The Sun newspaper, 25.11.08
The growth in purely private sector jobs, 1998-2006, and the growth in predominantly public sector jobs over the same period.
| Region | Growth in private sector jobs | Growth in public sector jobs |
| North East | 5% | 25% |
| Yorkshire & Humberside | 3% | 26% |
| | 2% | 18% |
| | 4% | 27% |
| | 3% | 19% |
| South East | 4% | 18% |
| South West | 8% | 29% |
| | 9% | 27% |
| | Minus 2% | 25% |
| | 3% | 22% |
The source of the data and calculations is unknown, as is why the data finished in 2006. The figures are percentage changes, all positive, i.e. growth, except one.
The conclusions are:
1) Although public sector employment grew at a faster rate in all regions, it doesn't mean that there are now more people are employed in the public sector then in the private sector, merely that the rate of growth was (much) higher there.
2) The paper gives few absolute figures, except to record that over the period 2.2 million jobs were created. Of them 1.3 were in the public sector, or 59% Among women the public sector was even more of a magnet. Of 1.07 million extra jobs filled by women, 963,000, or 90%, were in the public sector. This last result may reflect the presence of extra nurses, child minders and teachers appointed during the Brown Splurge. Brown used to boast of how many jobs he had created. Now we know the pattern of employment.
3) It may be that extra jobs have been created in the private sector since 2006, but in 2008 in a contraction period 50,000 extra public sector jobs have been created.
The worrying feature is that the public sector jobs are part of Heffer's "Client State", that is the people who depend for work, income or benefits on the (Labour) government. These people are more inclined to vote for Brown as a consequence.
Public sector jobs are difficult to reduce, because of the votes, and because of the strength of unions there. The government has talked of "savings" of £10 billion. It is difficult to see where these will come from, given the extreme reluctance to make staff redundant. There is not much saving in using fewer paper clips!
The public sector jobs are not only more secure than those in the private sector, they also pay index-linked final salary pensions, with absolute security. This commitment means that the country in a difficult period has an added burden of paying for all the extra pensions. (This may be the reason why Cameron and company are now talking about the possibility of putting public sector pensions on the same basis as those in the private sector, where the pension is determined by the total amount contributed.)
All this, except the Cameron suggestion, must be very pleasant reading for the socialists, - a further heave in their direction without any revolution. The problem for the rest of us is that many of the jobs will not increase national wealth or output, - as monitors, pen-pushers and bureaucrats they may advance the socialist ideal but they do not produce marketable or exportable output. They may actually hinder it! We are ultimately impoverished by their appointment and activity.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment