Best Of

For anyone suggesting cuts - please point out where they can come from

Seriously the only way to cut things would be to stop doing X, so tell me what things you don't want the public sector to do..

Repost from a few days ago:
"My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export "

It’s good to make specific suggestions. I can get behind some of these, but none of them are cuts (well, 9 is debatable). 1-5 are not increasing spending further, but they’re not cutting it. Some of them say more about your fears than they do about reality (3 notably). 4 & 5 are sensible, and seem inevitable, but are also unpopular with much of the electorate.

6 & 7 are also not cuts. 6 is an aim, but not a how. 7 isn’t simply not a cut: you are actively stopping possible future tax revenue. “Rich people spend a lot” is trickle down economics and doesn’t work.

8 is possibly sensible, but Labour made it a manifesto pledge not to do it.

9 sounds great, but the devil is in the detail. The government are already doing various things that fit under 9 & 10, reviewing the role of regulators and encouraging innovation.

10 & 11 are sensible, but are increases in spending.

I’d add

12) reform the subsides and incentives for green energy to make sense. So subsidies switch to delivery of U.K. made products at low prices. Batteries made in the U.K. get the full tax break/subsidy. Batteries made in China with a sticker added in the U.K., not so much.

Same with EVs, solar panels, wind turbines etc.

Since these will be payable on delivered products, they won’t need to be paid out before another election or 2. Building factories takes time….

To play devil’s advocate, who’s going to invest in these schemes if there’s going to be a new government next year that cancels the incentives?

Such a scheme would require cross party agreement.
Reform are stupid enough to oppose the idea simply because it's about 'renewables', I suppose, but would anyone else ?

Government signs a contract - if you actually deliver X, we will pay/tax break Y

Put a cancellation clause in it…

For anyone suggesting cuts - please point out where they can come from

Seriously the only way to cut things would be to stop doing X, so tell me what things you don't want the public sector to do..

Repost from a few days ago:
"My approach would be to tighten up the approach to the economy. For example:

1) Stop this insanity of increasing benefit spending by ending the 2 child cap
2) Give nothing to the WASPI graspers
3) Thoroughly kibosh the rarely mentioned but still floating around 'discussion' about reparations
4) Increase the pension age (not immediately but pencil it in)
5) End the triple lock, it's unsustainable as well as being unfair on the working population of the country
6) Commit to a long term reduction of the deficit with a goal of eventually turning it into a small (few percent of GDP) surplus and seek consensus from other parties to maintain that goal, even if the specific path of reaching it might change
7) End all talk of the madness of wealth or exit taxes. Rich people spend a lot, and when they do, they pay VAT. It's never been easier to leave and work elsewhere
8) Increase income tax. I'm not a fan of tax rises, I instinctively prefer lower taxes, but we do need to raise more money and this seems both more straightforward and less harmful than other measures
9) Embark on a simplification of regulations, include taxation and building regulations, to make things easier for individuals and businesses to get things moving
10) Try and find a way to keep new innovations here. Encourage this with tax breaks (in a time-limited period) for setting up factories and the like in the fields of emerging technology. Re-introduce the golden share so we can retain leading innovations and the workers and businesses pay tax here. Perhaps have extra incentives for locating factories etc in the north of England
11) Collaborate closely with Ukraine to encourage both their and our own drone facilities to be built here. Essential for defence with excellent prospects for export "

It’s good to make specific suggestions. I can get behind some of these, but none of them are cuts (well, 9 is debatable). 1-5 are not increasing spending further, but they’re not cutting it. Some of them say more about your fears than they do about reality (3 notably). 4 & 5 are sensible, and seem inevitable, but are also unpopular with much of the electorate.

6 & 7 are also not cuts. 6 is an aim, but not a how. 7 isn’t simply not a cut: you are actively stopping possible future tax revenue. “Rich people spend a lot” is trickle down economics and doesn’t work.

8 is possibly sensible, but Labour made it a manifesto pledge not to do it.

9 sounds great, but the devil is in the detail. The government are already doing various things that fit under 9 & 10, reviewing the role of regulators and encouraging innovation.

10 & 11 are sensible, but are increases in spending.

You don’t necessarily need to cut, just grow spending less slowly as was proposed by the modest reduction in spending on benefits which was kiboshed by Labour. These weren’t even cuts. The Tories should have supported Labour on this.

Ideally we should grow employment and grow the economy and increase the tax take that way. That’s not going to happen with these fools running the show.

Also the idea that the govt cannot cut spending given its massive spend is nuts. Course it can. It has no will to do so.

I agreed with some of Morris Dancer’s suggestions, and I agree that growing spending more slowly and growing the economy can work. But I would point out that eek’s challenge remains unanswered (except by Sandpit’s plan to cut IVF).

EDIT: CycleFree has now suggested some actual cuts.

There’s plenty you can cut, but there’s no will to do it. Others have suggested cuts to Eek in the past when he’s raised the same issue. But some people are high tax big government advocates. Others think the govt should do,less.

Policy Exchange has some concrete ideas.

https://policyexchange.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/Beyond-Our-Means_.pdf

Unpopular suggestions

- Remove winter fuel allowance & other add on benefits.
- Child benefit for first child only
- End the triple lock
- Cut back the number of diversity officers - there are at least 500 in central government according to a recent FoI request and the number has increased since Labour came into power
- Prescription charges: reduce the number of exemptions and increase payments
- Foreign aid: what actually is it being spent on and which countries
- More charges for council services above the bare minimum
- Stop or drastically reduce funding of lobby groups
- No money in current budget for AD - where is the money for that to come from? If people want it they should pay for it themselves.
- Social care - people with savings need to use those first. The rainy day has arrived so that is what the savings are for.

