Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

Brilliant-a govt. that can't think for itself! :rolleyes:

link

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

And yet the government hires ever more civil servants (Gordon Brown did say they were going to cut back, but I don't think that's really happenned). On the other hand the answer to everything these days seems to be to throw more monitoring targets and the like at a problem. Does it solve a problem no. Do these "consultants" actually come up with anything new or novel I very much doubt it.

On the other hand, by emplying consultants it makes the government look good as they are giving work to private firms, and keeping their own employee numbers down.

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

I remember there was some several thousand civil service jobs to be axed. Has it happened, does anyone know?

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

In order to answer those questions the govt will have to pay some consultants to find out! :D

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

yes it hasn't happened.

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

:rolleyes:

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

The civil servants who lose their jobs will be the ordinary, underpaid, overworked ones who actually make a difference to peoples lives through their work, not the jargon spouting suits. :(

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

Problem with the civil service, is not necessarily over or even undermanning, although it's probably like any larger organisation bloated with pen pushers justifying an existence. It's the time bomb of the pensions which remain index linked, final salary type schemes, whcih virtually all private indsutry had to abandon a long while ago. If the fat isn't trimmed soon, even if pensions are reformed (any government taking on the civil service unions on that will be more than brave), the country won't be able to afford the civil service pensions, let alone basic pensions for all.

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

I wish you were right Rob, the protection of their fat pensions will ( as it does now) fall on council tax payers. :mad:

It's a bloody disgrace. :td:
__________________

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

The attractiveness of the final salary pension is the main reason the goverment uses to keep the wages of ordinary civil servants down below market value.

If they scrap that (and if they do, expect mass strikes across the board) something tells me that salaries won't go up to compensate. :erm:

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

I reckon that if they were to strike then we wouldn't really notice much difference........rather like when all the doctors went on strike in some US town in the 80's--the death rate went down! :D

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

The majority of us wouldn't notice an immediate difference. Those on benefits might, and I suspect it wouldn't take long for some "essentials" to grind to a halt. Bear in mind the report talked of government in general, so it includes the biggest cash cow of them all the NHS.

Final Salary Pensions may make some government jobs attractive, but there are other benefits too that require more staff than private sector - leave entitlements being one. I was always amazed how many days off my Dad used to get, he never knew what to do with them all. Salary is only part of the equation.

Bottom line consultant use no doubt comes from a different budget to staff for any government department. It's thus probably too easy to claim a need for another needless feasibility study for the latest white elephant reinvention of the wheel.

Re: Labour's army of consultants adds 1p to income tax
 

Many years back I worked for a firm which was perpetually going through a tough time. Every three months they would make people redundant, then within a week a fair few would be re-hired as "consultants" on a higher rate!

The logic was that the company, being a U.S. company, had it's performance measured on a "per capita" basis. Consultants weren't included in headcount. So, whilst they cost money, the turnover/profit per employee worked out higher. So basically it was a way of twisting and manipulating figures.

In the Government's case, I wonder what exactly these consultants do... apart from put in some hefty bills. 1p in the pound off income tax... what a lovely thought... doesn't need a consultant to tell you that.