The extra £6.25 billion of cuts to government spending announced today (24 May) will inevitably damage public services, PCS says.
Massive spending on consultants is one area PCS has campaigned against for many years and the union has welcomed the commitment by the coalition government to reduce this. But with some departments being told to axe hundreds of millions of pounds from their budgets for this year, the union does not believe this can be done without hitting vital public services.
Other than a £600m cut for non-departmental public bodies and some commitments to renegotiate contracts and cut spending on travel and advertising, it is not clear what areas of government will bear the brunt of these cuts. The union also fears today’s announcement is just a taste of much worse things to come.
At its annual conference last week, the union agreed to launch a far-reaching campaign, including with other public sector unions, to not only oppose the cuts, but to make the case for the alternative. If the government were serious about tackling the deficit it would act immediately to close the widening tax gap which sees more than £120 billion lost to the UK economy every year.
PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka said: “We have serious concerns about the staff in many government agencies who will have read in the media at the weekend that their jobs could be at risk, but have been given little information since.
“We do not accept that huge spending cuts are necessary or desirable, and we do not believe it is credible for the government to say it can protect public sector jobs and services while taking the axe to departments in this way.
“These cuts will damage the economy, will undoubtedly lead to people losing their jobs, and will put the delivery of vital public services at serious risk at a time when they are most needed. A recruitment freeze now, when tens of thousands of civil service posts have been cut in the last few years, will further add to workloads and put at risk the services our members provide to the public.
“We would welcome the opportunity for a full and honest debate about the public sector and its role in the economy, but the government appears intent on short-circuiting that by cutting first and asking questions later.”
