OK we are in the beginings of a very serious economic crisis. Cuts in taxpayer funded expenditure need to be made. We are in the equivalent situation to the end of the second world war economically. We are broke and the victims of appalling economic mismanagment by New Labour on top of the legacy of the wholesale destruction of our industrial base by Thatcher.
So what would you cut? Here's my suggestions for cuts and changes in priorities.
Trident replacement
Its not necessary and takes funding away from our conventional forces which is sorely required.
Yeah. I think us being a nuclear power is something of a vanity project, really.
ID cards and other database projects that intrude on the law abiding individual.
Yep. Actually, I think I'd take out "law-abiding individual" there - I'd rather see such database projects proposed on their merits, not the solidness of the citizenry they're monitoring.
Cut a lot of the public sector IT projects and bring back in house the development of those essential IT projects. IT specialists individually hired on temp contracts would be cheaper than giving EDS and Fujitsu taxpayers dosh. Too many of these rubbish IT projects seem to be run by private sector organisations.
Well, actually, I'm going to need to disagree here. Sure, the likes of EDS have made out like bandits on government contracts, and they're certainly not blameless. But I think that the real responsibility lies in the procurement and oversight area. I've worked for companies involved in government-related IT, and it is a complete bloody nightmare, with no-one knowing what they really want, and everyone wanting a slice of the pie more for political or expediency reasons than practical ones. If you took the whole thing in-house, I think you'd probably end up with even worse problems.
Close down Dept of Culture Media and Sport and re allocate their functions elsewhere.
*shrug* Can't see that making any difference, unless you're planning to cut their budget in the process...and I think that's not something I'd automatically agree with.
Do not enter into any more PFI projects.
Well, yes, except that's not going to help our finances particularly in the short term. Indeed, it might increase the liabilities - hospitals and schools need building/upgrading/replacing, so it's either done by PFI (jam tomorrow) or we pay up front...
Introduce a local income tax to make local government more responsive.
Oh, I think we should do this anyway. Down with regressive taxes and do as much of it as is feasible on some kind of income-related basis.
Cut back by at least two thirds to three quarters on social engineering type projects and posts. Sack most of the diversity officers as they do nothing but divide human from human.
I'm not sure what you mean by this, though I suspect I know. And, while some of the "diversity" stuff is a waste of money, I suspect that - like social work - we only see the loonier bits, not the good stuff. We need people to foster and encourage cultural integration.
A total cut back on the faff such as real nappy officers, five a day co-ordinators, community development advisers and such like.
I think you'll find a lot of these people actually represent pretty good value. Again, I don't think it's as clear cut a waste of money as you're suggesting.
Introduce a cap on local govt top salaries. Its obscene that we as taxpayers are funding an elite of nonentities such as Sir Robin Wales to the tune of 100k plus. When the current contracts for top jobs are advertised then the replacement posts should be advertised at at least 25% less than their predecessor.
Disagree. By all means institute policies to make sure that we're getting value for money from our people, but we need managers and executives of the right calibre to do this job, which means we need to be able to compete with industry for them. This problem has already been evident in the lower levels, where public sector jobs, after years of pay freezes, caps, and so on, command much lower salaries than equivalent positions elsewhere and the calibre of many of the staff reflects that.
Reduce the layers of management in the public sector.
Yep. See also my post re MOD and staff officers - it's an endemic problem. There's even a word for it: "featherbedding".
Introduce rigorous assessment of programmes such as Sure Start to make sure that those running them are not just box ticking and that they are having a REAL positive impact on peoples lives and are not just providing a living for those members of New Labour's New Old Boy network.
Your agenda's showing a bit
I'd say introduce rigorous assessment of ALL programmes, from Eurofighter down. And do the assessment on an ongoing basis, too, so we can catch "feature creep" and stupid expectations BEFORE they end up costing us money, not after.
Streamline social services. Focus the money where it does the most good.
Utterly disagree. Social services is rather too "streamlined" as it is - case loads are stratospheric, there are serious recruiting problems with social work, management quality is often appalling, resourcing likewise. The last thing the social care network needs is more purse-string tightening. What it needs is good leadership, good management, and some decent support. And some sniper rifles for dealing with populist fuckwits who think it's easy copy to write vituperative and often incorrect rubbish about social workers (No, I'm not one. But I know a man who is).
Introduce Workfare for those unemployed who are fit mentally and physically and without caring responsibilities that cannot be alleviated by such things as childcare provision.
Yes, but again I don't think this is really to do with getting us out of an economic crisis. I do think that some kind of - non-punitive - process for keeping unemployed (and long-term sick, as appropriate) people from disconnecting from society would be a good thing. I'd actually make it voluntary, with incentives, rather than compulsory and quite probably punitive, though some element of compulsion might not be a bad idea.
Reduce the petty enforcement culture that has surrounded the average citizen with jobsworths.
Can't argue with that.
Reduce the current level of economic migration and only allow in those people who are doing jobs where it is difficult to get an employee who is a UK citizen.
So long as that's all it is, that idea has some legs. But the danger is that this is historically the Trojan Horse that the far-right and racist groups use - once you're starting to take people's ethnic origins into account to decide how to deal with them, you're beginning down a slippery slope...we'd need to be REALLY careful about that.
Reduce the amount of Govt PR fluff both local and national. Propaganda sheets such as the late and unlamented 'The Londoner' should be banned.
Dunno what The Londoner is, but this sounds like a self-evidently good idea.
Local and national govt should not do anything that adversely affects budding businesses unless there is a pressing need to do so. This would hopefully see an end to the CPZ's which are killing many small shops and other businesses.
I suspect Agenda here, so I'll reserve comment, save to say that prohibiting "anything that adversely affects budding businesses" sounds like a very good way of hamstringing an organisation. Needs to be more specific.
Stop the waste of money funding separatist groups religious and racilal and otherwise and institute a policy of multiracialism and abandon multiculturalism. Multiculturalism as practiced by many of the heirs of the 60's new left has failed and has not brought people together but has divided them. Overt discrimination of course needs to be tackled but there are too many resources wasted in this field to no benefit to either our minorities and our majority peoples.
This worries me. A lot of what is seen as wasted money "funding separatist groups" is nothing of the sort. So I'd be suspicious of what's really behind this.
Stop the privatisation of overseas focus such aid only on humanitarian aid in emergencies and only give to and co operate with such groups as prove to accept the progressive values of gender, religious, sexual and racial equality.
No.
That's as bad as US agencies deciding it's only going to give money to for AIDS assistance to people who practice abstention. We either give the aid or we don't - we don't start hedging it around with all kinds of ideological bollocks, beyond what we need to do to make sure it doesn't end up in the Swiss bank account of some dictator.
And words like "progressive" make my blood run cold.
Stop universal child benefit and make it available only to main carers earning under 18k..
*shrug*
I'm sure other people could think of more that could be cut
Yeah, lots
