Comments on: Conservative spending plans

By: D Hope

D Hope — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 12:22:05 +0000

Well sadly at looks as though the message has not got through just yet. Times comment today: “The Tory leader talks about the importance of thrift but he will not say what he would do to tackle the deficit if he were in No 10. He claims that he will be tough on public spending without specifying what he would cut. Again there is a lack of transparency.”
Comments like this are effectively lies whether by laziness or an unwillingness to find out the truth or by a desire to put down the Conservatives. Whatever it is, it is bad journalism!

By: STAN FRANCIS

STAN FRANCIS — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:59:48 +0000

“David Cameron made an excellent speech yesterday, calling for a new approach to public spending. He called for value for money across all departments.”
He needs to tell it to Bromsgrove and Worcs County Council that gives us 4.5% increase against the 1.9% norm, he needs to tell them that we don’t like paying extra for our garden refuse to be collected at £30.00 extra…Get the council’s that you have in your port folio working for and not against the people and then, just perhaps then you may be ready for central gov’t?…succinct and to the point?

By: Mike Wilson

Mike Wilson — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 07:12:32 +0000

Yes, but if conservative councils really are more efficient … why aren’t they saying …

‘We’ (conservative council) have 100,000 residents – and get 30 million from central government and raise 30 million ourselves.

‘They’ (Labour council) have 100,000 residents – and get 40 million from central government and raise 20 million themselves.

We are 33% more efficient than them.

… but you never hear figures like this. I can only assume conservative councils are not more efficient. I have some knowledge of my local conservative council – efficient they are not. Imbued with the typical – we must spend all our budget philosophy – they are.

By: backofanenvelope

backofanenvelope — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 06:25:44 +0000

I come back to my request for some idea of the total saving of Mr Cameron’s list – assuming they are all actually carried out. I speculated that they wouldn’t even pay the interest on the government debt. I see that “Burning Our Money” estimates £43 billion pounds interest next year – at least!

By: Ian Jones

Ian Jones — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:49:42 +0000

Agreed, privatise large swathes of the civil service. Real incentive to cut heads then, well if Harman’s equality bill hasn’t banned it (unless male, white and middle class of course!).

By: Ian Jones

Ian Jones — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 01:48:21 +0000

Remove the central Govt grant and let local authorities collect all the tax money locally. This would highlight the differences between councils as the Labour ones get more Govt money so hide their inefficiency!

By: robert

robert — Tue, 28 Apr 2009 00:29:23 +0000

I note that Miss Cooper has the responsibility for controlling expenditure but she does not have the technical skills, nor bluntly, the required stature with her fellow ministers to get the job done.

This task is so important given Britain’s level of debt that it needs to be given to a tough, experienced heavyweight who bluntly has the ability, capacity and political capital to intimidate his cabinet colleagues.

If done well the occupant of this position will be the most detested man in the ministry but also its key to success. And given the financial disasters of Brown it is essential that this task is carried out with the 100% support of the next PM.

By: SJB

SJB — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:25:37 +0000

What is the EU directive called, Roberta?

My understanding is that the UK is building a National Identity Register. The UK ID card will hold and retain far more information than those on the continent – which seems unlikely if the proposal originated from Brussels.

By: Adrian Peirson

Adrian Peirson — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:24:49 +0000

You could start Growing your own food and generating your own Power, however I’d be willing to bet money this Totalitarian Govt would introduce legislation preventing it.
They want ABSOLUTE AND TOTAL Control, I know exactly where they are leading us.

I also know they will fail.

By: ManicBeancounter

ManicBeancounter — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 21:20:30 +0000

Although the Conservative’s proposals are far more extensive than those of the Labour party, they will have a limited impact on the size of the deficit. Furthermore, they will not be fully achieved.

To go beyond cutting out the unnecessary, the Conservatives need to look at getting better value for money. The massive increases in expenditure in have mostly achieved a much larger cost base (and even larger long-term commitments), with a much smaller increase in output. In other words, productivity has massively decreased. There is a ratchet effect with lots of these expenditure increases, in particular with salary increases.

There Conservatives must therefore strive for the following
1. Emphasize that public services exist to serve the public. Responsible stewardship of a nation’s finances means improving quality, and improving value.
2. That fixed, monolithic, structures have always been a costly means of delivery. More importantly they are a hindrance to creative approaches that can deliver continuous improvements. Much better is for the state to become a funder of a plurality of approaches to enable the best solutions to emerge.
3. Detailed rules are an anathema to delivering creative solutions. It is far more important for central government to provide the structure of service provision, than with detailed meddling in every aspect. The Conservatives should get away from being so mired in the detail that they cannot see the general picture; or so engulfed in the minutiae of government that they have too little time, or energy, for making the strategic decisions.