you are bord snip your 10 biggest cuts?

goldenbrown

mine would be

no army operations outside of ireland for 10 years
no army/navy/aircorp new arms etc., purchasing for 10 years
no new state cars for 6 years and replace only after 4 years
if you receive a state salary no parallel pensions or similar
overseas aid paused fully for 6 years
no state employee to be paid more than 200k (there are many)
after current term close seanad - pointless/expensive
any person travelling at state expense only travels on economy ticket
no more helicopter travel for elected representatives
no irish annual tax return or similar? no irish passport mr rich

Imposter

Off the top of my head: (not just cuts but ways to make or save money)

- Reduction in social welfare payments
- Reduction of Minimum wage
- Introduction of property tax (taking into account stamp duty paid in the recent past - and eliminating or reforming stamp duty)
- Reform of public service pay and pensions to be more in line with the real world
- reduction in the number of public servants

and from above:
- if you receive a state salary no parallel pensions or similar
- any person travelling at state expense only travels on economy ticket (possibly exemptions for some on long haul travel)

Spiritoftheseventies

simple really. TD'S get their pensions like the rest of us when they get to 65. its madness. A freeze on all bonuses on banks and any bonuses to be referred back to financial regulator.

Morpheus

Good debate but....

ha ha ha

you make me laugh

Always the bloody army straight away when it consumes such a piddling small sun of money each year for massive return... show me one other department whos mission statement contains the words "value for money" in it. Gardai i wouldnt cut either.

no army operations outside of ireland for 10 years

seeing how the UN picks up the tab most of the time (chad being the exception), you wont save much.

no army/navy/aircorp new arms etc., purchasing for 10 years

only equipment they buy for aircorps or navy is replacement equipment, unfortunately some of our ships are long past their lifespan and need replacement. Would you rather have foreign countries stealing our fish stocks - thus increasing job losses in fishing here and smuggling of drugs to become much easier - thus increasing the burden on the govt to look after these drug addicts and the increase in criminal behaviour directly linked to drugs? What about arms? you think a gun never breaks and needs replacing, you think we fire magic bullets that never deplete the stocks held here, honestly for a department that runs on a shoestring, theres fe*k all cutting available.

Look at the wider range of things done by departments.

They all need to be revamped and rebuilt, thats where the money saving is.

Dept of health - theres a concept in ireland that if we fire money at this bottomless pit and we may eventually fill it up - that wont happen - wipe it out completely and rebuild from new -would save a stack of money - get a PWC whitepaper like we did on defence ten years ago and FOLLOW THE F***ING THING THROUGH - roll over the unions and just cut slash and rebuild.

More WHITEPAPERS on each major department and on the semi states like Bord Gais and ESB.

Civil servant pen pushers- wipe them out and rebuild the system completely.

cigarettes - increase tax

alcahol - increase tax

both the above have long term health department savings too.

govt salaries - slash

govt benefits - slash

top earners tax - increase

vat - decrease to encourage more consumer spending

PAYE - im sorry to say but this would need another increase


Car related taxes - dont see the point in increasing these without inproving the public transport services first.

Development of our oil and gas resources BY THE STATE for our own profits.

more tax incentives for foreign companies to set up here.

Just my thoughts!

Time Magazine

goldenbrown wrote: »

overseas aid paused fully for 6 years

Out of interest, how many people do you think would die if we did this? Honest question.

no state employee to be paid more than 200k (there are many)

Even the heads of NAMA? Do you not want the best guys possible? Do you want to put €80,000m in less competent hands for the sake of a few million in wages?

after current term close seanad - pointless/expensive

How would you go about altering the Constitution?

no irish annual tax return or similar? no irish passport mr rich

You cannot strip someone of their citizenship for paying tax in another country.

The_Conductor

1. Abolition of the Minimum wage

2. Linking of gross social welfare entitlements to the average cost of supplying of a basket of entitlements from a list of stated countries

3. Halving of employers PRSI and removal of most of the red tape associated with employing people

4. Simplification of the tax code- with tax paid at all income levels- 10% on first 10k of income, 20% on next 15k, 30% on next 20k (thats 11.5k on 50k of income) and a blanket 40% on absolutely all income over 50k

5. (All income to be taxed- including social welfare entitlements and superannuation disbursements)

6. Abolition of all tax shelters, credits, schemes etc

7. Linking all public sector salaries to the average cost of supplying of similar roles from a list of stated countries

8. Immediate rolling back of benchmarking

9. Abolition of local constituency offices for national elected representatives- once you are elected- you represent Ireland- not Dingle, Co. Kerry.

10. All state sector companies supplying goods or services to the public be instructed to immediately implement price cuts bringing the price of their products/services to international normal levels (think ESB, Bord Gais and others)

11. Abolition of a large number of bodies and indeed government departments- and their functions to be subsumed into the core functions of those departments (The two obvious surplus government departments are Arts, Sports and Tourism and Craggy Island (Community, Rural and Gaeltacht Affairs)). Bodies which have significant assets (from price gouging the public!!!) include the ESB, Coillte, Bord Gais and others.

12. On the abolition of these bodies- any pension funds or other assets to be transferred to the NTMA for management as they see fit.

13. Reduce the numbers of publicly elected representatives, cap their allowable salaries and combined remuneration at realistic levels, and abolish any payments which are not properly accounted for (for convenience sake- all items above EUR100 must be properly receipted for, and a maximum of 5k on unreceipted items, to include postage, will be allowable on an annual basis).

14. Lengthen the school year (we have the shortest in the OECD, and provide cheap, reliable childcare and afterschool activities in the local communities (use some of the recently unemployed to provide these services)).

15. Merge the two houses of the Oireachtais- rather than simply abolishing the Seanad. Have a staggered electional pattern- on a 6 year rotation- half the house goes for re-election every 3 years. Continue to allow a college electoral vote- but allow the resulting members to become government Ministers. I'd like to see what Shane Ross, Fergal Quinn and David Norris might achieve- given the appropriate opportunity.

16. Do a skills evaluation in government departments- and make a conscious attempt to match qualifications (educational and professional) to specific jobs- rather than pretending their all interchangeable robots.

17. Widen the service VAT rate to include staple foods- to offset the inevitable falls in salaries as a result of the abolition of the minimum wage

18. Abolish annual road tax on all vehicles- but hike the duty on fuel to more than make up the difference. Use some of the resulting funds to put more of the unemployed into Revenue investigative posts- targetting fuel/cigarette/alcohol smuggling.

19. Massive crackdown on welfare fraud

20. Total reappraisal of welfare entitlements- childrens' welfare to end after a certain age- but this to be offset by greater availability of parttime work, cheap/free afterschool clubs and a much longer school year.

21. Restatement of accommodation as a right, rather than 'housing' as a right. All local authorities to immediately cease buying and selling residential property. Any property on their books- to be designated 'accommodation' for those unable to supply accommodation for themselves- and a small monthly rent charged. Any dereliction of duty towards this property- damage or inappropriate upkeep on the part of the tenant, to result in immediate eviction and non-provision of alternate accommodation other than on a shelter basis.

Everyone has to be seen to be doing 'their part', no sacred cows whatsoever, and a massive reappraisal of what we are to be done. We are a very small country on the edge of Europe- who have totally lost the run of ourselves.

Harsh times ahead......

narwog81

goldenbrown wrote: »

overseas aid paused fully for 6 years

This is the only really meaningful cut here in terms of altering our budget deficit - the aid committment is circa 800million p.a. so this would save 4.8 billion over the 6 years you propose.

However the moral cost is perhaps harder to quantify.....

also i further the other posters comments on our military commitments overseas, generally they cost very little to the Irish taxpayer and their benefits in terms on national prestige etc massively outweigh the cost.

The rest are cosmetic changes that should happen but wont affect the bottom line greatly, i'd imagine "An Bord Snip" will be chasing bigger targets like Public expenditure and social welfare costs

seamus

Pay cuts across all public servants/departments, including TDs.: 10% cut under €40k, 20% cut between €40k and €100k, 30% cut over €100k.

Decrease definition of "Residency" to 90 non-consecutive days in any calendar year, 200 days in any two consecutive years. (Outside their remit, but hey, one can hope)

Cut as many "supplements" and "benefits" as possible - look into ways of dealing directly with utilities instead of giving people money into their hand. So if someone is getting some form of benefit to pay their phone bill, the government pays the company directly and doesn't give the person cash in their hand.

Standard social welfare reduction of 10%.

Large-scale cull of management in Public service. The ratio of management:non-management should not be more than 1:8.

BraziliaNZ

Civil/public servants are retiring in large numbers every week now due to the tax they'll have to pay in future on their pensions. These will not be replaced and their work will be passed on to others. So that's a large staff cut there.
Speaking as a gov employee who gets paid less than 40k, we've already lost out on about 5-7 % with new levys etc., i'm not too sure of the details, but I would be willing to take more of a pay cut, no more than 10% however. I don't think people will be happy with our wages until they themselves are happily employed and making loads of money like it was in the boom - and you can't tar us all with the same brush, our department is most certainly not inept.

gurramok

Benchmark backwards instead of forwards in 2002. That would be fairer.

Agree with most of what was said. Also slash Rent Allowance for the 80,000 on it. Its a renters market and landlords have no leverage so an immediately saving would be obtained.

irish_bob

BraziliaNZ wrote: »

Civil/public servants are retiring in large numbers every week now due to the tax they'll have to pay in future on their pensions. These will not be replaced and their work will be passed on to others. So that's a large staff cut there.
Speaking as a gov employee who gets paid less than 40k, we've already lost out on about 5-7 % with new levys etc., i'm not too sure of the details, but I would be willing to take more of a pay cut, no more than 10% however. I don't think people will be happy with our wages until they themselves are happily employed and making loads of money like it was in the boom - and you can't tar us all with the same brush, our department is most certainly not inept.

regardless of your wages being cut via levy , their is simply far too many of you , for example , thier are 100 thousand full time farmers in this country yet their are 6000 civil servants in the dept of agriculture , a huge number of civil servants remain in jobs for the sole purpose of appeasing unions and keeping 1st preference votes with local fianan fail td,s

Cute_Button

irish_bob wrote: »

regardless of your wages being cut via levy , their is simply far too many of you , for example , thier are 100 thousand full time farmers in this country yet their are 6000 civil servants in the dept of agriculture , a huge number of civil servants remain in jobs for the sole purpose of appeasing unions and keeping 1st preference votes with local fianan fail td,s

First of all- there are a total of 182,000 people employed in the agriculture and food sectors in the country- of whom 124,000 (if you want to be pedantic and use ILO stats- 118,200) (a rise for the first time in several years) are considered to be fulltime farmers.

The total amount spent on Irish agriculture (a combination of national and EU funding) came to 3.56 billion, of which less than 8.5% (just under 300m) was expenditure related to administration costs of all types. Subsidies represent almost 85% of net operating surplus in the entire agri-food sector.

There are just under 3800 staff in the Department- of whom less than half are administrative staff- and this is expected to fall by a further 700 in 2009 through a non-replacement and redeployment policy- which will bring the staff count to roughly half what you're suggesting.

Finally- and I don't know if you're aware of it- but there are fewer staff in the Department than there have been since the 1950s- and if you honestly think the policy of downsizing the department, cutting pay, and forcing people to travel hundreds of miles on a daily basis to and from work is going to get Fianna Fail extra votes- you're very sadly mistaken. All there is on the horizon are more local offices closing, more being merged or converted into social welfare offices, less staff to deal with an increasingly irate public, and more frustration for everyone.

You really sound like you have a chip on your shoulder about the Department of Agriculture Irish_bob.

irish_bob

Cute_Button wrote: »

First of all- there are a total of 182,000 people employed in the agriculture and food sectors in the country- of whom 124,000 (if you want to be pedantic and use ILO stats- 118,200) (a rise for the first time in several years) are considered to be fulltime farmers.

The total amount spent on Irish agriculture (a combination of national and EU funding) came to 3.56 billion, of which less than 8.5% (just under 300m) was expenditure related to administration costs of all types. Subsidies represent almost 85% of net operating surplus in the entire agri-food sector.

There are just under 3800 staff in the Department- of whom less than half are administrative staff- and this is expected to fall by a further 700 in 2009 through a non-replacement and redeployment policy- which will bring the staff count to roughly half what you're suggesting.

Finally- and I don't know if you're aware of it- but there are fewer staff in the Department than there have been since the 1950s- and if you honestly think the policy of downsizing the department, cutting pay, and forcing people to travel hundreds of miles on a daily basis to and from work is going to get Fianna Fail extra votes- you're very sadly mistaken. All there is on the horizon are more local offices closing, more being merged or converted into social welfare offices, less staff to deal with an increasingly irate public, and more frustration for everyone.

You really sound like you have a chip on your shoulder about the Department of Agriculture Irish_bob.

we are not in school and your not the teacher so no need to use terms like chip on shoulder , i was born on a farm , my brother is a full time farmer and i often help out on the home farm , ive had dealings with the dept of agri , ive never found it to be a place where efficency or time limits meant anything , thier working hours are incredibliy short

day begins at 9.30 but phones dont answer till 9.45 on most days
tea breaks often run from 10.45 to 11.30
lunchtime is officially 12.30 to 2pm but you rarely get anyone on the blower till 2.15
day ends at 4.30

to add to that , whenever you need to speak to someone , whoever deals with it , molly or mary or mikey is in another town that day our is not in and even they are in , the system is down , if the staff numbers are so low , how come many of the officers spend thier time going round to farms engaging in trivial jobs which are borderline farcicial like checking whether or not a field on a map is the same size as an actual field , ive seen this on my brother place , face it , many jobs at the dept are madey uppy stuff for the simple reason that none of you people are ever simply let go

regarding the CAP , farmers recieve subsidys so as to compensate them for the fact that the price they recieve for thier produce is often below the cost of production , this in turn keeps the shelf price low for consumers , something that is often over looked in this trade off is that thousands of civil servants at the dept of agriculture earn a living in adminsitering theese payments to farmers , i can assure you were theese subsidies to be scrapped in the morning and farmers were instead to be paid an above cost of production price ( unlike what they are presently paid ) , the only people apart from the consumer who would be annoyed are the beauracrats at the dept of agriculture yet its only the farmer who is demonised in this trade off

regarding my point about votes for fianna fail , like almost everything else that happens in the public sector , it is not politically advantageous to cut numbers in the dept of agriculture , thats the main reason it does not happen , everything that happens in the PS has political considerations , everything

a mass cull is urgently needed

The_Conductor

When you say its not politically advantageous to cut numbers in the Department of Agriculture- what do you mean? There are now less than half as many working there are there were 15 years ago- and it looks like they're going to loose even more if the reports on RTE at the weekend were anything to go by.

Having worked in GIS- I am only too aware of how a map may not match the actual field on the ground- and have spent many happy months doing exercises similar to what you're describing in Austria while I was working in forestry there. Until the department moves over to using digitised aerial and satellite photography- they are probably stuck with the old OSI maps- many of which date back to the 1890s. Is it any wonder there are errors in them?

