Letter to the Editor: Civil Service logic of Yes, Minister!

I AM concerned that it is taking an inordinate amount of time to find the most imperceptible of cuts in public expenditure.

Spending a small fortune on compiling a report to look at how to save money is an example of the perverse Civil Service logic that Yes, Minister! was based on.

We now have more people as a percentage, employed by the government, than any communist country during the Soviet era, and those countries collapsed under the burden of their own bureaucracies.

As we gradually see the finance industry fade quietly away to less over-regulated jurisdictions with more cost-effective labour, it is time to ask how we are going to pay for the legacy of civil service excess that Senator Ozouf will inherit.

The time has come to think big. Simplify the benefits system. Combining pensions and income support into a single weekly payment to each and every person of sufficient residency in Jersey would not only allow us to dispense with the entire Social Security department but would bring an end to the inherent age discrimination of the current system, disparity amplified by civil service discretion, often leading to the most terrible of inequities.

I realise that at first you may wonder how this would be paid for, but a significant proportion of persons in Jersey are currently in receipt of a benefit of some description and all persons employed by the government could have their wages decreased by a compensatory amount.

The loss of the 12.5% social security tax could be replaced by an additional 5% on income tax which would not require any additional civil servants to administer, and would be fairer as it would not be capped for the higher earners among us.

The final added benefit is that it would once more enable Jersey people to compete with foreign workers as they would then be able to work for lower wages and still maintain a reasonable standard of living.

Of course the States could simply bring the inevitable end to the civil service pension scheme, sooner, rather than later.

[JEP Archive]

Letter to the Editor: Is the work that these civil servants are doing really necessary?

I was moved to write by the headline of 8 March: 400 Health jobs ‘in cash crisis threat’.

I had hoped that Senator Ozouf was going to make genuine cuts in public expenditure in response to the ongoing financial crisis, which in truth is caused more by planned increases in government expenditure than anything else.

The figure of £600 million planned spending in 2010 consists of £540 million spent in 2009 and £60 million increase in expenditure. The plan to return to £540 million pounds expenditure is therefore not a cut, but merely a continuance of existing spending.

It is a start, but Jersey spends beyond its means or indeed needs. The burden must fall on the States Assembly to start looking at which legislation is surplus to requirements and begin to repeal laws. This may lead to a loss of employment, but the government should be looking at whether the work that many civil servants do is necessary.

It is clear that many civil service posts exist simply to keep someone off benefits and to justify promotions and higher pay for the upper echelons of the civil service.

The police are a prime example of an over-funded department. Moving plain clothes officers back into uniform, getting them out from behind their desks and putting them on the streets would not only cut expenditure but also fulfil the wishes of the electorate. Reducing the number of sitting States Members by ten per cent would be a good start to any plan.

I hope that Senator Ozouf will achieve his aim and begin to deliver cost-effective services to the people of Jersey. It is possible – Constable Crowcroft has previously achieved this in the Parish of St Helier.

[JEP archive]