Now it's cuts of 40 per cent

[Sara Jevo]

The UK Government has told its departments to prepare plans for cuts of 40 per cent in spending.

See: BBC (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/10500081.stm)

Is the country really in such a financial pickle - or is this the true ideology of the Tories shining through as they compete to see who can take the biggest axe to public services?

[Bobinovich]

Hmmm, a little from column A and a little from column B :roll:

[NickInTheNorth]

I would guess that as the government is looking for an overall cut of 25% it is reasonable for them to ask each department to produce plans for upto 40% cuts.

From that they can then decide which cuts they wish to make from each department to meet the overall target of an average of 25%.

Some may get the whole 40%, others may only be cut by 5%-10%

Guess we need to wait for october...

[davem]

Its an old trick, tell people it'll be terrible, then when its just awful - sighs of relief! - tried and tested by the Iron Lady, oh and of course there is no alternative and it's someone else s fault!
DeJa Vu or what?

[ducati]

oh and of course there is no alternative and it's someone else s fault!


There isn't, and it is :roll:

[dafi]

I think NickInTheNorth has it about right!! this is just a bit of spin to make the real picture look not so bad later.

Its little wonder that labour didnt want to get re elected!!!

[Anfield]

If the Tories had the courage to stop paying Child Benefits to all but the most needy, we would not need to make the predicted savage cuts to public services.
It is ridiculous that people on high salaries are able to claim this money.

[NickInTheNorth]

As was pointed out in the budget they thought about that but decided not to go down that route as the cost of bureaucracy to do so would probably be more than the saving.

However why they didn't just scrap the child benefit altogether add the amount of the child benefit onto the child tax credit I don't know.

As so often the government does not do the obvious :D

[Anfield]

We could wait till the Public Srvice cuts are completed and then scrap Child Benefits as by then the costs of bureaucracy will have been reduced!

[cazmanian_minx]

My brother is incredibly worried for himself and his team - he's a senior civil servant in the government's advertising department. There's a complete ban on any government advertising unless it's authorised by the cabinet office and he has 700 people sitting around with nothing to do.

[Anfield]

My brother is incredibly worried for himself and his team - he's a senior civil servant in the government's advertising department. There's a complete ban on any government advertising unless it's authorised by the cabinet office and he has 700 people sitting around with nothing to do.

Why does the Government need 700 people to handle propaganda, sorry, advertising?

[cazmanian_minx]

Why does the Government need 700 people to handle propaganda, sorry, advertising?

Pass! It's not all propaganda stuff though, they put out all the public information adverts - talk to Frank, stop smoking, improve your skills, catch it bin it kill it etc. etc. They're not allowed to do anything party political, that has to be funded by the parties themselves and put through private agencies rather than the civil service department.

[badger]

Pass! It's not all propaganda stuff though, they put out all the public information adverts - talk to Frank, stop smoking, improve your skills, catch it bin it kill it etc. etc. They're not allowed to do anything party political, that has to be funded by the parties themselves and put through private agencies rather than the civil service department.

Wouldn't wish job loss on anyone but 700 for Govt. advertising is pretty excessive as so much of it is quite unnecessary. Even 70 seems a lot to me. If this amount of over-staffing is replicated across the public sector it shouldn't be too difficult to make some pretty drastic cuts.

They could start with Tony Blair's security - he's quite wealthy enough to pay for that himself.

Then there are all those "advisers" which G. Brown couldn't manage without at No.10. No wonder he found it so hard to make decisions.

[glaikit]

It will be the poor and the vulnerable that will be hit by these cuts and don't kid yourselves that it'll be anything other.
Tories back in power..........don't you just love it.......not. It's all their rich banker friends that got us into this mess in the first place and I think they've all still got jobs and bonuses in the pipeline. And yes, I am generalising but I lived through the Iron Lady and I'm praying that Mr Cameron is not of the same ilk.

Milk snatcher[evil]

[bagpuss]

Hate to say this but it isn't Dave or Nick we have to worry about. George Osborne is the man making the decisions and he's never had to do a day's work in his life- he belongs to the real upper class twit brigade, and has never actually had to go through the whole job application/interview stage.

On his hit list may be_
means test the winter fuel payment to pensioners
means test child benefit
reduce spending on the NHS (yes we are talking desk jobs- but eventually they will hurt)
remove bus passes

oh and watch out for VAT- which might rise considerably over the next five years- 20% is only the start. apply it to food and put the whole rate on energy bills, and it might not be a very pleasant experience.

and for those of you in Caithness who've got a house on the market- watch out for Capital Gains Tax- applied to selling a first home