Sir Ralph

It’s the only way you can get into this Government. It’s a minimum requirement.

I agree for the good ones so I think you could pay good people more and make it easier to get rid of the shite ones. It’s notoriously difficult to sack bad people in the public sector.

MaCarthy Jelert Wood THB Wellington Romeu Jander (Charles when fit) Scienza Robinson Fellows Armstrong (Stewart when fit) Downs (tea boy)

Get in. Hopefully plays against Wednesday but defo Charlton.

My experience of stress in parts of the public sector and the private sector have different threshold levels (not for all I hasten to add, but many). This from someone who has worked in both. The pay does reflect this in parts of the private sector to add balance. I have known a few people in the public sector that are underpaid for their output and I would pay them more if I was in charge, but there are some sectors where the levels of output wouldnt be acceptable in most private sector environments. In my own experience, the former is less common than the latter.

but increasing taxes wont? You are referring to inflation, something which we have the highest of all the G7 countries in 2025 and predicted for2026. Say hello to your Labour Government.

Fair enough I didn’t say you didn’t. It’s helpful to understand where people are coming from in these discussions.

I am - thats one thing you are right about.

So yes. Thats why you dont want to discuss it. Your view on all of these matters about reducing spending is out of self interest then.😂

That isnt a reason for not challenging it. Do you have a public sector pension?

To be fair, I think pensions were historically excessive but have been reduced, by how much I'm not sure.

Just a quick point - what does your graph show after 2019 and does it go pre-2010?

Of a 17.8 billion civil service salary bill (doesnt include buildings) they are saving 0.5% of salary bills. Imagine being part of a business with a section that is renound for inefficiencies and having a meeting about savings of 0.5%! So they aren’t really making any civil service savings but want to tax us more. Great

Hang on I will get my LA specific accounting review for 24/25. As I agreed the spending savings for LAs maybe less. I have had to work with some LAs in recent years and, on reflection, my issue might be to be with the quality of some of the people there and the 'value' for money we get from some of them, particularly some senior people. So, to reiterate, I agree that the savings in this respect maybe smaller. Also LA's accounts for 20% of government spending. What about savings in the remaining 80%? Not possible.

I think people don’t want to answer it and admit that there are probably areas in a balanced budget where cuts can be made as it’s an admittance that this government is taxing people to levels it doesn’t need to. There isn’t an assumption they haven’t looked at it. It’s that they don’t want to make the cuts. I also gave @Farmer Saint areas where spending cuts could be considered and you said you wanted more and more details “thinking we are in the inner-circle in relation to Government and public service efficiency”. Not hypocritical at all. What I’m saying is in the press. I know to some poster on this forum it make feel like some far right view but it really ain’t! Actually just found this which is a very recent public survey on the matter from you gov. I suspect the opinion of the posters on here though is much better informed than the people who responded to this poll! They will all be estate agents, uneducated con-men, like their hero Farage. https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/survey-results/daily/2025/11/04/28b4a/1

I was trying to be fair. I don’t think I am wrong but I was trying to get a half reasonable response.

I agree to some degree. But the question is then, are there inefficiencies that can be addressed which have much less consequential impacts and could be tackled instead of more and more tax rises (to at least minimise those tax rises)? My issue is where is the governments plan for this to achieve a balanced budget?

I know people that work for local authorities and the impact on their budgets. Pre 2008 they were bloated so austerity did address some of this. I agree that now they are more stretched. I think there maybe some efficiencies in some local authorities but I think I agreed before that this would be relatively limited. LA spending is about 20% - what about the rest of government spending? Are there cuts to be made there?

Don’t pretend you have answered my question and that fob off. My question is why have spending cuts being seriously considered? This point is being debated regularly in the mainstream media….its not as if this is some wacky left field idea The only thing from you is a sarcastic response that suggests no spending cuts are possible. Let me make it simple for you: a. No spending cuts are possible at all moving forward b. Spending cuts are possible but the government won’t do it. It’s a really easy question to respond to. If you were unclear my answer is b). Maybe I am wrong and maybe I’m right but I’m clear on my opinion.

So you can’t answer it still. My reason remains the only reasonable explanation on the table in relation to this clinically useless government and why they won’t consider spending cuts. Thanks

Incorrect. @tdmickey3 criticised reform policy and I asked him what his alternative would be. He couldn’t respond so the point was don’t criticise if you don’t have an alternative to put forward. I actually think streeting comes across as one of the few competent ministers. you haven’t responded to my question about spending cuts though

Easy to criticise if you have no alternative isn’t it. Keep ploughing in the billions then

Azaz was terrible again. Seems to want to take so much time on the ball Downs - More effort than the usual pedestrian attitude. I would say a lot of effort is a bit much. He has the physical presence of a sleeping Pygmy. His end product was still terrible but he won a header 😂

The formation is a big problem. With three at the back it leaves us with a player less to press up top. It also leaves Fellows playing 20 yards too deep and means that Azaz (who I agree has been crap) gets more attention from the extra central midfielder they then have. He is a player that needs space and time to operate. I don’t understand the persistence with it and why we aren’t playing 4-2-3-1 As a side point I thought THB looked much more up for it tonight

So what’s your plan for saving the NHS in the long run? So far all government plans are to countinue blindly ploughing billions in - do you think that’s sustainable in the long run? What did reform actually say about insurance based health care by the way?