Tweet
Yesterday's Sunday Times ran another of their fairly regular articles highlighting what they refer to as 'non-jobs' and 'waste' in the public sector. It was a large story – occupying a whole page – but it left me a little cold.
Picking on ridiculous-sounding job titles (and there are certainly some which easily fit that description!) makes for an easy story, but the article made no real effort to go behind the ridicule and seriously discover whether the jobs are wasteful or not.
To pick on just one example of their non-jobs – a "city events and international links officer" - I would have liked to know the answer to questions such as whether the events organised generate additional visits (and therefore spending) in the town or not. Is there, in short a net gain to the local residents? Without asking that sort of question, how can anyone form a balanced judgement?
One of the examples of wasteful expenditure they quote is the refurbishment of offices for the National Audit Office. The cost per head of furnishings certainly looks excessive to me, and the talk of marble flooring and leather sofas makes one wonder about value for money. But for me to make a proper judgement, I'd like to have known how suitable the offices were before the refurbishment - did they, for instance, comply with relevant legislation? Do we expect staff to work in poor conditions, just because they are in the public sector? I'd also have liked to know what the alternatives were, and how much they would have cost.
I would never argue that there isn't waste in the public sector, nor that there are no non-jobs which we could easily do without. It may even be that every single example quoted in the article fits into that category. But there wasn't enough information to reach that conclusion, and it ended up being just another 'bash the public sector' piece. In this case, it's the media leading the charge - but there seem to be plenty of politicans equally happy to seek a quick headline on a simlar basis.
People in Wales working in the public sector are in for a tough time, with jobs likely to go. They deserve to have their situation considered properly and thoughtfully during that process, rather than be subjected to ridicule and abuse purely on the basis of who pays their salaries.
Posts
Under Milk Wood: 70-year anniversary special with Iwan Rheon
-
Dylan Thomas’s beloved radio play, ‘Under Milk Wood’ turned 70 this year –
and to celebrate its anniversary, the timeless masterpiece has been brought
to...
2 hours ago
5 comments:
trouble is John, whilst you conceed that there may be need to cut somewhat in the public services and also agree for the need to have tighter control of budgets (whatever the economic climate) I've never heard of you or Plaid say this (with the exception of Trident).
If you were in Govt how would you save money? Knocking it off Welsh-lanuage things? If not where - health is ringfenced so is education, so where? As a Welsh language supporter, I recon you'd take it from Welsh language things e.g. Federal college, education, arts etc because there'd be no money left from anywhere else like Plaid did with Y Byd ... the 'yes, we support it, but it's not viable argument'. the 'we want a Welsh language bill but we can't afford it'.
Would you have advocated a much bigger public sector had you been in power 5 years ago? How do you decide which jobs are important and which not? What's the criteria?
You always seem to stand up for 'hard working public sector' and everyone will quote those in the public sector on small wages, but you never say, OK, do we really need so and so?
I just recon you'd spend and spend with very little to show for it. You'll make savings in the 'arts' which are only 1% of WAG's budget and there'll be no 'new' money for Welsh-medium school as we're seeing in Cardiff now.
I can't trust you with my money.
"whilst you conceed that there may be need to cut somewhat in the public services and also agree for the need to have tighter control of budgets (whatever the economic climate) I've never heard of you or Plaid say this (with the exception of Trident)."
On the contrary Plaid has demonstrated time and time again that it looks for efficiency and value for money in government, often to the detriment of its own support base.
You mention Y Byd- Plaid didn't deliver the full amount of money because it wasn't viable. A tiny saving but that's the point.
There have been several economic development projects under the responsibility of a Plaid Minister where Ieuan Wyn Jones has turned down a grant or a payment on the basis of it not being value for money.
Plaid loses votes over this efficiency but they do it because it has to be done, you have to be responsible.
The London parties of big cuts have ringfenced health and education- yet you won't allow Plaid to do the same? Ridiculous.
That's the point. Y Byd wasn't viable but then is Communities First? Is any Welsh language project 'viable' - S4C, Theatr Genedlaethol, Welsh-language publishing. The point I'm trying to make is that health and education shouldn't be ring-fenced because all the cuts (that's the 40% os so which isn't Health and Education) will be cut even harder. Those cuts will fall disspropotionately on what socialists/Labour people thing isn't so important i.e. culture - the things which make us different as a nation. Plaid Cymru, the nationalist party, will go along and say, 'well you know boys, these things are all very nice and cuddly, but we have to defend [the waste] in Health because we're following the British agenda which doesn't need to ringfence it's own language and culture because its language and culture (English) is strong enough to thrive without government support'.
