private companies profit from such work. Yet with a commercial hat on. Taxpayers shouldn't subsidise a certain group of individuals. Just because they've opted for public service.

Hopefully in time they'll be an over haul of Central Government which leads to a building of new fit for purpose public sector organisations.

wymondham

Thrugelmir wrote: »

My unusual work background has exposed me to a wide variety of situations and people over the years.

I'm fascinated ... do tell more!!!

ManAtHome

wymondham wrote: »

I'm fascinated ... do tell more!!!

The A Team (knows F All about the aviation industry though).