The post you are reporting:
Chaps, there is no ideal way, no perfect outcome. Apart from anything else, although I think everyone will agree that quality services are wanted, there will be different opinions about priorities. Of course. But despite the poor experiences - and there are many - that does not mean it cannot be done, that we cannot retain and indeed improve quality AND save money. Sometimes the two go hand in hand - cut out the dead wood and inspire the remainder to do better. Offer evidence, demonstrate that it can be done. Value for Money is not a dirty phrase, and it can be and should be applied to service delivery - value for money says what it is - good value for the money spent. That has sometimes allowed the unscrupulous to reduce services as well, and it has led to poor decisions. But it doesn't have to. Peter et al have said it and I say it again - it is down to managing it better, doing it better.
Value for money means just that, not closing services because we need to save money, but delivering them more effectively, having the cojones to manage the people better, shopping around for the best (not the cheapest) deals.