GOVERNMENT ZONE
- Central government
- Defence Management
- Devolved government
- Education
- Health and social care
- Home affairs
- Local government
- Transport
AREA OF INTEREST
Email
Print
Digg
reddit
StumbleUpon
Facebook
DeliciousTotal Place 'could save billions'
Monday, January 25, 2010
The study reckoned that £11bn of the £73.6bn spent on services in the capital in 2009 was a waste of money. If this was extrapolated across England, the amount of money saved would easily solve the major financial problems that councils are facing.
The figures were the result of PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) looking at how Total Place could save money in London. The study found that "overcrowding of agencies can lead to confusion in delivery while different national goals often can conflict with each other".
London Councils chairman Merrick Cockell said: "We have long been aware that councils do not operate within a perfect system. The way public bodies are funded, and the number of different organisations working for similar or overlapping aims, unfortunately make waste inevitable. However, PwC's research has shown us a way to radically reduce London's burden on the public purse while still improving the services we offer Londoners. Amidst the ongoing debate around the public sector funding squeeze, we will be thoroughly examining their conclusions in the hope of setting out significant reforms for the capital in the coming months."
• The number of planned affordable homes built over the next 10 years could be halved by government spending cuts, the National Housing Federation has warned. The government had suggested that the housing budget might be cut by 17.98 per cent and the federation has said that housing budgets must be protected in the same way as health and education budgets.
Chief executive David Orr said the cuts for new affordable homes would deepen the national housing crisis and lead to the loss of thousands of jobs and apprenticeships.
"Reducing the number of new homes by such a huge degree would kill off the dreams of more than a million people in desperate need of decent, affordable housing, leaving many to live in cramped, unsuitable conditions for a generation," he said. "As bad housing is closely linked to poor health, poor educational attainment and higher crime rates, ministers should give funding for the house building programme the same untouchable status as health, education and policing, and protect it from the coming savage cuts."
But Housing minister John Healey said the federation was "missing the bigger political picture", adding: "Of course the public finances are tight but this government continues to demonstrate our long-term commitment to affordable housing."
Public sector costs could be dramatically cut. There would be a price for doing so:
a) Public Sector jobs would have to go. However, like everything else it has become involved in (the Police, NHS etc.) the present Government has dramatically increased bureaucracy out of proportion to 'front line' delivery. Therefore that bureaucracy could be dramaticaly cut - AND essential front line service protected. the price the loss of thousands of 'non-jobs', those jobs that operate to apply the bureaucracy.
b) PFI (PPP) must be frozen - or even better scrapped. In its universal adoption of PFI the Government has precided over a massive increase in costs which are not value for money. The result is that schools, built under Schools for the Future are costing the Nation 3 to 7 times their true capital costs. The same can be found with hospitals, new police stations etc. Basically, the Government has adopted a 'spend now' pay later policy. Rather than refurbish perfectly good buildings, many schools have been demolished to be replaced by new construction which in 20 years time will be a maintenance headache. The result is that future generations (and governments) will pay for this extravagance in taxes etc., long after the present PM and his Ministers have retired. However, in that process the construction companies engaged in the work will have enjoyed excess profits.
c) The benefit culture must be tackled. It is absurd that able bodied people can still claim benefits when there are jobs to be had. Also, there has to be a major reform of the incapacity benefits system. We have a situation in which genuine, in many cases heart-wrenching, claimants are not getting the support they need. Thus we see such things as families with severely handicapped children do not have sufficient respite care, we threaten formerly hard-working pensioners (in some cases War veterans and heroes) with the loss of their home to pay for care, and face a post-code lottery for after-care support following major illness (such as heart attack or stroke). All this whilst many who are, frankly, not deserving 'play the system. What an awful indictment of a civilised society and the 5th richest country in the World.
In short, essential front line services can be protected AND public expenditure cut.
WJC - Stockport
The article refers to the reduction in the 'new-build' of affordable housing. What efforts are being made to bring into occupation the thousands of empty older properties. Affordable housing does NOT always mean new build. In Liverpool, thaaks to Givernment policies, thousands of perfectly restorable, well build Victorias houses have been demolished. The new houses which have replaced them wil be the 'new slums' of Merseyside in less than 30 years and like many of the properties built in the 1960's and 1970's will also succumb to the bulldozer.
One answer is to remove VAT from housing refurbishment projects aimed at providing affordable housing (say a minimum of 25% within any development). That way a 'level playing field' would be created in which the capital costs of 'new buidl' versus 'rebuild' could be more fairly compared.
William JC - Stockport