Register


  • Share this article

Spending Review Warning

13 Oct 2010

The UK debt is lower than it has been several times before, after the second world war it was understandably substantially higher and this was when the NHS was born and the welfare state expanded - we could afford it then and we can afford it now. The folly is to believe the rhetoric of the Coalition Government that tells us the only way to reduce the debt is to cut public services. This is a smokescreen for what is really Tory ideology - to dismantle the welfare state. Why do we have a welfare state? Simply it is because the drain on the country resulting from poverty as recognised in the 19th and early 20th Century is a far worse scenario. Poverty creates innumerable negative consequences for us all; physical and mental ill health reduces the number of people fit to work and if necessary defend the country. Poverty affects individuals' ability to stay in education and enter professions - to earn more and contribute more to the country's coffers in taxes. Poverty weakens families and their ability to provide safe and secure lives for their children. Poverty means less money circulating in the economy and people stop spending in shops and on services from private businesses.

How will the cuts to the public sector affect Great Yarmouth?

Well, the local authority and the NHS are the biggest employers here and nationally and what they provide are the basic services we all need - schools, hospitals, social services, benefits agencies, GP surgeries and clinics, community health services, school crossing patrols, street cleaning, refuse collection the list is endless and we all take these services for granted!
Some people think that employees in the public sector earn lots of money and have big pensions, this simply isn't true; most employees earn under £20,000 per year and many are part time and female. Pensions aren't a gift - employees pay into them and if they have a low pay they end up with a paltry pension that is rarely enough to live on. All of you will know people who work for the council or the NHS - do they enjoy long holidays abroad? Do they drive expensive cars? No - like most of us, they put in long hours, above and beyond their contracts and earn a fraction of the salaries of comparable jobs in private industry.

So if this workforce is cut there will be fewer people paying for their cars to be serviced at the local garages, fewer people going to local travel agents to book holidays, fewer people paying for someone to decorate their homes, fewer people buying new furniture, having their hair done, paying for repairs to their houses, popping to the local butcher, having a meal out in a local restaurant, going to the pictures, using the gym and health clubs. The local businesses will be seriously affected and particularly those who currently have contracts with the local authority who will in turn have to lay off their employees when the work disappears.

The Coalition Government naively expects that philanthropic middle classes will replace the public sector services with voluntary work with local charities. The middle classes are the very people the Government wants to make unemployed, in other words to do the same job they are doing now but without pay - and live on what?

So as unemployment rises and less money is paid in taxes and more and more local businesses collapse, the economy is supposed to become healthier? No! It just doesn't add up.
Don't believe the hype - it's a myth that this is the way to create a fair and economically buoyant society, exactly the opposite is true. Fill the country's coffers by taxing the super-rich and recoup the money from the bankers and by creating more jobs. The welfare state is not a drain on society, it creates opportunity and fairness and is an investment in everyone's future.


Ruth Thacker.


Comments


Response - Oct 13, 2010
There are not many comparable jobs at the lower end of the pay spectrum – public services don’t tend to employ sales assistants, cashiers and salespeople. One comparison could be cleaners and here both in the private and public sector workers would expect pretty close to the minimum wage. (Guardian Jan 2010) There are approaching 6 million public servants in the UK, but only around 10% of these are civil servants. (Click here for further detail.) Civil service pay therefore represents only a small fraction of total public sector pay. The vast majority of civil servants earn pretty much the same as their private sector counterparts. (At 31 March 2009, median gross annual earnings for all full time civil service employees were £22,100.) Senior civil servants, however, earn significantly less than their opposite numbers in the private sector. However, many other public service roles are graduate professions and it is here that if you compare levels of responsibility such as management & supervision as well as qualification levels many public sector workers lose in a pay comparison. “The better paid tend to get less than they would in the private sector, while the low paid do slightly better in the public sector.” For an explanation and useful table see here (http://www.touchstoneblog.org.uk/2009/12/more-about-public-versus-private-sector-pay/) Pensions are another hot topic, if you compare large private companies with the public sector, there is little to choose between them, obviously smaller companies find providing a good pension more difficult but they would also find it difficult to attract high calibre workers without a decent salary so this isn’t a fair comparison. As for the Working Time Directive, at the moment there are groups of workers who are excluded in both sectors but this isn’t what I meant. I’m referring to the vast number of workers who may leave their office or staff room at 5pm but then spend several more hours in the evening and at weekends doing additional work. I’m not assuming that workers in the private sector don’t have as much pressure or dedication either. My saintly other half who works in the private sector does spend time finishing off projects at home and he won’t mind me telling you that he is not as highly qualified, earns more than twice my salary, has a final salary pension and pockets the occasional bonus (often just for having a good idea) and could, if he was so inclined, avail himself of many other expensive perks. (He also has longer holidays and his petrol allowance is bigger than mine too.) The fact is that in the public sector the largest group of employees are those who earn 20-35K and because the majority are women (so tend to take career breaks to care for children) and the public sector has the higher number of part-time workers too, they are not accruing large pension pots. As for funding the public sector – we all do, I’m not exempt from taxes! The public sector and all employment funds the private sector too don’t forget – private businesses could grind to a halt if they lose contracts with the LA or if unemployment (of public sector workers) increases, as there will be fewer of us spending money on gas, electric, oil, cars, electrical goods, insurance, holidays etc etc. I’m not sure if the size of my wheelie bin is down to my employment or my husbands though? Ruth Thacker

Ruth Thacker
Anonymous - Oct 13, 2010
"No - like most of us, they put in long hours, above and beyond their contracts and earn a fraction of the salaries of comparable jobs in private industry" Where is the evidence for this? I say this because as far as I'm aware public secto...r sticks rigidly to the European Work Time Directive. Public sector pay rises on the whole, have been greater year on year than private sector (discounting bankers, we all hate them) A much larger percentage of private sector worker's pay goes towards individual/stakeholder pension payments. Private workers also lose out on certain 'perks' enjoyed by public sector workers such a travel expenses, extensive training opportunities, child care discounts, final salary pensions and massive wheelie bins. At the end of the day it is the private sector that funds the public sector and if there isn't enough money to go around then something has to give.

stephen getliff

Join

to Contribute


Register or Login

To add comments to this page



Menu

Browse pages





Back To Top