Here come the cuts

[Simon Pieman]

One question.......exactly who does the country owe these billions.........China?...or fukin Timbukto.

No guessing please.........and no nonsense about bonds.

Edit: Actually didn't need the nonsense about bonds

Most is owned by insurance and pension companies, then overseas investors (I don't think there is a good record of the split between individual countries anywhere), banks and financial institutions. These make up the bulk of who owns the debt. Some is owned by building societies and the general public.

[Arriba]

they should just print loads of £50 notes and pay off the debt that way.then print some more so we dont have to pay any taxes forever.jobs a good un....

[Lumps]

Having been into colleges, NHS trusts and the such, often you get people making decisions or having a big part in running the show which don't have a clue. This is where the public sector could learn from the private sector.

That'll be the same private sector that has managed to rush blindly into the Irish property market and found themselves left with around 500,000 empty houses (this in a nation with a population of only about 6.2 million).

Yeah, fucking great decision making there.

[leefer]

Edit: Actually didn't need the nonsense about bonds

Most is owned by insurance and pension companies, then overseas investors (I don't think there is a good record of the split between individual countries anywhere), banks and financial institutions. These make up the bulk of who owns the debt. Some is owned by building societies and the general public.

Maybe then maybe the Govt could give us a list of these companies and such....after all it is us who are paying them back....let us at least see ware the money is going.

[Simon Pieman]

That'll be the same private sector that has managed to rush blindly into the Irish property market and found themselves left with around 500,000 empty houses (this in a nation with a population of only about 6.2 million).

Yeah, fucking great decision making there.

A good example to use is our football club. Years and years of money being pissed up the wall and now we have owners who are seemingly trying to do things the right way. We had a good season last year and this was even after selling our star player at the time. Of course you can pick examples of poor management in the private sector. But if you pick the good examples, lessons can be learnt.

This doesn't mean cutting funding or compromising service, I'm talking about running a tight ship and placing in controls. I'm not pointing out one political party as doing the damage or another as the saviour - from my experience the problems are deep routed in the philosophies of certain organisations.

I was at a college this week which has allowed some students to study free which shouldn't be eligible due to not being a resident here for 3 years or more. A good control would be to ensure the residency status was crystal clear prior to allowing admission to the courses and hence not wasting money.

I went to one organisation where no forecasts or updated budgets had been prepared for a number of months...for a £16m+ project.

At one NHS Trust I asked someone what the £1.2m figure was in one line of a financial reconciliation. The individual had to ask someone to make sure. Now this wouldn't be a problem necessarily, but this was the person who was checking and signing it off. I'd highlighted the amount as it was very high in comparison to other months.

For every one of these examples in the public sector I could note plenty more in the private sector. But the big point to make here is if Joe Bloggs' business goes bust it's of little consequence to me. However if he's using my money to run a business poorly it is. Why should it not be the same for the Government or public sector?

Quite frankly I don't know what your beef is. Nobody has suggested privitisation, just a greater deal of management and control. I don't understand how that can be bad. Perhaps it may have even saved a few jobs along the way too.

[Lumps]

But your original post was to say the public sector should learn from the private. That's a massively different proposition to what you've now retreated to which is some sort of "there are examples of good and bad practice in the private sector and there are lessons to be learned from the good".

Well no shit!

[Simon Pieman]

But your original post was to say the public sector should learn from the private. That's a massively different proposition to what you've now retreated to which is some sort of "there are examples of good and bad practice in the private sector and there are lessons to be learned from the good".

Well no shit!

Yes but you picked up on one small aspect of my post and ignored the other bit.

The Government, their departments and organisations receiving funding don't necessarily need to be more stingy, they just need to be more accountable and business minded in their approaches. The correct ethos/mentality isn't their in a lot of cases. I have seen a few organisations which are really good at this and they get more far value out of their funding.

Bit highlighted in bold is the point. The aim in the private sector is to make money and profit. You can't do this by pissing money down the drain like the Irish housing market example you gave. Perhaps I should have phrased it 'private sector cost philosophy'.

Translate this to the public sector, if they don't piss money away by mismanagement, they can provide more service or better service to the public for that same cost (instead of making money or profit).

Again it's a case of 'no shit', but I have seen some worrying and consistent themes out in the real world.

[flammableBen]

Will the tories fund the TEF Christmas party?

[Simon Pieman]

Will the tories fund the TEF Christmas party?

I'm sure Summer of 69 will shout you a bottle of cider

[flammableBen]

3 litre white ace?

[Simon Pieman]

Yes, but make sure you drink it all. If you drink only 2 litres then that's all you'll get the following year.

[Lumps]

Yes but you picked up on one small aspect of my post and ignored the other bit.

Bit highlighted in bold is the point. The aim in the private sector is to make money and profit. You can't do this by pissing money down the drain like the Irish housing market example you gave. Perhaps I should have phrased it 'private sector cost philosophy'.

Translate this to the public sector, if they don't piss money away by mismanagement, they can provide more service or better service to the public for that same cost (instead of making money or profit).

Again it's a case of 'no shit', but I have seen some worrying and consistent themes out in the real world.

But the example I quoted really exists "in the real world". What I've got a problem with are statements that imply that the public sector is wasteful and inefficient, whilst the private sector is held up as an example of efficiency and financial prudence.

For every example of money being pissed up the wall in the public sector, there are as easily as many in the private.

I've spent over 15 years in the NHS, in audit and service redesign roles, and 5 in the private as a consultant. Believe me I've seen a plenty of the "real world", and I know damned well that there are things that need putting right.

But the idea that inefficiencies in the public sector are what's got us into this shit, and that we need to look to the private to get us out of it is just deluded.

[Simon Pieman]

I think the problem is that there are examples of companies being successful and making profits and you can't really have this with the public sector, so in terms of budgetary control it's only the negatives which are picked up on. But the 'lessons' from the private sector aren't in terms of running Walmart or building 500,000 in Ireland, it's more to do with the idea it's ok if you don't spend all your money.

What I would love to see, maybe when the economy is more steady (if it ever happens) is the Government saying: right, you didn't spend all your budget this year. We'll give you the same this year, what can you do in addition to last year? Will you need last year's surplus? Could you possibly put that away for a rainy day when the economy is totally fucked and we have to cut your budgets? Or maybe when the supply of grit gets awfully low in the winter you could use your surplus then.

I realise there are plenty of organisations who do utilise the money in the year and effectively use inter-departmental virements where possible. I probably wouldn't expect a surplus to be made in most places. It'd be interesting to see a change in attitude towards money though.

But nobody really said inefficiencies were the cause for all these cuts and looking to the private sector would have saved us, I think you've picked up on a couple of points and over-reacted as usual.

[pauld]

I've worked in the private sector all my life and my better half in the public sector. We can both cite examples of shocking wastes of money, inefficient management etc. As well as good practice, genuine efficiencies which benefit productivity and so on. In my experience, it's not public vs private, it's large organisations. Any large organisation, whether public or private, will generate a large bureaucracy which will always tend to be inherently wasteful and provides far more places for the inefficiencies and the incompetents who practise them to hide away. It takes extreme rigour and very good management to prevent that and in a large enough organisation even the best management won't be able to root out all of it.

As football fans we should have more experience than most that the mantra of "It would be better if it was run more like a business" is utter shit. No, it would be better if it was run well - there's no exclusive magic potion that comes with the word "business"

[pauld]

But nobody really said inefficiencies were the cause for all these cuts and looking to the private sector would have saved us.

Except for pretty much every national newspaper, radio pundit etc etc etc