• The post you are reporting:
   
  Look face a few facts.
  
  Massive cuts need to be made and it would be silly to cut each department at 25%. Some will find it difficult to find 10% cuts without touching front line services while we would not notice 40% cuts in other departments.
  
  Needing to find, say 25%, means it is sensible to tell each department to identify 40%. Then there can be some proper cost/benefit analysis done on what projects/spending should actually be chopped. Some departments in that way will be cut more than others. The alternative may be that just to meet its figures a valuable project is chopped in one department while in another money continues to be wasted. (I would chop 100% of the overseas aid budget personally.....)
  
  This suggestion is logical however some may choose to spin it.
  
  There is massive waste in Government and it also undertakes projects and gets involved in things it should stay wellm out of. We are setting out on a massive transformation of The State and what it does and of what we expect it to do.
  
  You need only to take one recent example exposed. £20bn spent to 'narrow the health gap between rich and poor' and what happens, the gap widens.... better to have not spent that money at all.
  
  Only too often public spending is the problem.
  
  Brian - do you know what a 'double dip' actually is? I have been saying for 3 years that we are likely to have a double dip recession. I hope I am wrong and cutting public spending and relieving the private sector of that massive burden is the best way to mitigate that and get long term prosperity. I still believe it is likely to happen.

Report Post

Your Name

Reason