I thought we were drifting north-west, in general? But even if plate tectonics were reversed, surely the Alps would stop us ever turning into Greece?

If you are claiming Contributory ESA and are placed in the Work Related Activity Group and your household income is above the threshold of £7,500 your ESA ceases after 365 days. Your "household" is expected to support you. Given that I still have presctiptions to pay for, full mortgage, council tax, petrol to get to hospital appointments, all of which I contribute to, it does affect things. No more will we be able to buy anthing other than the absolute essentials to live. I'm not saying right now we will go straight into poverty but the household income will now be fully spent on the above I have mentioned,just to live, with nothing left, not even to go to rugby anymore

With half a million ESA claimants not receiving their ESA benefit, 1000,s being made redundant ie caravan industry in Hull, more public sector cuts coming, and don't forget the pasty tax

this surely must affect spending?

Can I be the first to shout BINGO!

Just walked past a TV set to get me coffee and there is Panface struggling hard in the Commons shouting at the top of his voice "Its what we inherited!"

I'll have a prize from the middle row please.

That is as I said a different debate as to whether or not cutting back spending on the public sector is a major factor in driving the economy into recession at this point in time. Given it is so large a part of the economy and given the private sector has not filled the gap it is so blindingly obvious that the cuts driven as much by ideology as economics (which is what those economists I quoted meant about politics being the problem) are a major factor.

Just admit you are wrong on that.

You will also have to explain how money currently spent on the public sector can be deployed more profitably. By doing what exactly? Cutting public spending and giving companies a tax break? Well that clearly isn't working (and it is what Osborne's one strategy for growth is).

The Tory philosophy of cut taxes for the wealthy and for companies funded by public sector spending cuts and this will all trickle down and magically rebalance the economy just won't work. However that won't stop Osborne sitting on his hands waiting for the miracle to happen.



What? First of all there is no evidence of rebalancing going on and in any case the rebalancing we need to less reliance on banking and the city not just a switch from public to private. I suppose you will be telling me next the privatisation of the health service is rebalancing the economy? And where does this millionaire local authority middle management thing come from? The Daily Mail?



The public sector has grown since the 60's (as opposed to since 1997 as the Tories would have you believe) to be the percentage of GDP that it is. It isn't much different in that respect in the USA, that bastion of "small government". You have to ask why that is and in my view it is not what we do in the public sector but what it [icosts[/i to do it. I also believe that costs have gone up the more private industry has become involved. Many of our services are now decentralised, open to competition (buses and refuse collection for example) and while I don't have any figures to back it up I just do not believe we get these services cheaper as a result. I know from the work my wife has to do at he school she works at regarding what gets spent on suppliers of things like refuse collection the outgoings of a council to private companies are huge. If you want a fundamental rethink then I reckon we need to change the record of privatising everything that moves and thinking competition will drive costs down.

1. To reduce the debate to the fact we are apparently in recession today is silly. As I said, we have major problems which will take years to, hopefully, resolve. The fact is there will be ups and downs in headline figures along the way.

2. Resources will be reallocated into profitable areas if the public sector shrinks, just as they were after Thatcher's era. It just takes time. Is China more propserous now than during the days of Mao?

3. If a public sector manager gets a pension of say £50,000 pa that would be equivalent to saving a capital sum of ca. £1,000,000 (or £25,000 pa for 40 years - how many people can do that in the rest of the economy)?

4. Just like you, I have no idea whether outsourcing has been cost-effective or not. If it has not been then there has been mismanagement. It probably has been because even if it cost 10% more to collect the bins than the Council doing it through its employees the back offf savings in payroll, personnel management, training, pensions, holidays, etc would be saved.

Dally: if your partner is applying for ESA, she may be entitled for 365 days only, then your income will be taken into account for future benefits or she may be reassessed as fit for work before then.
Of course she may get a part-time job but this will not attract WTC as 24 hours a week is "full-time" and you need that to get WTC.
Wait for the benefit cap explosion in a week

Today's figures [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/reality-check-with-polly-curtis/2012/apr/25/economicgrowth-debt-crisisshow that a massive contraction in the construction industry[/url lies at the heart of the overall figure. This is predominantly down to government cuts, such as scrapping the schools building programme. This is Osborne's recession.

