Ring-fencing NHS and schools budgets 'insane', says Audit Commission head

[LA]

Labour has pledged to protect funding for hospitals, schools, police and foreign aid, while the Conservatives have said they will "ring fence" the NHS and foreign aid budgets.

But Steve Bundred, chief executive of the Audit Office, said given that deep cuts were likely to be needed to cut the £178 billion national deficit, it would be unfair to maintain some budgets at the expense of others.

Ring-fencing NHS and schools budgets 'insane', says Audit Commission head - Telegraph

Too bloody right.
The idea that you can ring fence any budget in these times is absolutely ridiculous. Naturally, I expect this kind of political-ringfencing by Labour, but from the Conservatives? It is absolutely shocking.

The Head of the Audit Commission is entirely correct. Almost all budgets must suffer, especially Social Security, Health and Education as they are the largest budgets.

However, we should ensure that budgets such as Universities and Defence are protected as they are vitally important.

So, do you guys agree with the head of the audit commission?

[Midas]

...... So, do you guys agree with the head of the audit commission?

In principle, yes I would agree, but it's important that there's a very clear categorisation of what budgets can be pruned and by how much as opposed to those which are far more important to retain as untouched as possible. For a politician, any politician, to say "we're not going to touch this" is simply to invite later derision and calls of breaking election promises; I'm sure the British public would respect someone far more if they told the truth for once!

Budgets like those for education and health should be the last be be chopped, however that doesn't mean that there still can't be significant cuts made in the bureaucratic sides to cut down of excessive staffing levels, waste and general inefficiency.

[LA]

In principle, yes I would agree, but it's important that there's a very clear categorisation of what budgets can be pruned and by how much as opposed to those which are far more important to retain as untouched as possible. For a politician, any politician, to say "we're not going to touch this" is simply to invite later derision and calls of breaking election promises; I'm sure the British public would respect someone far more if they told the truth for once!

Budgets like those for education and health should be the last be be chopped, however that doesn't mean that there still can't be significant cuts made in the bureaucratic sides to cut down of excessive staffing levels, waste and general inefficiency.

This is the problem though. If; say, the Conservatives came out and honestly stated that all budgets would need to be cut because of Labour's spending spluge, people just wouldn't vote Conservative. It makes me laugh. The electorate say they want honesty, but they never vote for it. They say they want honesty, but their actions suggest they want lies and deception.


In regards to the budgets, I disagree to an extent. The two budgets that should be protected by as much as is possible is Defence and Universities. Neither are particularly expensive, but both are vitally important.

Health, Education and especially social security don't need cutting, they need a hacking down. The budgets have overgrown and require a strong chancellor to bring them under control. The Social Security budget is astounding. It is ridiculous.

[DTE]

In regards to the budgets, I disagree to an extent. The two budgets that should be protected by as much as is possible is Defence and Universities. Neither are particularly expensive, but both are vitally important.

The defence budget needs increasing, let alone protection. We continue to send men and women out to fight in sub-standard equipment and there is vitually no support for returning and injured troops. The way this government have treated the armed forces is nothing short of scandalous. Hopefully a new government would seek to address this. Everywhere else should face cuts, but in comparison, I see no reason why university budgets should be protected when education and healthcare face cuts. What is more important than the health of citizens and education of children? Tweenagers sitting on their backsides watching movies for media degrees, or doing other soft subjects like philosophy or social sciences, whereby the possibility of direct employment based on said degrees is almost nil?

New Labour told a whole generation that university was THE ONLY way to go after leaving school, did it work? Do we now have masses of superbly educated twentysomethings who can pretty much do anything?

No. Healthcare and childhood education are RIGHTS. University education is a privilege, and should be subject to cuts as well as everything else.

[Major Sinic]

But Steve Bundred, chief executive of the Audit Office, said given that deep cuts were likely to be needed to cut the £178 billion national deficit, it would be unfair to maintain some budgets at the expense of others.

So, do you guys agree with the head of the audit commission?

I agree with him absolutely.

There is a considerable difference between protecting a budget and protecting the objective of that budget.

Taking the NHS as a point in hand. Many people believe there is inexcusable waste within the NHS, a belief shared by many of the non-administrative staff employed within it. Few people dispute the desirability of a national health service and the principle that it should be free at the the point of treatment.

To ring fence the NHS is to ring fence the waste within it. This is ridiculous. What is needed is an objective and detailed review of the most cost effective means of enabling the NHS to meet its pre-agreed objectives. If a potential area of cost saving compromises an underlying prime objective then it should be disregarded or modified. Administrative practices, salaries and wages, pension schemes and procedures should all come under particular scrutiny.

Having said that I would reduce, and in some cases remove, free health care requested or required as a result of lifestyle choices. Within this I would include gender change surgery, breast reduction and enlargement, fertility treatment, and 'vanity' cosmetic surgery. I would also look very closely at treatment required as a result of the patients being under the influence of non-prescription mind and/or body affecting substances.

Personally whilst I am perfectly at ease with the principle of the private sector having a management and operational involvement in the NHS, ultimately the assets and operational policy and priorities must remain under public control.

I believe these principles are equally applicable to other crucial public services including education, transport, welfare and defence. No public service should have its budget ring fenced, but there are public services which should have their objectives protected.

I do sincerely believe that there is so much waste within the public sector, that cost cutting exercises are not necessarily synonymous with cutting services, but would in many cases result in more responsive and efficient public services.

[LA]

The defence budget needs increasing, let alone protection. We continue to send men and women out to fight in sub-standard equipment and there is vitually no support for returning and injured troops. The way this government have treated the armed forces is nothing short of scandalous. Hopefully a new government would seek to address this.

I entirely agree.
I would like to see the Defence Budget substantially increased year on year.

Everywhere else should face cuts, but in comparison, I see no reason why university budgets should be protected when education and healthcare face cuts.

Couple of reasons
1/ If we reduce the budget, less British students get places because they get foreign students so they can survive
2/ It is vitally important we maintain the strength and standard of our Universities.

What is more important than the health of citizens and education of children? Tweenagers sitting on their backsides watching movies for media degrees, or doing other soft subjects like philosophy or social sciences, whereby the possibility of direct employment based on said degrees is almost nil?

Two things should happen
1/ Students studying mathematics, science and technology based subjects should have their tuitions free (assuming they are British)
2/ Students not studying those subjects should pay more for their courses.

New Labour told a whole generation that university was THE ONLY way to go after leaving school, did it work? Do we now have masses of superbly educated twentysomethings who can pretty much do anything?

No. Healthcare and childhood education are RIGHTS. University education is a privilege, and should be subject to cuts as well as everything else.

But University is education... How can you draw an arbritary line to say Uni education is not education?

Really, I would like to see the deficit removed by cutting Health, Social Security, International Development. However, I cannot picture a government being able to do it.

[DTE]

Oh my non-religion-specific God LA! Your views on this are like picking a thread on a crazy jumper, its all just keeps coming!

Couple of reasons
1/ If we reduce the budget, less British students get places because they get foreign students so they can survive
2/ It is vitally important we maintain the strength and standard of our Universities.

First point, not necessarily. You cut their budgets, they make cuts themselves. Second point, well that isn't really a point at all, is it? Its just what you said before but with more words. I can categorically do that too in order to make what I said before appear to have more worth than it previously did, as I appear to be doing now.

Two things should happen
1/ Students studying mathematics, science and technology based subjects should have their tuitions free (assuming they are British)
2/ Students not studying those subjects should pay more for their courses.

What?! So the students choosing to do subjects which are almost by definition harder than others get to go free, whereas other students are penalised for not doing these 'core subject' courses. Say for example you have a kid from pivate education, getting all As at A level and deciding to do medicine at university, well then they should get to go free of course! Whereas little Johnny or Josephine from the local high school, who gets all Cs but wants to do engineering at what will probably be a lesser university, has to pay through the teeth! Nice to see the old Tory inequality beleifs are still in force! The amount you pay should be relative you how much you can afford, no other factor is relevant.

But University is education... How can you draw an arbritary line to say Uni education is not education?

Well for a start every other developed country considers childhood education a basic human right, and that it should be free. We'll give you the basics, and then you go from there. Thats not my arbritary line, its the western world's, but I'll take credit for it if you like. It could very well be argued that University education should also be free, but considering the country is currently the equivalent of the local unwashed miscreant smelling of cheap cider going back to the betting shop asking for more credit, times are tough, and cuts need to be made.

Really, I would like to see the deficit removed by cutting Health, Social Security, International Development. However, I cannot picture a government being able to do it.

Blanket cutting across the board is an inevitability, but special protections should be put in place on education, health, defence, public transport and some aspects of social security. Rather than letting the government decide what areas to cut, lets cut government itself, the bloated civil service could use a fat-trimming, all those ridiculous public service advertising campaigns could go as well. Then there's the unnecassary waste that comes from having the public purse at your desposal. Maybe its about time public services had to 'do more with less' rather than the people for once.

I agree with Major Major that ring fencing the NHS ring fences the problems within also, but in an election year honesty will be in short supplyso who knows what they're planning really.