Making sense of political decisions
AS A keen follower of local politics I often think of the actions of our deputies and civil servants in terms of mathematical formulae or scientific theories. For me, this helps to put them into perspective. For instance our Treasury Minister is trying to tell us that: 'Taxes and charges = savings.' Hmm, not sure about that one.
Anyway, the purpose of this letter is to reveal my new theory which has proved remarkably accurate when tested against recent States decisions. Naturally, my theory is over-arching and evidence-based (joke) which should make it particularly attractive to those influenced by meaningless jargon. So here it is: 'Plans (development or otherwise), reports, initiatives, reviews, inquiries, programmes (esp. devised by consultants) = vast expense + daft outcome.'
I am currently working on another theory which goes something like this: 'Fiddling about + making unnecessary changes = make-working + justification of enormous salaries = ???'
I would welcome input from other readers on either of these theories, or thoughts in a similar vein.
Incidentally, a tip for anyone interested in the savings made under the much trumpeted Financial Transformation Programme: look in the States Accounts and you will find there have been no savings at all.
My best guess as to how real savings can be made? Well that is a difficult one. How about cutting the number of deputies to 30 or less, reducing States departments and middle management? The next question of course is: Should we have a review? How about we just get on with the job?
M.J. VERMEULEN,
Address withheld.
