+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 16 to 27 of 27
BSF Thread, Tory government not backing BSF? in United Kingdom (UK) Specific Forums; Labour will be hedging their bets on the need for really deep cuts to public services..... if they can keep ...
  1. #16

    broc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,046
    Thank Post
    104
    Thanked 401 Times in 265 Posts
    Rep Power
    150
    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?

  2. Thanks to broc from:

    beeswax (30th April 2010)

  3. #17
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by 36Degrees View Post
    Assuming that the PFI deals for hospitals and schools are the same here is an example. The new Queen Elizabeth hospital in Birmingham "will cost taxpayers 1.75 billion under a private finance initiative scheme, being repaid like a mortgage of at least 48 million a year plus inflation until 2046, with developer Balfour Beatty owning 40 per cent of the hospital." I found an article elsewhere that said the cost was 547 million.
    good example. although i couldn't tell you whether it was comparable to the financing of school builds.....but i remember reading somewehere that 48 million a year repayment figure had to actually be revised upwards from 40 million purely because of inflation.

  4. #18
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by broc View Post
    Labour will be hedging their bets on the need for really deep cuts to public services..... ?
    sounds more like they plan on protecting education, nhs and police......and have other department find the cuts required. The IFS have produced a report detailing the types of cuts/savings that need to be found, and what that means as far as real terms increases in spending.

    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.

  5. #19

    broc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    England
    Posts
    2,046
    Thank Post
    104
    Thanked 401 Times in 265 Posts
    Rep Power
    150
    Quote Originally Posted by torledo View Post
    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.
    I don't like stealth taxes either, Gordon Brown made it a black art..... did you notice how often we got taxes today, tax reductions tomorrow or next year in his budgets as chancellor?

    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.

  6. #20
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by broc View Post
    I don't like stealth taxes either, Gordon Brown made it a black art..... did you notice how often we got taxes today, tax reductions tomorrow or next year in his budgets as chancellor?

    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...
    but all those other taxes are a form of tax on behaviour.....VAT is a tax on certain types of consumption for instance. taxes exist primarily to influence behaviour and to affect spending power.

    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..

  7. #21

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,162
    Thank Post
    284
    Thanked 768 Times in 579 Posts
    Rep Power
    334
    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.”

  8. #22

    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    894
    Thank Post
    64
    Thanked 171 Times in 140 Posts
    Rep Power
    55
    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).

  9. #23

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,162
    Thank Post
    284
    Thanked 768 Times in 579 Posts
    Rep Power
    334
    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.

  10. #24
    torledo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Posts
    2,928
    Thank Post
    168
    Thanked 155 Times in 126 Posts
    Rep Power
    47
    Quote Originally Posted by teejay View Post
    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.
    but doesn't money get to smaller firms via subcontracting by the larger 'winners' of govt. contracts to deliver services. i don't know if it's anywhere near as much as it should be.....but i'm sure it happens to a degree.

  11. #25
    Face-Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    577
    Thank Post
    11
    Thanked 58 Times in 40 Posts
    Rep Power
    70
    Quote Originally Posted by torledo View Post
    but doesn't money get to smaller firms via subcontracting by the larger 'winners' of govt. contracts to deliver services. i don't know if it's anywhere near as much as it should be.....but i'm sure it happens to a degree.
    It does get to smaller firms and I even have two friends who have done some training as subcontractors of a BSF firm but the big companies can always squash the smaller ones and demand lower prices. This is only good for schools if as part of the bid process the large bidder has been made to deliver value in the first place

  12. #26

    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    London
    Posts
    3,154
    Thank Post
    114
    Thanked 527 Times in 450 Posts
    Blog Entries
    2
    Rep Power
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by teejay View Post
    Yeah, sorry, back on topic.
    Hopefully this will mean the end of the managed service centralised IT part of BSF.
    I'd love to think you're right but the talk of "efficiency" suggests you're not. the current school model of IT is wildly inefficient - it has too many people paid too much money doing too little (and yes, I am playing devil's advocate!)

    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.

  13. #27

    teejay's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    3,162
    Thank Post
    284
    Thanked 768 Times in 579 Posts
    Rep Power
    334
    Quote Originally Posted by srochford View Post
    I'd love to think you're right but the talk of "efficiency" suggests you're not. the current school model of IT is wildly inefficient - it has too many people paid too much money doing too little (and yes, I am playing devil's advocate!)

    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.
    Well if that's the case, why is it that the costs mooted for the managed service part of the BSF would cost our school nearly 100k more per year on the base contract? You also have to add on top of that any change orders, which if our PFI contract is anything to go by will add a substantial amount on top of that, plus the cost of any hardware, which will be higher than what we currently spend.

SHARE:
+ Post New Thread
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12

Similar Threads

  1. [Pics] I've never voted Tory before...
    By mattx in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 22nd February 2010, 12:53 AM
  2. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 7th October 2009, 02:53 PM
  3. [Joke] Proof that the government and the BSF are related...
    By nephilim in forum Jokes/Interweb Things
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 23rd April 2009, 06:57 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 30th January 2009, 11:00 AM
  5. Replies: 7
    Last Post: 20th February 2008, 04:37 PM

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •