I see young Georgie's move as political rather than economic. Explicit fiscal rules are political hostages to fortune which can be breached through no fault of a competent Chancellor, particularly one who inherits an economy resembling a stagnant pool full of rusty supermarket trolleys.
As for not targetting spending, I can see this being a late addition to the policy portfolio. He tested the waters with the consultant-cull approach to limiting council tax. If that is received well other cuts to pure waste can be proposed piecemeal in the coming months. Labour cannot gain mileage by objecting to the withdrawal of tax bucks to hangers-on and party functionaries.
Before you know it the uncontroversial cut has set the ball rolling and quangoes come next. Politically he must preserve NHS and education spending but there is still plenty of leeway for attacking waste in other fields before turning, when in government, to waste in the NHS and education systems themselves.
All is not lost, I suspect there is method behind his timidness.
There is considerable evidence in my area that the Council is hiring not consultants but contractors needed to do substantive essential jobs such as processing planning applications and developing the detail of highways projects. Some of these contractors are people who used to work for the Council but moved off to organisations that are labelled as Consultancies (which means the ability to charge very high fees). By getting out they get away from the lousy management regime. So double waste: paying managers who are not up to the job, and paying contractors at consultancy rates.
By contrast, the legal dept doesn't contract work out, so it is unable to handle its workload of routine things such as TROs. Presumably it is overloaded with complaints about the work of the Council - a mate who was once a senior officer in an LA has described to me the downward spiral in which bad work creates complaints that overload the Council that results in less ability to do the other work that needs doing and thus more complaints. It takes far too long to close such a Council down (done by bringing in Commissioners, I'm told).
Wat,
http://lpuk.blogspot.com/2008/09...puk-
policy.html
Makes interesting reading.
"Very disappointing" - love the English ability for understatement.
As you point out, the country is re-entering an economic era with similar problems as those that existed in the seventies, and your conservative party throws up a team that wants to follow Ted Heaths lead. Doh!
Better pack up and get out - quick.
If every employer and every employee changed the way they agree to accept their work contract and be paid, it is not only possible to avoid PAYE and other Taxation, it is absolutely legal.
Just change the way the worker agrees to work for the boss and is paid. All payments can then be made beyond the Jurisdiction of any British Court.
Taxation could then be a function of the Parish, Town and County Council.
As it would be illegal for elected Councillors to establish this, the Taxpayers would have to be in control of Taxation and request the Elected Councillors to take control of the Revenue and the Payment of charges on Public Services, as set out in the Taxpayers Spending Programme Policy.
I have already spoken to some of the Norfolk CC. members and earlier this year I addressed a meeting of the South Norfolk District Council, on this subject. My talk was very well received.
We are now in the process of taking this forward.
Kind Regards, ATFlynn,
"Norfolk's Mutineer"
Commenting by HaloScan