It was my understanding that the CAP was not to compensate farmers because their costs of production is below the market price. If this were so- why were all production based payments uncoupled- and the Single Farm Payment based on payments received in a reference period- and not current production? If its not a production based payment- which it isn't- why don't farmers simply switch to whatever they are able to competitively produce? I know farmers are raped by Tesco and other multiples- don't get me wrong- surely this is not a case of farmers being unable to produce at below market prices- simply that there is a disconnect between producers and end consumers- and its the supermarket chains that are robbing everyone- producers and consumers? Surely- the purpose of payments- is not to allow farmers subsidise Tesco and Centra and the other multiples? This is the issue- not that farmers are being bribed to sell below production cost with transfer payments. All I get is 15c per litre of milk I produce. My neighbour is paying 99c a litre- where is the other 84c going.....

If you imagine staff numbers haven't fallen though- you are wrong- very wrong.

edanto

All I get is 15c per litre of milk I produce. My neighbour is paying 99c a litre- where is the other 84c going.....

That is the key question when it comes to political and social reform. And it's the one with the least amount of public dialogue.

There are black holes all over the place with huge amounts of money just disappearing - legally - into people and company pockets. What use is a free market system if it doesn't achieve what we want, which would be an equitable production/sales process of goods & services?

CCCP^

The 12 million the Government wasted on security for Shell in Mayo, what a farce.

irish_bob

smccarrick wrote: »

When you say its not politically advantageous to cut numbers in the Department of Agriculture- what do you mean? There are now less than half as many working there are there were 15 years ago- and it looks like they're going to loose even more if the reports on RTE at the weekend were anything to go by.

Having worked in GIS- I am only too aware of how a map may not match the actual field on the ground- and have spent many happy months doing exercises similar to what you're describing in Austria while I was working in forestry there. Until the department moves over to using digitised aerial and satellite photography- they are probably stuck with the old OSI maps- many of which date back to the 1890s. Is it any wonder there are errors in them?

It was my understanding that the CAP was not to compensate farmers because their costs of production is below the market price. If this were so- why were all production based payments uncoupled- and the Single Farm Payment based on payments received in a reference period- and not current production? If its not a production based payment- which it isn't- why don't farmers simply switch to whatever they are able to competitively produce? I know farmers are raped by Tesco and other multiples- don't get me wrong- surely this is not a case of farmers being unable to produce at below market prices- simply that there is a disconnect between producers and end consumers- and its the supermarket chains that are robbing everyone- producers and consumers? Surely- the purpose of payments- is not to allow farmers subsidise Tesco and Centra and the other multiples? This is the issue- not that farmers are being bribed to sell below production cost with transfer payments. All I get is 15c per litre of milk I produce. My neighbour is paying 99c a litre- where is the other 84c going.....

If you imagine staff numbers haven't fallen though- you are wrong- very wrong.

even they did fall , thier are still far too many and in pointless wage justifying jobs , besides , anyone that is let go just ends up in some other department doing some other pointless job

Euro_Kraut

smccarrick wrote: »

1. Abolition of the Minimum wage

How does that help the public finances? Apart from a small number of public servants who might be on it I cannot see how it saves the government any money.

Are you making an assumption that it would reduce unemployment prehaps?

helimachoptor

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

How does that help the public finances? Apart from a small number of public servants who might be on it I cannot see how it saves the government any money.

Are you making an assumption that it would reduce unemployment prehaps?

Makes us more competitive, a company could hire 10 people instead of 5, 5 people of the dole, company paying PRSI for those additional 5 people, those 5 people spending their money in the economy at large.

oncevotedff

irish_bob wrote: »

.... i can assure you were theese subsidies to be scrapped in the morning and farmers were instead to be paid an above cost of production price ( unlike what they are presently paid ) , the only people apart from the consumer who would be annoyed are the beauracrats at the dept of agriculture yet its only the farmer who is demonised in this trade off....

The farmers would be pretty annoyed because within a short space of time nobody would be buying their over-priced produce. And shortly thereafter they'd be out of business.

helimachoptor wrote: »

Makes us more competitive, a company could hire 10 people instead of 5, 5 people of the dole, company paying PRSI for those additional 5 people, those 5 people spending their money in the economy at large.

You'd think wouldn't you. But of course if you reduced the minimum wage, the employer would simply pocket the extra profit. Meanwhile the poor dope on slave wages pays less tax and has less money to spend.

rasper

helimachoptor wrote: »

Makes us more competitive, a company could hire 10 people instead of 5, 5 people of the dole, company paying PRSI for those additional 5 people, those 5 people spending their money in the economy at large.

How in the name of god do you expect even a single person to be able to afford to get to work, dress , eat etc in the 2nd most expensive country in Europe on €200 or €30 a day,the cost of living is through the roof here ,yes minimum wage and SW rates are too high but it doesnt mean their generous just badly managed, chicken and egg scenario , reality is across the board everything (private sector) has to come down at least 20% from top down, always easier to take it from the most vulnerable though

Euro_Kraut

helimachoptor wrote: »

Makes us more competitive, a company could hire 10 people instead of 5, 5 people of the dole, company paying PRSI for those additional 5 people, those 5 people spending their money in the economy at large.

You are making some huge assumptions there and I think you may be misunderstanding the the purpose of this thread. An Bord Snip's remit is to stabilize the exchequer by identify places in public expenditure where saving could be made. Abolishing the minimum wage will not reduce government spending.

Its like if some was rushed into A&E with a heart attack and the doctor told him to eat more salads.

The_Conductor

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

You are making some huge assumptions there and I think you may be misunderstanding the the purpose of this thread. An Bord Snip's remit is to stabilize the exchequer by identify places in public expenditure where saving could be made. Abolishing the minimum wage will not reduce government spending.

Its like if some was rushed into A&E with a heart attack and the doctor told him to eat more salads.

That would be by making it cheaper to employ people- removing them from the dole queue and thus reducing government expenditure.

Of course- we need to reduce the cost of living here- perhaps by making staple goods less expensive, and luxury goods more expensive (if this can be done in the single EU market- without leading to everyone importing stuff from the UK or the continent).

We need to reduce the cost of living here- significantly, and quickly. Bord Gais and the ESB are both state owned incumbents- they should be made reduce prices immediately- to realistic levels- which in turn will reduce other costs for suppliers of goods and services. Its no coincidence that we have the most expensive electricity in Europe- and some of the priciest gas......

oncevotedff

smccarrick wrote: »

That would be by making it cheaper to employ people- removing them from the dole queue and thus reducing government expenditure.......

So you think that someone who gets €220 a week on the dole is going to go out and work for the same money.

You're not Brian Lenihan in disguise are you?:D

The_Conductor

oncevotedff wrote: »

So you think that someone who gets €220 a week on the dole is going to go out and work for the same money.

You're not Brian Lenihan in disguise are you?:D

No- I don't.
Dole in the UK is £65 a week. If we significantly reduced the dole, massively cut the cost of living- and reduced public sector pay- then people would be sufficiently incentivised to go out and take lower paying jobs.

Ps- no, Brians no friend of mine......

Euro_Kraut

smccarrick wrote: »

That would be by making it cheaper to employ people- removing them from the dole queue and thus reducing government expenditure.

Of course- we need to reduce the cost of living here- perhaps by making staple goods less expensive, and luxury goods more expensive (if this can be done in the single EU market- without leading to everyone importing stuff from the UK or the continent).

We need to reduce the cost of living here- significantly, and quickly. Bord Gais and the ESB are both state owned incumbents- they should be made reduce prices immediately- to realistic levels- which in turn will reduce other costs for suppliers of goods and services. Its no coincidence that we have the most expensive electricity in Europe- and some of the priciest gas......

Even if what you were saying was to turn out as you say it might... one important fact remains: The minimum wage is not the remit of An Bord Snip.

They do not advise the govt on employment policy. Its really a discussion for another thread. Its like you didn't really read my post and just rehashed your opinion on the minimum wage.

The_Conductor

Euro_Kraut wrote: »

Even if what you were saying was to turn out as you say it might... one important fact remains: The minimum wage is not the remit of An Bord Snip.

They do not advise the govt on employment policy. Its really a discussion for another thread. Its like you didn't really read my post and just rehashed your opinion on the minimum wage.

I did read your post- but I felt that some of the things they should be coming up with, couldn't be done in isolation of other factors (in this case- employment law). Its all interlinked. Our biggest outlay at present- almost as much as all other government expenditure (including the HSE) combined- is social welfare. The only way to massively address this- is by making it worth people's while to accept lower paying jobs. Its impossible to address this in isolation- and simply state- sure we'll snip all social welfare payments 10%. We need to look at the fundamentals behind all of this- and instead of simply making headline cuts- tackle the root and cause behind the expenditure being so high in the first instance. Perhaps this is not within the remit of An Bord Snip- but it really should be.

FutureTaoiseach

Means-testing of all social-welfare benefits. €21 billion is unsustainable in the current circumstances. Michael Smurfit doesn't need a state pension. :rolleyes:

Sale of state-assets, notably, ESB, Bord Gáis, Bus Eireann, Bord na Móna and An Post. Privatisation of hospitals and schools aswell. This could raise €5 billion.

A 21% pay-cut in the public-sector pay bill. That would save €4 billion.

Imposition of the HSE cuts in reinbursement to pharmacies.

Abolition of the Dept of Tourism and Sport. Cut the number of county councillors to 220. Cut the salary of TDs including ministers by 50%. Abolish public-sector increments and TD's severance payments. Ban the receipt of ministerial-pensions by sitting TDs.

A massive cull of quangos. I understand 850 have been created since 1997. We are spending €5.7 billion on them. A redundancy programme for middle-management in the HSE.

Euro_Kraut

smccarrick wrote: »

Prehap this is not within the remit of An Bord Snip- but it really should be.

I disagree. Long and medium term economic statedgy should be the remit of the Government not some advisory group who were brought in to indentify savings. They would be completly over stepping their mark if they were to recommend something like this.

The minimum wage debate is not really for here. Propably worth setting up a thread for it in itself because there is plently of contradictory economic literature out there that is worth pouring over to see if it can be applied to an Irish context.

So my proposal: Back office Civil Servants put on a 4 day week for the next 12 to 18 months. We save 20% of the gross cost of the wage (prob 10% net) and they are effectivly required to produce 4 days work in 5. They benefit from getting an extra day off work and are more likely to accept that ahead of crude pay cuts.

transylman

Slash all social welfare payments, by up to 20% in some cases.
Means tested benefits.
Means tested college fees.
Cut health spending and introduce cost saving programmes.
Freeze on public sector pay (should be cut but they don't have the balls)
Cut number of managerial positions in public sector, as well as overall staff reductions.
Drop the minimuum wage level. (not going to bring in more money but needed for competitiveness)
No more major infrastructure projects other than those already started.

Don't agree with all of the above but it has to be done because we are deep, deep, deep in the $hitter.

BraziliaNZ

FutureTaoiseach wrote: »

Means-testing of all social-welfare benefits. €21 billion is unsustainable in the current circumstances. Michael Smurfit doesn't need a state pension. :rolleyes:

Sale of state-assets, notably, ESB, Bord Gáis, Bus Eireann, Bord na Móna and An Post. Privatisation of hospitals and schools aswell. This could raise €5 billion.

A 21% pay-cut in the public-sector pay bill. That would save €4 billion.

Imposition of the HSE cuts in reinbursement to pharmacies.

Abolition of the Dept of Tourism and Sport. Cut the number of county councillors to 220. Cut the salary of TDs including ministers by 50%. Abolish public-sector increments and TD's severance payments. Ban the receipt of ministerial-pensions by sitting TDs.

A massive cull of quangos. I understand 850 have been created since 1997. We are spending €5.7 billion on them. A redundancy programme for middle-management in the HSE.

Is that you Enda?