An Alternative to Public Sector Cuts?

There was an interesting article on the Politics Show yesterday, in which Profesor Greg Philo of Glasgow University (about 1hr:29 mins into the programme) argued that the state deficit could be abolished by a one-off tax on the wealthiest 10% of the population, rather than through the cuts agenda that almost all politicians of all stripes seem to be seeing as inevitable. The Profs' ideas are promulgated on the Glasgow Media Group's website.

Because I believe that government interferes too much in the life of the individual, I would support some state spending being reduced even if the government had zero deficits or even if it made a healthy profit.

I have some doubts about the practicality of taxing the best tax avoiders in order to raise revenues! There would have to be a series of preliminary laws to tighten tax avoidance and the donations made to political parties by massive tax avoiders, before any collection of such a tax could be practical – something that neither Labour or Conservative recipients of tax avoiders largess will support!

And there is the perennial problem of taxing success. Untaxed money can go back into business and wealth creation, creating better businesses and more wealth (and more taxes in its wake). Taxes tend to get swallowed up in bureaucracy and bumf and administration rather than in economic growth.

On the other hand I don't want to see my local school close, fewer police on the beat; monthly bin collection, or my aged parents' old age pensions slashed either. If a one off tax on the super rich can avoid those then I'm all for it!

Whatever the merits or the faults of Prof Philo's proposals, it is good to see an alternative to the cuts agenda offered by most parties in the last election. The Glasgow Media proposal should have been offered as an alternative to voters during the election by a major party. Agree or disagree a party proposing and another party opposing would have given the electorate a real choice!

An austerity conundrum

In these days of austerity and tightening of the public belt the ConDem Westminster government tells us that there is a need to cut all sorts of costs out of public service provision in order to reduce costs and to provide better services for less money. A very laudable ideal that many will support.

But yet, when the Plaid /Labour coalition spends less per head on education, or on health or on social services than is spent per head in England the Assembly Government is accused of short changing the people of Wales and of underfunding services in Wales by Conservatives and Liberal Democrats!

I can't understand this!

If we need to cut public service costs why isn't the Westminster Government looking at the Plaid/ Labour Government in Cardiff and saying Wales has proved that you can deliver a decent education for £xxx per pupil less than is spent in England etc rather than the same parties who want to reduce spend per pupil / patient / service user in England complaining that the spend per person isn't as much in Wales as is, according to their own mantra, overspent per head in England?

The efficiency of devolution

Listening to those who still oppose devolution complaining during this weeks decennial celebrations, it has been interesting to note that most of them have based their complaints, not on standards, but on how much per head is spent on Welsh school children, Welsh patients etc.

Because of my health problems I am a heavy user of the NHS in Wales. My experience is that the NHS in Wales is much, much better now than it was ten years ago. English friends who live with hearing loss and epilepsy tell me that my service use experiences are much better than theirs.

As a parent of two children in secondary education I couldn't wish for a better education experience than that offered to my sprogs. English friends are amazed at the range of subjects, extra curricular activities and educational opportunities that my kids have in comparison to what their kids are offered. They can't believe that my children are not just given the range of experiences but that they can access them through a choice of languages!

The funny thing is that those who complain about the Assembly's per capita spending are also the rent-a-gobs who the press can always depend upon to give a quote about efficiency and the need for cutting public expenditure.

Which raises the question: Is the fact that less per head is spent on Welsh Education and Health than is spent on English Education and Health a sign that these services are worse in Wales or a sign that they are more efficient in Wales?

Its only anecdotal evidence, but my experience is that Wales is more efficient, providing more for less.