Do you want to discuss boring politics? (18 Viewers)

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Find productive work elsewhere? If someone is unproductive, then we definitely do not want them being on the government payroll.

You were obviously being sarcastic in the first instance but co’mon, if someone is unproductive in any role (private or public), it’s best that they go elsewhere in the economy. At least with private businesses, if they fail they’re not always bailed out using public money.


Well, gold plated public sector pensions cost a lot of money that isn’t actually funded. It’s a government IOU and the costs are spiralling year in year.

So they already add to welfare bill…

This weird appetite to see people fired is just something I won't understand I guess.

 

---

[Grendel]

This weird appetite to see people fired is just something I won't understand I guess.

You shouldn’t if it harms the output but also people should not be employed if they aren’t needed - no business is a charity

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

This weird appetite to see people fired is just something I won't understand I guess.

If my taxes are being raised over and over, then employee contributions are being cut to pay for a bloated public sector… It makes perfect sense.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

If my taxes are being raised over and over, then employee contributions are being cut to pay for a bloated public sector… It makes perfect sense.

We were talking about both private and public sector workers. Though on the latter...you didn't give me an answer on how many people you want to sack.

Can you give a ballpark figure?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

You shouldn’t if it harms the output but also people should not be employed if they aren’t needed - no business is a charity

Except for private schools...

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

We were talking about both private and public sector workers. Though on the latter...you didn't give me an answer on how many people you want to sack.

Can you give a ballpark figure?

How can I give you an accurate number? It’s a completely pointless question.

We do know the public sector has expanded and productivity has flatlined. So something isn’t adding up and this is something you can’t blame austerity on. The civil service has swelled by 30% over the last 10 years and we can all agree that the output you expect has gone down.

Reform pledged and the Tories drew up plans to get the civil service back to 2015 levels and that equates to a 100k cut in today’s money. That’s probably a good start and more or less every civil servant has a degree so I don’t think they’ll be on the dole for very long. I know it’s personal to you because you want to join the civil service and sincerely hope you get there and that’s a role that adds value.

As Grendel said, businesses and the government is not a charity. If the jobs aren’t needed, then why pay someone to do nothing.

 

[wingy]

I'd have a look at Panorama just been on TV tonight,Vetenary Pricing being the subject, it's not lhike all creatures great and small anymore but you'll get the drift of where this is heading, corporations and hedge funds involved.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

How can I give you an accurate number? It’s a completely pointless question.

We do know the public sector has expanded and productivity has flatlined. So something isn’t adding up and this is something you can’t blame austerity on. The civil service has swelled by 30% over the last 10 years and we can all agree that the output you expect has gone down.

Reform pledged and the Tories drew up plans to get the civil service back to 2015 levels and that equates to a 100k cut in today’s money. That’s probably a good start and more or less every civil servant has a degree so I don’t think they’ll be on the dole for very long. I know it’s personal to you because you want to join the civil service and sincerely hope you get there and that’s a role that adds value.

As Grendel said, businesses and the government is not a charity. If the jobs aren’t needed, then why pay someone to do nothing.

Thanks for answering the question in any case. I'd hope as and when Reform take charge that they see the good sense in having more STEM graduates in the civil service as Starmer has strongly hinted at in the past year.

I just feel it's important to remember that when we are talking about shrinking the state/streamlining government etc, it actually means taking work away from a not inconsiderable number of people. I'd be saying that irrespective of my own career plans.

 

[Grendel]

Except for private schools...

They aren’t charities. Terrible argument - they have to be self sufficient

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Thanks for answering the question in any case. I'd hope as and when Reform take charge that they see the good sense in having more STEM graduates in the civil service as Starmer has strongly hinted at in the past year.

I just feel it's important to remember that when we are talking about shrinking the state/streamlining government etc, it actually means taking work away from a not inconsiderable number of people. I'd be saying that irrespective of my own career plans.

The taxes being levied to pay for these jobs are causing employers to cut jobs in the private sector. The only job market expanding atm is the public sector.

Undoubtedly, there will be short term pain for many people. Equally, businesses and individuals are feeling the pain of propping up an unproductive and inefficient civil service. That also isn’t fair.

We’re not talking about doctors, nurses, policemen/women, soldiers, firefighters or teachers… we’re talking about bureaucrats who often aren’t adding value.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

They aren’t charities. Terrible argument - they have to be self sufficient

They literally are registered charities. Are you saying they shouldn't be?

 

[Grendel]

They literally are registered charities. Are you saying they shouldn't be?

The expression meant that public sectors aren’t charities that employ people at tax payer expense who aren’t productive - they should be the same as any private companies

Actual charities clearly would not waste money on non productive people.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Maybe we need a cultural shift and start to do these things for our parents ourselves.

Sounds very woke and lefty to me.

The reason we don't have that is because we've built a nation whereby both men and women have to work long hours just to make ends meet. We've been brought up to believe that career, wealth and possessions are the most important factors. People that are carers are too often looked down upon as people using it as an excuse not to work as much as they should.

And that's before you take into account the fact that elderly parents nowadays have far more complex and time consuming needs than those of previous years. Now people are living into their 80's there are a huge number of elderly suffering from dementia and who literally can't do anything for themselves. It's a full time job requiring specialised training. Are you going to pay them for it, because they can't afford to do that and not work? And that's before you even begin to factor in that many of them will also have children of their own to look after at the same time because far more people are leaving it later and later in life to start a family because they can't afford to when they're younger. It's physically and mentally exhausting.

This is a problem the ideology of the right has brough about. When it's said people need time to look after their families, young and old, the response is "go to work you lazy bastards and stop scrounging"

 

[Sky Blue Pete]

They aren’t charities. Terrible argument - they have to be self sufficient

The have charitable status

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Zahawi was popular with Tory members iirc. The problem Reform has, is that needs talented people to join its ranks rather than party appointees.

The big question mark many voters have about Reform are:
1. Can Farage work with other people effectively
2. Does it have the expertise to run government effectively

This is a problem the Greens will also face if they break through. At the current polling, the Greens are likely to cause Labour to drop to a rump of parliamentary seats.

I can answer both of those questions right now.
1. No
2. No.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

I can answer both of those questions right now.
1. No
2. No.

Legitimate concerns, no different from Labour it would seem.

 

[Sky_Blue_Dreamer]

Let’s start with what we all agree on:

The healthcare system is broken and bloated.

Rightly or wrongly, Turkey has a booming trade in cosmetic procedures which employs nurses and support staff and consumes medical equipment and supplies. It also provides footfall for local Hospitality industry.

The UK is still home to manufacturing of some medical equipment such as bladed items and has the ability to manufacture specialist machinery.

The US health system is absolutely bonkers expensive.

Park those 3 items.

Suggestion:

Build teaching hospitals on a university model.

Build a raft of new hospital infrastructure (costs money but creates jobs) and equipment and provide training.

Make the UK a go to destination for cutting edge treatments, let the private sector enjoy the potential footfall externally.

Economies of scale SHOULD give us more NHS capacity at a proportionally lower cost.

Tempting ethical health tourism from places like the USA for certain treatments dilutes overhead and contributes to GDP

Personally I’d find a way of providing a degree of free healthcare for the neediest in the world as a direct switch for the Foreign Aid bill; rather than send money to other countries provide emergency care, medial missionaries at an equitable value.

You may not have noticed but many of the newer hospitals have been built on the university model, including our own.

Lots of 'lefties' have said we need to invest in increasing health infrastructure, especially in social and mental health care which are causing the biggest problems in overcrowding in hospitals alongside increased demand. We've had a poster on here show the positive difference mental health programmes can have on things like usage of healthcare and areas like policing, only governments keep on cutting them. We'd also like to see it so GP's have longer hours and there are more GP's available, especially in areas which are vastly underprovided (and which often just happen to be the poorest areas). We point out the economic and social benefits, the jobs created etc. But we're then told "this isn't affordable! No-one wants to work cleaning up shit and piss so it won't increase employment and would just result in more foreigners coming over here to work!" So it seems your answer isn't that different to the one lefties have been championing for ages. More investment, increased capacity.

Doesn't the right blame most of the problems in the NHS on foreigners coming over here and using our healthcare? And yet you think the answer is to increase that? Whether they'll be paying or not it still uses up capacity as many of the private doctors and surgeons are the same ones as work in the NHS. So to do that you've got to build the capacity BEFORE they come and therefore before they start paying. So who's footing the bill in the interim on this vague idea that these health tourists will make us more money than they take in treatment? Isn't there the argument by the right that foreigners will just do or say whatever they need to get over here, and doesn't this just given them another way in? Get insurance for something minor then while they're here it's realised they actually need much more expensive treatment. Do you really want to be a country that tells very sick people to fuck off because they can't pay? Because I don't.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The taxes being levied to pay for these jobs are causing employers to cut jobs in the private sector. The only job market expanding atm is the public sector.

Undoubtedly, there will be short term pain for many people. Equally, businesses and individuals are feeling the pain of propping up an unproductive and inefficient civil service. That also isn’t fair.

We’re not talking about doctors, nurses, policemen/women, soldiers, firefighters or teachers… we’re talking about bureaucrats who often aren’t adding value.

There are people who don't add value in any large organisation, public or private. I once worked in big pharma where we genuinely held meetings over how to have more productive meetings, projects ran way over time and budget etc etc.

You have referred to it as a 'moving the goalposts' point in the past, but how do you actually measure the productivity of a white collar worker who isn't in sales?

 

[skybluetony176]

we’re talking about bureaucrats who often aren’t adding value.

Brexit added about 120k bureaucrats because of the bureaucracy it caused. That’s pretty much the entirety of the growth in bureaucrats since 2015. You know who to thank for the rise in bureaucrats. Oddly it’s the same people telling you that there’s too many.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

The expression meant that public sectors aren’t charities that employ people at tax payer expense who aren’t productive - they should be the same as any private companies

Actual charities clearly would not waste money on non productive people.

So it would appear that you agree with revoking private school charity status.

 

[Grendel]

The have charitable status

They also are operating as a private company

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

There are people who don't add value in any large organisation, public or private. I once worked in big pharma where we genuinely held meetings over how to have more productive meetings, projects ran way over time and budget etc etc.

You have referred to it as a 'moving the goalposts' point in the past, but how do you actually measure the productivity of a white collar worker who isn't in sales?

That's a feeling most of the workforce in the place that I currently work at (not for long). However, the fundamental difference is that those businesses fail, they'll cut headcount and they can't just go cap in hand to central government.

Brexit added about 120k bureaucrats because of the bureaucracy it caused. That’s pretty much the entirety of the growth in bureaucrats since 2015. You know who to thank for the rise in bureaucrats. Oddly it’s the same people telling you that there’s too many.

All roads lead to Rome, I mean Brexit.

Brexit did cause an increase because we needed civil servants to perform functions previously performed by the EU (e.g. trade negotiators). However, the biggest rise in the civil service has been since COVID, 92k of that 120k increase.

There's just no nuance to much you contribute on here, everything leads back to Brexit. Newsflash, if everything was idyllic and utopian in the EU, we wouldn't have voted to leave in the first place. I preface that statement as a Remainer. the other major EU countries face v similar problems to ourselves and they didn't have Brexit.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

That's a feeling most of the workforce in the place that I currently work at (not for long). However, the fundamental difference is that those businesses fail, they'll cut headcount and they can't just go cap in hand to central government.

Remind me what happened during the 2008 GFC.

 

[skybluetony176]

However, the biggest rise in the civil service has been since COVID, 92k of that 120k increase.

Or another way of saying that is since we left the EU i.e. the 31/01/2020. Which just so happened to coincide with the pandemic. The majority of that 92k was for Brexit. The scramble for customs officers and related workers is 50k on it’s own.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Remind me what happened during the 2008 GFC.

Was that the right policy decision though? I'm not 100% sure it was. It was a Labour government that intervened in the economy back then, probably the right thing to do given the bigger picture.

It's kinda hard to have a reasonable conversation if you're going to continually reach for exceptions to the rule. The government also propped up Tata steel in Port Talbot... There will be occasions governments choose to intervene and bail out private companies.

Voluntary liquidations hit 12.6k (total liquidations = 36k) in 24/25... how many did Labour step in to save?

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Was that the right policy decision though? I'm not 100% sure it was. It was a Labour government that intervened in the economy back then, probably the right thing to do given the bigger picture.

It's kinda hard to have a reasonable conversation if you're going to continually reach for exceptions to the rule. The government also propped up Tata steel in Port Talbot... There will be occasions governments choose to intervene and bail out private companies.

Voluntary liquidations hit 12.6k (total liquidations = 36k) in 24/25... how many did Labour step in to save?

Well it was a generation defining economic event...criminal bankers brought the house down and governments here and elsewhere had to bail them out. They did what they did knowing that the government couldn't afford to just let them go under. Their profits were privatised but the losses were socialised. Before not too long some of those same bankers were back to collecting generous bonuses when they should have been in prison.

George Osborne later admitted that the Labour government was correct in doing what it did.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Or another way of saying that is since we left the EU i.e. the 31/01/2020. Which just so happened to coincide with the pandemic. The majority of that 92k was for Brexit. The scramble for customs officers and related workers is 50k on it’s own.

The scramble was pre-Brexit...

The 'and related workers' part is important because this includes the private sector. You're presenting the 50k as if it is part of the 120k growth, it's not. A few examples of department increases post-Brexit:
- Ofgem, 165% increase in headcount (1.4k)
- Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation, 75% increase
- Housing, Communities and Local Government, 60% increase (1.8k)
- Home Office, 51% (17k)
- Scottish Government, 42% increase (8.2k)
- National Crime Agency, 37% (1.6)
- Justice department, 28% (21k)
- Health and Social Care, 32% (2.6k)
- Work and Pensions, 16% (13k)

That's already over half the increase in the civil service and this list isn't exhaustive. By contrast, HMRC's headcount was only up 2% (1.6k) and the Department for Business and Trade was down by 25% (-3k). Two of the most important departments for customs "Brexit" matters. In fairness, there are increases in statistics offices, the foreign office and the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The latter will be driven by Brexit and Net Zero policies combined.

The public sector growth is up year on year, is that still because of Brexit?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

Well it was a generation defining economic event...criminal bankers brought the house down and governments here and elsewhere had to bail them out. They did what they did knowing that the government couldn't afford to just let them go under. Their profits were privatised but the losses were socialised. Before not too long some of those same bankers were back to collecting generous bonuses when they should have been in prison.

George Osborne later admitted that the Labour government was correct in doing what it did.

Yep, I've heard this many times from the likes of Owen Jones. The point remains: it's an exception to the rule and just derails the direction of the conversation.

Ultimately, who's holding these departments to account? You've got records of middle managers and those on 5-figure salaries being appointed and the system, like many in the UK, is not fit for purpose and has become an employment scheme for grads.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Yep, I've heard this many times from the likes of Owen Jones. The point remains: it's an exception to the rule and just derails the direction of the conversation.

Ultimately, who's holding these departments to account? You've got records of middle managers and those on 5-figure salaries being appointed and the system, like many in the UK, is not fit for purpose and has become an employment scheme for grads.

I have said more than once about how you could significantly improve value for money in state education without spending an extra penny: de-academise and get rid of the influx of highly paid MAT executives and MAT level staff who divert significant sums of money away from the front line service. I'm less familiar with other sectors but I wouldn't be surprised if a similar story isn't there in other public services.

In attempting to create these mongrel privately run-publicly funded systems we have got a visibly worse return. I know that the CEO of one of the largest MATs in Coventry gets a generous bonus every time he adds another school to the trust. That's public money going to line someone's pocket for just having made an organisation larger, not for making it better.

 

[skybluetony176]

The scramble was pre-Brexit...