Sad, sad day for ESA claimants on Monday. For those in the WRAG on Contributory ESA who's household income is above £7,500 who have been on it for one year or more will no longer qualify for the benefit as from Monday. That means on Sunday you are just as ill and disabled as you ever were but on Monday you will be thrown on the sick and disabled scrapheap or the ConDems will have performed a medical miracle on you however you want to look at it.

I can see some pretty serious headlines in the papers in the next few weeks to do with ESA claimants

A more pertinent question would be: just how many people, working in the public sector, do you think have amassed a pension of £50k per year?



But the savings in back-office functions then have to be balanced by the cost of supporting those made unemployed by outsourcing, or do you think those people simply disappear along with their jobs?

Outsourcing?

There are reasons that services are being brought back in house in various places – even in Tory councils.

And this is why you should never believe what you read. My father in law was a Senior Officer at Hull City Council. He'd laugh at you if you thought his pension was £50,000 and ask you where on earth you got that ridiculously high figure from.

Typically pensions generate 2/3rds final salary for long serving people in the private sector and at least that in the public. there are alot of public sector staff earning £75,000 plus. Several thousand earn £100,000+

Or what Dally says



Without disclosing too much (mainly because I can't remember it exactly), my pension at 60 (due to my terms and conditions when I was employed and left) will be a lump sum of around £15000 and then just under £5000 a year. That's from just under 14 years in the public service. The longer it stays the higher it will eventually be (I hope) but I won't be getting the Bentley just yet.

I would love to meet the £50000 a year public sector pensioner, to punch him on the nose.

Oh and Dally seems to be missing the point that that pension money will be spent on goods and services from which VAT etc will be paid. What goes around....

My wife (not partner please) is applying on behalf of my daughter. Not sure if my income counts towards my daughter? In any event its just a case of applying so one arm of the public services can get the money from another. In other words, waste and beaurocracy to see whose budget it comes out of.

Costs are transferred to the private operators back-office. They need to employ people to cover the extra work.

The LA is no different to any other employer, there will be high earners, but for every one on 100k there will a few thousand on the breadline with a tiny pension to look forward to.

And the majority don't. The majority don't even earn a quater of that. There are around 6million employed in the public sector, the majority on the average UK wage or below. Several thousand (if your figures are correct) out of 6million earning top whack isn't going to make the public pension scheme collapse.

Nope, Igglepiggle (name courtesy of his former fan club at gobbyhousewifes.com or whatever they are called) insisted today in the commons that it was because of what they'd inherited from Labour.

So thats alright then.


In the real world it doesn't matter why there is a nail in the tyre, just that the Kwikfit fitter has the ability to fix it and if he doesn't then call someone else in to do the job.

My understanding Dally is if your daughter has worked previously and paid enough NI contributions then she will be entitled to contributory ESA. If she is placed in the support group on contributory ESA then she will continue to receive it continiously (or until she is re- assessed and told otherwise ie to be placed in the WRAG or found fit for work). If she is placed in the Work Related Activity Group and lives with you and your wife, both your incomes are classed as "household" and she will be on ESA for one year then the "household" will be expected to support her after the year if the household income is above £7,500 combined. If she is on Income Based ESA no matter if she lives at home with you or independantley then she will continue to receive the benefit continuously (or again until she is re-assessed and told otherwise ie fit for work).

If you think after the assesment that the decision is wrong, you have one month from the decision date to appeal.

Good luck with it all, it really is a minefield and imo deliberately confusing.

It's only silly if you don't want to admit you were wrong in your original post. There is now plenty of analysis coming out from various economists and they are dismissing Osborne's stance it was all down to the Eurozone and even the ONS is saying its down to the purely domestic issues mainly constructiopn that is is suffering from the governments cuts.

The ONS said output of the production industries decreased by 0.4%, construction decreased by 3% and output of the service sector increased by 0.1%.

It added that a fall in government spending had contributed to the particularly large fall in the construction sector.

"The huge cuts to public spending - 25% in public sector housing and 24% in public non-housing and with a further 10% cuts to both anticipated for 2013 - have left a hole too big for other sectors to fill," said Judy Lowe, deputy chairman of industry body CITB-ConstructionSkills, said."

From here: [urlhttp://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17836624[/url



What profitable areas? And how do you do this? Is the government to do as I suggested its strategy is, to cut corporation tax and cross its fingers it will work? If not just what do you mean by "Resources will be reallocated into profitable areas if the public sector shrinks"? What does this mean and what magic wand will do this?

What happened after Thatcher was we became a service led economy and guess what? The only thing that is pinning up at the moment is the service sector and what little retail activity their is. The stuff we really need to do it isn't.



A public sector [umiddle manager[/u (your original words) will never be on a pension of £50K. You don't have a point.

The handful of council CEO's who earn 6 figure salaries might be. But then I guess the old argument we have to pay the going rate to get the best man for the job so often trotted out to justify high salaries in the private sector doesn't apply in the public sector.



My wife sees the cost (not savings) associated with using private companies. I have lost count of the number of stories she tells me of how the attitude is charge for everything. And councils pay it because they no longer have the old ethos of being custodians of the local finances. Most of them involved in the finance departments are overworked and the level of scrutiny is quite shocking.

At her school to give one example Biffa turned up when they shouldn't have to collect the refuse. Could not gain access so then proceed to charge the council for return visit. Invoice lands on my wife's desk - she refuses to pay it. Or should I say she tries to. The effort involved to sort this out was huge. She got it sorted in the end but there are plenty of other small amounts of money incorrectly billed that the attitude is (because it has to be) that it is not worth the effort to chase up. The books balance, there is money in the budget so stuff the effort.

My wife hates this attitude and has saved the school a small fortune over the years but how many people do you think are like this? Not many is my guess and if this is replicated across the country the costs will be huge overall. And this would not be happening anything like this if the money stayed where it was, within the local authority.

My Mrs has just been placed in the Support Group - what a huge relief.

Had the assessment only last week and after weeks of worrying it went well. She'd spent weeks reading horror stories of CCTV and trick questions and we'd prepared for most eventualities, but she was still very stressed.

Actually, when I say 'it went well', what I mean is they left her sitting in a crappy chair too long so she ended up in agony. Oddly, as soon as I asked for somewhere for her to lie down they were immediately ready for us. She then had to carry out the assessment lying on the examination table (a first for our assessor, apparently) and they didn't carry out the physical assessment as she was in no state. The sheer effort and stress caused a bit of a panic/stress attack as she was barely able to walk, floods of tears ensued and she had to spend time recovering in a side room. All in all, a lovely morning!

However, all that has gone in her favour as far as the assessment was concerned. She got her letter this morning and is - correctly - in the Support Group. Amazed by such a rapid response but it was pretty clear she's not faking.

Undoubtedly. But how does that affect poll ratings?

As for public sector pensions, it's likely they'll be offering some generous packages right now as jobs being are shed.

My dad took voluntary redundancy at the age of 50 back in 1991 after Bury Council lost about £6.5M in the BCCI collapse. He was a senior bod on about £30k (about £55-60k in today's shekels). I don't recall the exact details but I think the terms were a generous pay-off, a full salary pension for 10 years and 50% after that.

No one is disputing that.

Not disputing the majority position. That's obvious. The several thousand figure is correct. The issue I was raising was nothing to do with the the pension funds but simply the economic reality that if significant numbers of people are given risk-free jobs with such security then will not engage in more entrepreneurial activity and hence stifle the long-term economic well-being of the country (and its ability to maintain strong public services).