The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Cutting the slack and saving the budget > Comments

Cutting the slack and saving the budget : Comments

By Mikayla Novak, published 14/11/2011

Some say there are no budget savings to be had because the public service is working as hard as it can. They are wrong.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All
579

Sounds like you agree with the Greek and Italian socialist ideologies of the last 40 years. Happy with waste and then blaming everyone else for the fruit of idiotic ideology.
Posted by runner, Monday, 14 November 2011 5:11:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ah, more supposedly balanced stuff from the IPA. Heaven help us. They know all the answers.
Posted by Chris Lewis, Monday, 14 November 2011 5:11:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The savings to be made from public service cuts are minuscule compared to the infrastructure savings which would be realised from cutting immigration. Another far more pertinent topic is the rising cost of infrastructure, but would the IPA's sponsors agree with this line of inquiry?

The author is scampering excitedly after a little mouse, oblivious to the elephant.
Posted by Fester, Monday, 14 November 2011 6:06:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The trouble with cost cutting in the public service is the random nature. The public service is about providing services and value for money for the tax dollar.

It is not about efficiency dividends which usually end up creating inefficiencies with cuts to real services while the fat continues to grow unabated. Senior positions within the APS have grown along with senior executive salaries which have risen more than lower end salaries.

Why not work out which services the public wants and fund them accordingly. To some extent, decisions about services could be democratically determined. If it came down to services for the disabled, extra beds in a hospital, more police according to need, fixing a pot-hole or establishing a whole new Department of Climate Change, I know what I would choose.
Posted by pelican, Monday, 14 November 2011 10:03:37 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
pelican you write

'If it came down to services for the disabled, extra beds in a hospital, more police according to need, fixing a pot-hole or establishing a whole new Department of Climate Change, I know what I would choose.'

First time ever I think we have agreement. Miracles happen!
Posted by runner, Monday, 14 November 2011 10:51:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Child Support Agency is a classic example of the growth of executive pork. In just 5 years it has increased in size by 1/3, while senior executive service positions have increased by over 50% in the same period.

People have been moved up the seniority ladder and others have come in to take their place on the more junior rungs of the SES. the head of the Agency is now a Deputy Departmental secretary, for example, while Matt Miller, the previous head, was SES band 1. The additional cost is many thousands of dollars per year for no additional responsibility or additional productivity.

At the same time, there has been a deliberate effort to hide the cost of the CSA within the DHS budget, by aggregating figures that used to be itemised and by simply not reporting to the same degree of detail generally.

There is a huge amount of money being spent to combine the services offered by the CSA, Centrelink and Medicare within a "one-stop shop" backed up by DHS's new computer systems. Does anybody want to hazard a guess as to how much money will be saved due to staff redundancy? My guess is that staff numbers will increase, despite the efficiency gains from operating a coordinated system.

As the author points out, this is because:

"the public sector unions have gradually displaced manufacturing unions as kingmakers within the wider trade union movement."

The only problem is, she used the wrong gender. Overwhelmingly, the APS is being staffed by women, many of whom are separated parents. There has been enormous public expenditure on training these women at uni, and the priovate sector has no jobs for people with qualifications they have acquired, so now an enormous expenditure is occurring to give them jobs.

Feminism has a great deal to answer for and it may yet manage to send us all broke. Except those lucky enough to work for the Government of course...
Posted by Antiseptic, Tuesday, 15 November 2011 4:08:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy