Enriched by Public Services

Only the crassest and the most shallow minded consider that everything costs and therefore everything must pay its way. A way of thinking as befits a grocers daughter or some similar philistine banal mindset. We have to lift our heads up out of the mud our feet are wading through to see higher aspirations, to have hope for a better future, to be inspired by the achievements of those around us and most of all to have a vision for how all on this planet can experience a better life. Big dreams. In the real world there is not unlimited money and there are a thousand competing priorities. Put cost as your first and overriding starting point and the dreams will never even emerge. But without dreams we can never realise a better quality of life no matter how that quality might be imagined. Cost and payback are not the determining factor in a civilised society. Never to be ignored, always with a watchful eye but not the bottom line criterion that they have become.

I am ranging way beyond culture the obvious candidate for cost cutting. Yes culture of course to lift the spirit, to raise the hope even just to endeavour to reach beyond the immediate now, we need arts, we need crafts, we need music, we need graphics in all its forms to give shape and meaning to otherwise vague ephemeral glimpses beyond the mundane over familiar present day. Can we agree that culture, with its high costs and indeterminate payback, is a given must have, that frames us as civilised and not savages? If you think it is a no, then this site really is not for you, you must look elsewhere.

What I want to promote is the concept of service as an aspirational tool to achieve a better quality of life, for all. 'Service' this word is heavily overworked and has an extraordinary wide range of meanings and connotations. The common usages I want to focus on is, according to the sOED, 'Service' as conduct tending to the welfare or advantage of another and 'Service' as a branch of public employment of such body concerned with some particular work or the supply of some particular need. Service in today's climate is denigrated and demeaned, seen at best as a charity cause to help out those pitiful people too poor to do better. It didn't use to be like that, service industries were once seen as the powerhouse to lift and raise our aspirations as a nation and power us to a better more modern way of life. These are not bad or irrelevant objectives even in today's world? Being able to offer service to an individuals must be the hallmark of a democratic civilised society. Helping those in their moment of need until they can strike out confidently on their own again. Sounds like the sort of place I would like to be.

Maybe a ticket office manned to help cut through the complexities of tariffs, timetable and alternate conflicting options. Maybe a visible approachable and friendly policeman able to calm, reassure or direct, that would be nice. Of course the more obvious of a nurse with time to reassure, talk and to really understand what is troubling a patient. Or a teacher able to spend time one to one to help that one child overcome their confusion about some new topic. Service providers who are not seen as cost centres, who are required to prove their worth on a daily basis, who are not required to complete offers of help to some predetermined timeslot. The worth is there in payback dividends but not in profit returns the bean counters understand. So the list can go on, Tax Collectors able to spend time to understand the exception's and find more fitting rules, or JobCentre Advisers with the skills and time to actually understand a seekers capabilities with the realistic knowledge of local opportunities. Indeed wherever we as individuals interface with the providers of our wants or needs then there is an essential service input, an input which may not show a profit but certainly oils the wheels and helps society to move smoothly. What price do you put on that?

Services also include all the utility services, water, electricity, gas, sewers, telephones, refuse collection and the mail. Once state run they were sold off, amid a great fanfare, to companies whose driving force is profit first. Yet they are essential services, services that are at the foundation of the wellbeing to our UKplc. If any of these cinderella services are not there in place with the right capacity our ability as a nation to grow and develop is hampered. Look no further than the stranglehold the provision of highspeed broadband has on any commercial enterprise that is not located in a major conurbation. UKplc is held to ransom because it is 'not profitable' to provide in these smaller communities. Utility Services sold off because in some naive tunnel vision view of some other fantasy world, competition equates to efficiency. No. Equally, state run enterprise does not mean inefficient and extravagant. So make your choice, do you run them for profit for the benefit of shareholders, or, run them well for the benefit of the society that relies on them?

Finally, Public Service, another broad wide ranging category, now much maligned and held in disdain. Once the pinnacle of UKplc governance, held in esteem around the world, for its expertise, for its detachment and for its impartiality. What happened? Did we run out of good enough scholars to enter the civil services. No, of course not. A deliberate decision was taken to politicise the output of the civil service, overturning centuries of impartial advice. In this new way of thinking, unless civil services responses fully reflected the political aspirations of the government of the time, it was rejected and overturned. Such a small seemingly innocuous step but having catastrophic impact. Now there is no government edict, no report, no forecast, nothing emanating from government that can be trusted or relied on. Everything has to viewed with suspicion for political bias. There is no objectivity, there is no impartiality, everything is tainted with political expediency. Not any way to run a company let alone UKplc.

One woman overturned centuries of governance evolution and wrought chaos. Benefits? Once the initial feeding frenzy for the 'free' goodies on offer had subsided, are we better off, driven by profit for shareholder benefit? Have we totally lost the concept of service to the people to enable them to grow and blossom? Bring back Service to the People, bring hope for a better future for us all.

Bankrupt Nation

Been here before, so see also my Government Savings, this Nation is overspending on its Government. Compounded by us, its citizens, with unrealistic, or rather unaffordable, expectations of what can actually be provided or responded to. The size of slice taken to run UKplc is far too great compared to the income UKplc can generate. We are living way beyond our means and get by, by opening a new credit card then spending to its limits without being able to pay back the interest. Suddenly people are waking up to the total absurdity of private investment in new NHS hospitals. It always was crazy double thinking but it got politicians off the hook and gave a back door way to pay for the desperate re-investment required. A back door that had a very nasty and a painful bite some years on. A bite some people are only now waking up to. There is a huge yearly ongoing cost just to service the investment. A cost way in excess of what it would have cost if governement had made the investment directly.

We are in the centre of fudge land. We have expectations of what our country should do and provide for us. UKplc just cannot afford to meet those expectations. The politicians cannot, if they are to survive, tell us to our face that we cannot no longer get what we expect as of a right. UKplc cannot borrow more as it has already exceeded its spending limits. So fudge, enter the world of magic mirrors, where you can spend on huge luxuries, but not actually spend, well not today but only later on down the line. A huge HP loan with deferred easy payments. Everyone happy right? Of course not. As the deferred payments kick in, as they must some time, surprise, surprise, what you have left to spend has been sharply cut back and you owe more to the remorseless repayment schedules and have nothing left to buy for today. It was and is a lunacy.


Yet we clearly do need massive investment in the NHS, and schools and roads and transport. We do actually need to upgrade the apparatus of government and bring it kicking into the ways of the C21 world. We are not in the realm of finding 5%, 10% or even 25% efficiency savings. We really do have to take stock of what we, UKplc, are and what is the level of governance that is supportable. We were once a global power with a huge global empire, a key player. US of A has made it its business to take us out of that role. Today we are a crowded off shore island associated with a big powerful European Union of large nations struggling to come together and work in some sort of harmony. We are a marginal small bit player. Getting marginalised because we fail to play our trumps wisely and opportunely. At this level of play we simply cannot afford  grandiose ideas of having an aircraft carrier, with all the attendant fleet, nuclear submarines, an airforce with world strike capability nor an army able to fight in all theatres of the world. What is affordable within our current so much smaller role in the world is a national defence force able to defend its frontiers, if you must, working in close collaboration with our neighbours. That is the stark reality.   


I do not have a down on the defence services per say, more on that another time maybe. It is just that they encapsulate so well this bloated transition from global power to small bit player. We cannot give up the baggage of our past and come to terms with today's realities. We just do not have the income to sustain a world power role. But look around and there is evidence of this same bloat everywhere. Ministries and support institutions that were fit and proper for an empire but are grossly oversized and over ambitious for our now current status. We need a new slimmed down model of government that is fit, sleek and apt for the situation we now occupy. Many cherished objects and institutes of national pride may have to be sacrificed as we navel gaze our way from that empirical past down to our new needs. Political Parties have talk the talk for years, exorcising this tip here or this unloved limb there, tinkering, not radical. We need radical now, what is the minimum basics we must have to survive in today's world? That is the starting premise.


Along the way we will have to confront the issue of our expectations that 'they' can and will do everything about all those things that perturb us in our daily life. This is a socialist fantasy, actually a nightmare dream, of the State being the all provider. We are too unique, too diverse and too individual to ever be content with a uniform state provision. But there is a lot of comfort in that escape route, the government must should do that, sort it out so I do not have to bother about it. It is lazy, self-indulgent thinking that has become deeply rooted in our national thought. Time to turn tables.Out of the chaos will emerge a sleek, energetic and quickly responsive UKplc up for taking on of what ever challenges lie around the corner. Confident in its abilities and able to deliver decisively. Well that is my dream.

Government Savings

Almost without fail each new government has promised significant savings that just don't materialise. The political government has to rely on the executive civil service to implement its planned savings and they have an entrenched position with an equally long tradition of being able to successfully bury each saving plan. How can it be otherwise, all of the reins on the day to day running of the country are firmly in their hands even if they have to nod to the left or to the right depending on the current political flavour.

Realistically we should not even be talking about yet another round of efficiencies, re-locating offices there, cutting a few redundant posts here, using the backs of forms to save paper or not issuing pencils until there is no stub left. What is needed is a systemic fresh look at government.

Government funding is based on annual budgets. Each year proposals are put forward, based on last years budget outturn, for an equal or bigger budget requirement. Who in there right minds would offer a reduced budget? Cuts are then made on these proposals to bring them all into line with the planned spending limits. Then all hell lest loose as each department vies with another to establish the ascendancy of their budget over them. The top civil servants are promoted to their positions because they successfully promote their departments budget and see off others. It has nothing at all to do with how much it actually costs to run government. The status-quo is maintained year by year, minus a few percent, any losses more than made up when 'new' workloads arise out of government initiatives.

What we inherit then is government bloat. Old budgets are fiercely defended by the entrenched civil service, manpower shaved perhaps only to be re-instated plus at the next workload addition and a civil service more than capable of burying cost effective engineering or savings in a deluge of paper.

The only way forward is to utilise the ingenuity of the civil service to re-structure their provision of government services, achieve their own saving targets and earn the consequent reward of additional allocation. This will be a bloody process and as an opening strike the top two tiers of the entire civil service should be made to take retirement! What is needed is a complete overhaul on what and how government services are provided. There is some two hundred years of bloat to cut through. Basic question, what are the bottom line services that a department must inescapably provide and how many persons and acres of floor space are need to service it? Dividing the tasks by the cost of people and floor space gives an indicator of how much of our Nations resources are being used. Then political judgements can flow. What is the cost to the Nation of a soldier, a fighter plane, a teacher, how much does it cost the Nation to raise a each of the different tax levies? Are there any parallels that can be drawn? Might it be better to not provide one service but more of another or even is this service really inescapably needed? In fact what are the roles left to a central government when decision making has been devolved (see - "Working it out together")?

An approach like this will result in a significantly scaled back government and from then on efficiencies that achieve in reducing the cost of provision can be rewarded with commitment to fund a long term programme of investment, providing the further efficiencies promised are delivered.