Minister of Treasury - Dr Spend - waffle, spin, deflect

[Mann O Mann]

https://www.manxradio.com/news/isle-of-man-news/mass-austerity-the-alternative-to-spending-from-reserves/

I listened to this podcast from our Treasury Minister and it was a very uncomfortable listen . He seemed absolutely clueless with no grasp of what needs to be done. 

He talked about the only alternative to spending 10% of the IOM reserve was to reduce public services .

What about a plan to reduce the size of the Government administration over a period of time !

It does not have to be all at once but at least communicate some sort of plan. 

Government overspending is catching up with them and he is absolutely clueless.

Our near term Island expenses with an aging population, pension commitments, infrastructure spend , renewable energy costs ……. And he maintains he will balance the budget within this administration…….give me a break .

High on principle low on practicality .

There could be trouble ahead …..

Will he face the music and “dance”…,,

Or he is laying the ground work to increase our taxes in the near term.

Doctor Spend 

 

[Numbnuts]

Cutting workforce in government doesn’t fit Alf’s narrative though does it. It’s crying out for a reduction in headcount but it’s not going to happen sadly .  

[Ham_N_Eggs]

1 minute ago, Numbnuts said:

Cutting workforce in government doesn’t fit Alf’s narrative though does it. It’s crying out for a reduction in headcount but it’s not going to happen sadly .  

There is no doubt there is an abundance of staff in the Government but the question is what is it that the Government are doing that you would like them to stop doing?

I'm also not counting capital projects in that question because that is a massive area of overspend and, since they outsource just of the work, not one that is very costly on Govt staff time.

[Numbnuts]

1 hour ago, Ham_N_Eggs said:

There is no doubt there is an abundance of staff in the Government but the question is what is it that the Government are doing that you would like them to stop doing?

I'm also not counting capital projects in that question because that is a massive area of overspend and, since they outsource just of the work, not one that is very costly on Govt staff time.

As you rightly say they outsource so much yet head count is increasing all the time. The Prom showed that the management that are there are not overseeing works anywhere near as they should be. That applies to most big schemes. So what they getting paid for !? . Make them accountable and do the jobs they presumably have been employed to do. Is it that hard…. Clearly it is . Add in the job for life and you can see why we are in such a mess. Private sector and trust me you’re out on your ass if you don't perform. Coal face workers in government go over and above but tiers of management just take the piss…With very few exceptions. 

Edited June 22, 2023 by Numbnuts

[Ringy Rose]

2 hours ago, Mann O Mann said:

What about a plan to reduce the size of the Government administration over a period of time !

So what’s your plan for cutting public sector staff? What services would you reduce?

[Happier diner]

I'd take the advice of an ex mediocre GP.......not!

[Non-Believer]

Would services actually need to be reduced if we trimmed away accrued layers of management though? It might actually be more efficient in freeing up some funding for those services at their points of delivery whilst still making savings. The threat has always been that "services will have to be cut" because the cuts have always been applied at the coalface. It's our very own "Project Fear" - but who stands to benefit from it? Let's consider making some cuts further up the chain.

It would be interesting to let a professional right-sizing outfit loose on IoMG.

Edited June 23, 2023 by Non-Believer
Extra bit

[Numbnuts]

8 minutes ago, Non-Believer said:

Would services actually need to be reduced if we trimmed away accrued layers of management though? It might actually be more efficient in freeing up some funding for those services at their points of delivery whilst still making savings. The threat has always been that "services will have to be cut" because the cuts have always been applied at the coalface. Let's consider making some cuts further up the chain.

It would be interesting to let a professional right-sizing outfit loose on IoMG.

This…If people could be brought in to assess productivity and what people actually do in the work place in Government at management level it would be a blood bath. But it’s not happening as first thing they would do is squeal they were being harassed and bullied and if found they were actually surplus to requirements would they get sacked or paid off. Not a chance . It’s an out of control monster which nobody is big enough to deal with. 

[WTF]

15 hours ago, Ringy Rose said:

So what’s your plan for cutting public sector staff? What services would you reduce?

getting rid of dead wood usually improves service.  less staff doesn't automatically mean less service.

[Andy Onchan]

15 hours ago, Ringy Rose said:

So what’s your plan for cutting public sector staff? What services would you reduce?

It's not services, it's positions. For example, is it really necessary to have 4 x CEOs in DfE for Digital, Finance, Business & Visit??? Why do they have to be designated as a CEO? Why not HEOs remunerated according to the appropriate published pay scales? And are these CEOs fixed term or permanent??

And there are more Directors of Policy in the Cabinet Office than you can shake a stick at. 

[Passing Time]

The reality in reducing numbers would effectively mean trimming away from the bottom leaving a still overbloated management structure

[2112]

1 hour ago, Andy Onchan said:

It's not services, it's positions. For example, is it really necessary to have 4 x CEOs in DfE for Digital, Finance, Business & Visit??? Why do they have to be designated as a CEO? Why not HEOs remunerated according to the appropriate published pay scales? And are these CEOs fixed term or permanent??

And there are more Directors of Policy in the Cabinet Office than you can shake a stick at. 

The CEOs in the various agencies are supposed to be fixed term. IOMG like to employ their mates, or the movers and the shakers. 

[joebean]

I have had some experience of the Manx public sector. There has been no serious attempt at reducing the size of Government, or to even assess the need for the current headcount for at least 15 years. Whilst there was some tightening of budgets following the VAT reduction, this was only a temporary issue and now budgets and staff increases are back at pre-VAT “crisis” levels. There is always the threat of service cuts in response to suggestions that expenditure should be checked. Anybody who has worked in any large organisation will know that cuts to service delivery or production are always some way down the line when options for cost reductions are examined. Any organisation can assess work and effort and reduce activity that is not directly related to its core functions. Outside of the public sector, this will be standard and expected practice. If an activity produces no added value it can be reduced or eliminated. When did any such exercise meaningfully take place within the CS? Never, is the answer. 
If the good doctor believes that any reduction in budget would automatically and necessarily lead to cuts in services he either does not understand public finance and resourcing, or he is being disingenuous. Neither is acceptable for a Treasury Minister. The truth, of course, is that he and the CM have no control of Government Departments and have no stomach for the fight. As a result, Departments continue with their shroud-waving tactics to counter any budget tightening and weak CMs and Treasury Ministers repeat the nonsense they are fed and attempt to justify it to the public and taxpayer. In the meantime our reserves are depleted and the next generation is saddled with additional tax burdens. It’s feeble and untruthful politics. 

Edited June 23, 2023 by joebean

[Mercenary]

9 hours ago, joebean said:

I have had some experience of the Manx public sector. There has been no serious attempt at reducing the size of Government, or to even assess the need for the current headcount for at least 15 years. Whilst there was some tightening of budgets following the VAT reduction, this was only a temporary issue and now budgets and staff increases are back at pre-VAT “crisis” levels. There is always the threat of service cuts in response to suggestions that expenditure should be checked. Anybody who has worked in any large organisation will know that cuts to service delivery or production are always some way down the line when options for cost reductions are examined. Any organisation can assess work and effort and reduce activity that is not directly related to its core functions. Outside of the public sector, this will be standard and expected practice. If an activity produces no added value it can be reduced or eliminated. When did any such exercise meaningfully take place within the CS? Never, is the answer. 
If the good doctor believes that any reduction in budget would automatically and necessarily lead to cuts in services he either does not understand public finance and resourcing, or he is being disingenuous. Neither is acceptable for a Treasury Minister. The truth, of course, is that he and the CM have no control of Government Departments and have no stomach for the fight. As a result, Departments continue with their shroud-waving tactics to counter any budget tightening and weak CMs and Treasury Ministers repeat the nonsense they are fed and attempt to justify it to the public and taxpayer. In the meantime our reserves are depleted and the next generation is saddled with additional tax burdens. It’s feeble and untruthful politics. 

I think what you'll find is because of the expectations of MHKs & public many of these Departments (e.g. DEFA/DOI) don't have 'core functions' and are in effect responsible for a concierge type service being the first port of call for complaints for all manners of ills.

 

You only have to read on here to see many of these, and with the close proximity/responsiveness of local politics to government this just results in a continual expansion in services to react to 'webcams not promoting tourism' / 'local radio station can't fund itself' etc rather than risk losing votes from a stream of interested parties.

 

Smaller government is harder in the short term and not a vote winner

[code99]

IMHO, the rebuke to Ashford comes across as hastily put together political scaremongering. With the current; inadequate provisioning for public health, crumbling infrastructure, struggling education sector, etc., some may argue that the Island is already experiencing austerity.

Notwithstanding the fact that huge amounts of taxpayers’ money has been wasted by successive largely unaccountable Manx governments and individuals over many years on numerous projects, in his statement Dr Alex is trying to frighten the Manx public into thinking that the government only has two options. He is saying the government needs to spend down the Reserves, and that the only alternative to that strategy is mass austerity - in other words, wholesale cuts to government services, including frontline public services. I take an umbrage with this ‘black and white/either-or’ disingenuous argument/ false dichotomy. Instead of the government facing a ‘this or that’ choice, there are thousands mini-decisions that can and need to be made in between these two extremes. As others have already posted, the first step must be to review senior ‘non-jobs’ within the government. In a country of barely 85,000 people it is beggars belief that we have so many chiefs, i.e., too many directors and too few nurses, air traffic controllers, driving instructors, etc. Does anyone know what value the previous Director of Communications added to the welfare of the Island before he quit last year? Personally, I have only a vague idea what this role entails but it seems to me that no one noticed his departure. Unlike the departure of our air traffic controllers, which is something that is currently seriously impacting the whole Island, the Director of Communication is not being missed. IMHO, the government can and must undertake selective ‘austerity’ that have minimum impact on frontline public services.

Currently the IOMG is having an ongoing political spat with the BMA, Crogga has effectively pulled out of its own project, and only 6.4% of the businesses surveyed by the IOM CoC expressed confidence in government’s plans. Yet the IOMG persists with the attempt to create the illusion that everything is just rosy. They are asking us to simply trust Dr Alex when he says there is a medium-term plan that will work. I for one, do not understand what he is promising to deliver. With the Chief Minister being effectively AWOL, even though the buck must stop with him on all of these important matters, this government is seemingly becoming more like an interregnum as opposed to a properly functioning organisation. Presumably they still believe that with all this chaos they are all going to get re-elected...