As the glorious days of the British summer – and we are having a magnificent one this year – pass by, the sound of scissors can be heard the length and breadth of this country. Snip, snip, cut, cut, as the new coalition continues to announce cut after cut of public spending. Today’s announcements: civil service redundancy payment and the Building Schools for the Future fund.
The Government wants to reduce the amount payable to a civil servant being made redundant (aka laid-off) and bring it in line with those in the private sector. The minimum amount payable to a private sector worker is a week’s pay for every year you have been with the organisation. If you’ve been there for four years you are entitled to four weeks, or around a month, of pay.
At issue is the fact that some civil servants are receiving the equivalent of up to six years worth of salary. Someone who has worked in the public sector for 20 years will receive two years worth of pay. Depending on how high up they are, this could be as much as £100,000 in severance pay. Admittedly, this may be excessive but the Government really ought to consider the consequences of changing this scheme given their prediction of as many as 600,000 public sector job losses.
Many of the job losses may very well be redundancy, whether that is voluntary or compulsory. Changing the redundancy rules too dramatically will give these people a double blow. Not only with they lose their jobs but they’ll receive far less in redundancy pay on which to live while looking for work. They may also be eligible for Jobseekers Allowance or other benefits depending on their household income. This could, in effect, lead to more spending due to more people on the dole queue.
The other announcement will also not only have the potential to put more people out of work but it could also have an effect on the education of this and coming generations. The Building Schools for the Future (BSF) fund was aimed at those areas where school buildings are very out of date or extra pupil places are needed.
The local authority I work for was to be a recipient of this funding to build a secondary school. School places are much needed in this borough as there has been an overwhelming influx of children in the past few years and the schools are struggling to cope. These students will soon reach secondary school age and, thus, a new secondary school is needed. It is yet to be announced whether we will be affected.
As discussed previously, the private sector feels the effect of these public spending cuts in their government contracts. When the public sector is spending money, such as they would in the construction sector building the schools, these companies benefit from the work. If public sector spending is reined in and, specifically, if these new schools are not being built it could have a huge knock-on effect for the UK’s construction industry. More unemployed people equals more eligible for benefits.
Equally as bad would be the pupils that will end up bearing the brunt of these cuts. Their education provision could be extensively stymied in the coming years due to lack of adequate buildings or resources. This could lead to a whole generation of students less well-educated than their predecessors. While there may be arguments for revamping the BSF project, slashing the funding for much-needed schools is not a good idea. The argument that our future generations will be paying for the deficit we’re trying to reduce now is not valid if you’re cutting education that will equip them to get jobs in this deficit-free future.
In other cuts news the Local Government Association has announced results of its poll of what the public would want to see cut. In an ironic twist the very things the Government has ring-fenced – the NHS and overseas aid – are what the public would like to see cut. Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg announced last week that the Government wants to hear from the public on what laws should be kept and should be scrapped in one of the largest ‘consultation’ exercises. Perhaps they ought to be asking what should and shouldn’t be cut since it seems the public disagree with them dramatically.
Finally, in what is not entirely shocking (to me, at least) news, it would seem women will bear the largest burden of these cuts. Because the public sector is largely made up of women they will feel the effects of spending cuts, pay freezes and budget cuts more than their male counterparts. Further to this are the already-announced cuts of child tax credit, child benefit, the Sure Start and the Health in Pregnancy grants. They say that behind every great man is a great woman. In this case, behind poor men will be poorer women.
Sources:
BBC:
Telegraph:
Guardian: