beeswax (30th April 2010)
Labour will be hedging their bets on the need for really deep cuts to public services..... if they can keep the economy stable & even growing a bit more they can slowly reduce the deficit using increased tax receipts with things like NI increases, which by the way are paid by both private sector and public sector employers & employees alike... and more importantly clever corporate accountants cannot duck the NI 'tax' like they can most other taxes.....
When the politicians talk about the need for public sector 'efficiency' savings they really mean cutting public sector jobs.
But keeping public sector workers in jobs & spending money is surely better than making them redundant & having them claim benefits?
beeswax (30th April 2010)
yes, and they do plan to use some tax increases to reduce the deficit.....but they are saying no 'new' tax increases beyond those already announced so there will surely be significant cuts outside of the sacred cows if they are to keep to that promise.
on a personal level i object to being hit with another NI stealth tax rise. the fairness angle is nonsensical, because it only affects directly those who earn over 20k and i think up to 40k...so it's targetting those earners who won't get any working tax credit and are unlikely to get much, if any, child tax credits......it's just a hit to the marginal tax burden of this group....whether they work in the private or public sector.
Having said that; you could argue that most taxes are unfair, there will always be someone who loses out while others don't. VAT is a particularly unfair tax as it is the same rate regardless of your financial circumstances.... someone on job seekers allowance pays the same VAT rate as a multi-millionaire.
Income tax is unfair, as people on PAYE cannot avoid paying it but self-employed & very wealthy people can employ accountants to avoid it....
Fuel duty & VAT on fuel is unfair on people who live in rural areas, or the frozen wastes of the north and have to heat their homes for longer during the year...
Last edited by broc; 30th April 2010 at 03:15 PM.
A NI increase isn't a tax on any particular behaviour, it's an additional tax on earned income that isn't discriminatory on the types of employment or the location of employment undertaken.....merely the income. which is fine if we're talking about middle or high earners and it being redistributive....but it isn't. It's affecting people who earn as little as 20k a year. and it means less spending power albeit fractionally.
cameron had a point last night when he said something like......labour think your rich if you earn 20k and they'll hit you with a tax increase next year rather than do anything about idiotically wasteful spending, that we all know cannot continue to be justified..
Quote from Cameron today about the return of Blair:
Asked about Mr Blair’s involvement in Labour’s campaign, he said: “It’s great to have him back in the country. He’s one of the few people who could actually afford another Labour government.”
Getting back to the OP - the Tories have said they'll keep BSF but channel some of the money into "New Academies" (whatever they are). In other words, we'll all get BSF Lite (Shareware Edn with restricted functioning). They were talking about this last year although I don't know whether they kept it in their manifesto (and don't have the inclination to read it to find out zzzzzz).
Yeah, sorry, back on topic.
What they have said though, which is quite promissing is that they will be severly limiting large government contracts, especially in IT and breaking them down into much smaller contracts if required for specific purposes, not such broad stroke contracts. Hopefully this will mean the end of the managed service centralised IT part of BSF.
Do you really need a network manager in every school? Why not one per LEA? You do need bodies in the school to put new machines on desks, unjam printers, reimage machines etc but all these are low skill (= low pay)
If you're looking for efficiency savings then the first thing you target is people - they are the big cost. I read on here recently some criticism of a BSF project which was insisting on having (I think) 10% of hardware just kept in store as spares. Sounds daft but having a spare computer which an unskilled person can put on a desk to replace a faulty machine is far cheaper than having a skilled technician to diagnose the fault and fix it - you just ship off the machine to your central place and they fix it.
It's not good but it's what I think is coming.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)