So, curtains to Welsh culture so that we can give off freebie/bribes like 'free' perscriptions and make no savings at all to all the waste and replication in Health.
Plaid are in danger of delivering a British nationalist agenda if it carries on and ring fences health which is 35% of WAG's budget and cuts from Heritage which is 1%.
Thanks Plaid. Thanks 'socialists'.
'Plaid loses votes over this efficiency but they do it because it has to be done, you have to be responsible.'
I've yet to see Ieuan Wyn Jones stand up to Carwyn Jones on anything of importance. Labour are dragging out the Mesur Iaith for as long as possible so that Plaid can't get on with other things and won't be able to implement it. They've hood-winked Plaid over the referendum - Plaid have done nothing. There's more delay over the badget cull so as Plaid can't get on with other issues. They've wasted time on Affordable Housing again so that Plaid can't deliver anything else and can't get any credit as it will be too late for any one to benefit before the election.
You've been shafted by Labour and the more you're following in their 'ringfencing Health' agenda the mroe you're forced to cut back on some of the things which make Wales different and interesting and investing in infrastructure projects in transport and IT.
You're doing Labour's bidding for you.
No wonder Carwyn Jones felt cocky enough to totally ignore Ieuan Wyn and Plaid and 'save' Ladnsdown School - he knew you'd do nothing about it and you'd stay in the Coalition. It's like Cynog and Wigley back in 2001 going on and on about 'making the Assembly work' and then in a total moment of madness getting rid of Alun Michael to get Rhodri Morgan who thereafter contniued to put the boot into Plaid Cymru.
Willing idiots.
Anon,
Where to start? So many points! It seems to me that you've decided where Plaid would make cuts to public expenditure and then proceeded to criticise us for the decisions that you've assumed we would take. Let me just make a few points in response.
1. Ring-fence is politician-speak. It's not a word that I tend to use because, unless qualified, it's pretty meaningless. If expenditure on health and education is ring-fenced, that implies that we simply ignore any genuine waste or inefficiency, which would be pretty stupid. What has to be 'ring-fenced' or protected is the services delivered, not the money spent on them.
2. You accuse us of wanting to both ring-fence education expenditure and then cut spending on the Coleg Ffederal and Welsh-medium education. I don't think that you can really make both charges stick simultaneously.
3. Your arguments are predicated on the (all too common) assertion that deep and urgent cuts in public expenditure are necessary. I accept that they're going to happen, but that isn't at all the same thing. What needs to be cut is the deficit; cutting spending is not the only means of doing that.
4. Cuts operate at two levels. The UK Government decides the amount of money available to the National Assembly; and the Welsh Government decides how to prioritise within that. Plaid have little influence over the first, but will be heavily involved in the second.
5. That doesn't mean, of course, that we don't have a view on the first. We support the decision to scrap ID cards, and we've called for Trident to be scrapped. We've also called for increases in Capital Gains Tax, lowering the threshold for the highest rate of income tax, and the removal of some tax breaks for higher earners. All of these would help to cut the deficit without cutting public services.
6. The process of adjusting the Welsh Government's spending plans for the next year to fit the reduced block grant will inevitably involve negotiation with our coalition partners. Do you really expect us to conduct that negotiation publicly, spelling out details in advance?
I suggest that it might be better to wait until you see the outcome before criticising it. You never know - it might not be what you expect.
"Y Byd wasn't viable but then is Communities First? "
Communities First originated under Labour before Plaid was in government. You can hardly expect them to overturn it.
"Is any Welsh language project 'viable' - S4C, Theatr Genedlaethol, Welsh-language publishing."
Yes some of them are if the employment, creative and economic spin-off justifies it.
"Plaid Cymru, the nationalist party, will go along and say, 'well you know boys, these things are all very nice and cuddly, but we have to defend [the waste] in Health because we're following the British agenda which doesn't need to ringfence it's own language and culture because its language and culture (English) is strong enough to thrive without government support'."
That's just idiotic, sorry. There's nothing British about defending a publicly-funded service that was invented and pioneered in Wales. If anything we are reclaiming it for our own.
Post a Comment