The 'and related workers' part is important because this includes the private sector. You're presenting the 50k as if it is part of the 120k growth, it's not. A few examples of department increases post-Brexit:
- Ofgem, 165% increase in headcount (1.4k)
- Office of Qualifications and Examinations Regulation, 75% increase
- Housing, Communities and Local Government, 60% increase (1.8k)
- Home Office, 51% (17k)
- Scottish Government, 42% increase (8.2k)
- National Crime Agency, 37% (1.6)
- Justice department, 28% (21k)
- Health and Social Care, 32% (2.6k)
- Work and Pensions, 16% (13k)

That's already over half the increase in the civil service and this list isn't exhaustive. By contrast, HMRC's headcount was only up 2% (1.6k) and the Department for Business and Trade was down by 25% (-3k). Two of the most important departments for customs "Brexit" matters. In fairness, there are increases in statistics offices, the foreign office and the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. The latter will be driven by Brexit and Net Zero policies combined.

The public sector growth is up year on year, is that still because of Brexit?

It really wasn’t, we were woefully short of customs officers, administrators (that’s what I mean by related workers) and indeed the infrastructure. It was a complete clusterfuck. We wasn’t even ready to leave at the end of the transition period let alone in Jan 2020. It was an absolute joke and speaking as someone involved in import and export for my job during that period I can’t begin to tell you how difficult it became. We were having to do things like pay for an entire artic trailer to move a couple of pallets of hazardous goods because it was just too complicated in bureaucracy to get a carrier move a mix load of hazardous so they would simply just refuse the job then have trailers stuck at ports waiting for paperwork to be sorted. You had to pay for the whole trailer and only move one hazardous class per trailer. That situation hadn’t changed when I moved jobs at the end off 2024. The paperwork it created was unprecedented. It was actually simpler to get goods from Asia than by container than it was getting goods from Ireland on RORO. Which pre Brexit was just as simple as moving goods around the UK. If you’d worked in it you’d know differently and the goods I was working with were relatively simple compared to shipping food, the paperwork those guys have to do now is staggering.

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

It really wasn’t, we were woefully short of customs officers, administrators (that’s what I mean by related workers) and indeed the infrastructure. It was a complete clusterfuck. We wasn’t even ready to leave at the end of the transition period let alone in Jan 2020. It was an absolute joke and speaking as someone involved in import and export for my job during that period I can’t begin to tell you how difficult it became. We were having to do things like pay for an entire artic trailer to move a couple of pallets of hazardous goods because it was just too complicated in bureaucracy to get a carrier move a mix load of hazardous so they would simply just refuse the job then have trailers stuck at ports waiting for paperwork to be sorted. You had to pay for the whole trailer and only move one hazardous class per trailer. That situation hadn’t changed when I moved jobs at the end off 2024. The paperwork it created was unprecedented. It was actually simpler to get goods from Asia than by container than it was getting goods from Ireland on RORO. Which pre Brexit was just as simple as moving goods around the UK. If you’d worked in it you’d know differently and the goods I was working with were relatively simple compared to shipping food, the paperwork those guys have to do now is staggering.

This is true. However, what you’ve described is work undertaken by the private sector, not civil servants.

As outlined previously, HMRC’s headcount increases was poultry considering Brexit and these are the people who enforce everything you described. Likewise, the Department for Business and Trade headcount decreased and these are experts on trade deals and so on that private businesses rely on for advice.

Your 50k for customs officers and administrators rings true for the private sector, not the civil service.

I know import/export procedures and FTAs very well.

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

This is true. However, what you’ve described is work undertaken by the private sector, not civil servants.

As outlined previously, HMRC’s headcount increases was poultry considering Brexit and these are the people who enforce everything you described. Likewise, the Department for Business and Trade headcount decreased and these are experts on trade deals and so on that private businesses rely on for advice.

Your 50k for customs officers and administrators rings true for the private sector, not the civil service.

I know import/export procedures and FTAs very well.

@Sky Blue Pete can you confirm how many chickens they've put in your office?

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

@Sky Blue Pete can you confirm how many chickens they've put in your office?

Sometimes you reread a post, notice a grammar mistakes and just cringe…

 

[Brighton Sky Blue]

Sometimes you reread a post, notice a grammar mistakes and just cringe…

You've done some absolute bangers in the past year alone, keep it coming!

 

[Mucca Mad Boys]

You've done some absolute bangers in the past year alone, keep it coming!

At this point, you’ve got to consider the possibility it’s deliberate…