On the tax side -
- raise income tax and extend NI ultimately combining the two
- add council tax bands at the top end rather than faff around with extra taxes
- Extend VAT - we have more exemptions than many other countries
- Get rid of cliff edges
- Reduce pension tax relief to the basic rate
- Freeze thresholds

Once there is a path to a reduced deficit and growth then can think of reducing tax. But I would make the priority proper investment in infrastructure and high quality competent permanent staff rather than endless locums and consultants.

Good thread header. This is the real issue facing this government and it is one that the last government largely dodged. I would add that the increasing cost of our debt burden is another very serious challenge going forward. According to the OBR, " in 2025-26 we expect debt interest spending to total £111.2 billion. That would represent 8.3 per cent of total public spending and is equivalent to over 3.7 per cent of national income."

A lot of our current debt was borrowed at ridiculously low interest rates after the GFC. So a 10 year gilt from 2015, for example, might have had a coupon of 0.2%. When that became repayable this year we obviously did not have the money to repay it so the debt will have been rolled over but at a cost of around 4.5%. A lot of people on here criticised Osborne for not borrowing more to invest and claimed this was shortsighted. This shows how wrong they were. That 8.3% is heading in only 1 direction.

It doesn't show anything of the sort.
Had we actually borrowed more to invest (rather than fund current spending), the return on investment over the last decade and a half would with absolute certainty been higher than the annual 0.5% it might have cost, and quite likely more than the current 4.5% or so.

‘Uninvestable’ UK takes 30 years to do a nine-month project, says billionaire
Jonathan Oppenheimer blames slow decision-making and planning rules for lack of investment
...
He cited as evidence the dualling of the A66, a crucial route between England’s east and west coasts, running from Teesside to Workington in Cumbria.

“So long as the UK takes 30 years to do a nine-month project, it’s uninvestable,” Mr Oppenheimer told the Bloomberg Africa Business Summit.

Plans to turn the stretch from Penrith to Scotch Corner into a dual carriageway were launched in 2002, but only partially completed. Further proposals made in 2016 were approved in 2024.
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2025/11/18/uninvestable-uk-takes-30-years-to-do-a-nine-month-project/ (£££)

For anyone suggesting cuts - please point out where they can come from

Seriously the only way to cut things would be to stop doing X, so tell me what things you don't want the public sector to do..

And the football regulator has a budget of £10m, paid for by the clubs, not the government. Football directly provides 0.5% of our tax take, so yes it is a significant industry we should protect.

Why does football need specific regulation? Surely it is just another business.

Everyone likes a regulator as it sounds like they will fix all the problems in the sport - or at least allow the blame for not fixing those issues to rest elsewhere...

Good thread header. This is the real issue facing this government and it is one that the last government largely dodged. I would add that the increasing cost of our debt burden is another very serious challenge going forward. According to the OBR, " in 2025-26 we expect debt interest spending to total £111.2 billion. That would represent 8.3 per cent of total public spending and is equivalent to over 3.7 per cent of national income."

A lot of our current debt was borrowed at ridiculously low interest rates after the GFC. So a 10 year gilt from 2015, for example, might have had a coupon of 0.2%. When that became repayable this year we obviously did not have the money to repay it so the debt will have been rolled over but at a cost of around 4.5%. A lot of people on here criticised Osborne for not borrowing more to invest and claimed this was shortsighted. This shows how wrong they were. That 8.3% is heading in only 1 direction.

So, we urgently need to cut spending. Much easier said than done of course, especially given the pressures mentioned by Gareth and by me. We need to reduce regulatory costs, we need to reduce the head count in the public sector substantially, we need to stop wasting money on never ending inquiries which tell us the same things again and again (and which, as @Cyclefree points out, we normally ignore). Its a huge challenge for any government and politically it is a particular challenge for Labour. But it needs to be done.

I am all for a balanced budget, but be realistic on public headcount. After 15 years of austerity how much fat is there to cut in our criminal justice system for example? The way to cut costs there is to restrict what is permitted, for example greatly restricting the right to appeal.

Similarly in my line of work (my Trust is reducing headcount this year by 7% already). What treatments on the NHS do we stop?

Head count was sharply reduced in the period 2010 to 2019 and then exploded again during Covid with the massive and largely unsuccessful test and trace systems. It has continued to grow and is growing now. I don't accept that there is little fat to cut in those circumstances although there will obviously be exceptions. If the public sector as a whole was doing what your Trust is doing we would not be in such a mess.

FWIW I think we need to largely get rid of HR departments and their associated paperwork, I think we need to thin out management reducing the layers, I think we need to do our best to avoid meetings that achieve little or nothing. I think we need to apply technology in a way that genuinely improves productivity. I think we need to completely stop the early retirement and back on Monday for another wage routine that seems to have become so common.

In my line of work we introduced a remote empanelling day during Covid. This meant that the jury is selected without being present and the clerk then phones the unlucky selectees to come in the following morning. This added a day to every High Court trial. All too often, being available, this is useful in terms of preparation time. But we can't afford such fripperies or such conveniences. It should have been stopped.

One of the problems in the Civil Service is the pay structure. You cannot be paid more for doing your job well so have to go into management. This means many people go into management that aren't suited for it. First level management then gets so micro-managed (probably because so many of them are crap at it) it is impossible to do the job well.