The Conservatives have been making anti-BSF noises for while now and being quite vocal in opposition.
Only last week at the PfS conference their adviser on the subject said "The conservatives recognise the need to “renovate” the school estate BUT we are not committed to the same structures, amounts or processes"
Interestingly even the PfS CEO Tim Byles wasn't too upbeat about the future of BSF and described it as “economically tight and politically uncertain”.
Does anybody know what £2bn is in real terms?
Roughly what would that work out per-pupil? (how many uk pupils are there)
Given that there are 3500 secondary schools, it does work out to over £1/2M per school, I can't see how cutting Managerial positions would even get close.
That part isn't supposed to, if you read the article at the other end of the OPs link : "Officials believe about 3,000 senior school jobs could go, mainly through “natural wastage”, saving the department about £250m a year".I can't see how cutting Managerial positions would even get close.
So about half of the average secondary budget then ouch!!!Given that there are 3500 secondary schools, it does work out to over £1/2M per school, I can't see how cutting Managerial positions would even get close.
I can only pray they fire my headteacher and the other 7 deputies and assistant heads who got the jobs a year after qualifying.
I heard an interview with George Osborne a couple of weeks ago in which he was talking about the way money could be saved by outsourcing more things in schools (I think he was particularly talking about teachers but I'm not sure how that would work; outsourcing pretty much all support is easy to do but doesn't necessarily give good results)
that sounds more tory than the tories. Perhaps you've got a bit of an outdated understanding of the actual differences between the main parties ?Balls said that while teachers’ pay was set by an independent body, he was keen to ensure wage rises in the next three-year deal starting in 2011 were kept low.
All the parties want to cut Public Spending, they have no choice the country is heading towards bankruptcy. We will only really find out where after the next election.
G7 Countries - external gross debt/GDP ratios, 2003Q2 - 2008 Q2
The true extent of Britain's debt [The Spectator]
National Debt Counter
UK 185th Country in the World by Current Account Balance $ -44,960,000,000 (2008 est.) [CIA World Fact Book]
Last edited by somabc; 20th September 2009 at 09:39 PM.
New Labour came to power by occupying the centre ground in British Politics, pushing the Torys much further to the right. It is natural for New Labour to continue to promote Tory policy.... policies such as financial deregulation, PFI, privatisation, capping wages of Govt employees to name but a few....
I'm not employed by a secondary school and was, well.. ignorantly wondering about that having seen the same basic point in a comment made @ The Times article. Went out fishing and found "How to save £50 billion" from the Taxpayers Alliance (TPA) and Institute of Directors (I know nothing at all about either of them, but one assumes the figures they quote are real):I can only pray they fire my headteacher and the other 7 deputies and assistant heads who got the jobs a year after qualifying.
... the growth in managerial positions in our key services has far outstripped the benefits such employees bring. Between 1998 and 2008 the number of doctors in the NHS increased by 45.5 per cent, but managerial positions increased by 75.8 per cent. Administrative staff places in the English schools system increased by 82 per cent between 1997 and 2009, while regular teacher numbers have increased by just 10 per cent, a pattern echoed across the public sector. Over the same period the productivity of public services has declined by 3.4 per cent. Such backroom positions, far from freeing doctors and teachers from bureaucracy, have increased the burden of it.
They make the usual criticisms of BSF and go on to say:
"In these circumstances, personnel and equipment must come first. From now on capital investment in schools should be the responsibility of schools themselves. Once sustainable public finances are restored, investment in schools infrastructure can resume again."
Last edited by PiqueABoo; 20th September 2009 at 10:16 PM.
And to think I'm leaving my post on Tuesday (for a University Job)... and it's being replaced by an additional IT Manager Position! (in addition to the NM)
It's far too easy to basically make up figures to prove what you want. I'm sure that throughout all of the public services there are managers and support staff doing jobs which aren't needed but it's simply not true to say that every increase in support staff is a waste of money.
In hospitals, for example, nurses/matrons used to do a whole pile of admin work which is now done by "managers" - this frees up the time for medical staff to use their medical skills.
In schools, it used to be the case that teachers managed all of the computers and ran the networks (a job I did as well as teaching just over 10 years ago). Now we employ IT support staff and network managers to do this - the taxpayers alliance will tell you that they're a waste of money; I suspect some here would disagree with them :-)
How long before they start getting rid of the extra Admin staff needed to take up the slack, sorry I mean extra jobs teachers couldn't do anymore & therefore put those jobs back on the teaching staff?
I did think that I read they were looking at getting rid of a fair few 'consultants' as well which would save a fair whack I think.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)