Open Unionism


A forum to discuss new ideas and perspectives on Unionism…

TUV’s turn to publish economic proposals…

By thefreshthinking

The TUV are the latest party to publish proposals on how to cut spending, their effort published by Economics Spokesman David Vance certainly kicks the pants off the UUP’s effort.

The proposals mostly either don’t make sense or look a bit familiar though….

1.  Expensive North-South Bodies costing £100m per annum must go. This will yield Half a Billion Pounds in savings over the next five years, a massive contribution.

Getting rid of them won’t save all their costs, in a lot of cases it would mean that seperate bodies would have to be set up in both juristictions to carry out their functions.  Certainly there are potential savings though, so it’s a fair suggestion on Vance’s part, nothing like £100m though.

2.       Northern Ireland’s Quangos cannot be afforded any longer and it is time that they too were thrown on the financial bonfire. This will save further millions, as will curbing squander on overuse of consultants.

The DUP having been moving to reduce the number of quangos for some time.  Sinn Fein thought of getting rid of quangos last week.

The curbing of the use of consultants is already underway.

3.       TUV would seek to provide a shield to people in low paid jobs by insisting that a pay ceiling of £100,000 must be accepted by Management before any jobs cuts are even considered.

Is this in the private sector?  If so how is the state going to intervene in the activities of private companies?  It’s certainly not within the remit of the Assembly to implement such a policy.  If it is the private sector it’s a bit rich Jim criticising SF for being Marxists earlier this week.

If this is the public sector Sinn Fein proposed something similar last week.  They were in favour of a pay freeze for civil servants paying the top rate of income tax.

4.       All abuse of Welfare, including DLA, needs to be scrutinised as a priority and offenders weeded out.

Re-assessing those on DLA is a coalition government policy

5.       Bloated costs of Government here need to end. Cutting 108 MLA’s down to 60, reducing their expenses and their generous allowances would also make a meaningful contribution.

Robinson says he wants to reduce it to 75 MLA’s, so the TUV thinks of a different number?  60 MLA’s works out at 4 MLA’s per constituency over 15 constituencies, Robinson’s proposing 5 per constituency over 15 constituencies.


Filed under: business, Coalition Government, economy, finances, TUV, ,

2 Responses

  1. fair_deal says:

    Nothing wrong with No.4 but it doesn’t do anything for the budget hole here its AME not DEL.

  2. David Vance says:

    Hi. Thanks for publishing and perhaps you will permit me the opportunity to respond?

    1. On the North-South bodies, the reason we think they should go is that this is simply expensive bureaucratic indulgence. The £100m per annum cost is not picked from the air, in fact I have seen a £130m estimate pout against them. Even if we saved HALF of this – which would be very modest – that is still a cool quarter of a billion over the next Assembly, worth other unionists agreeing with?
    2. On the bonfire of the Quangos, DUP/Sinn Fein have indeed talked about it. And then agreed further quangos. Trust me, I would axe them.
    3. Point 3 relates to the STATE sector, government has no business dictating to private enterprise. Where we are coming from is this; As cuts are handed out, it is too easy for those sitting on £100k + (and plenty are) to take out those at the lowest level on the ladder. During the GE I also talked about this. If we’re all in it together let those sitting on EVERY BOARD accept a cap of £100k before they start taking out the more lowly. Equity of treatment seems a fair idea.
    4. Fair Deal is right, it is AME but why not show initiative here and cut a deal with Westminster?
    5. It’s about gross payment towards over governance. The Welsh Assembly has 60 members and this to govern a population 50% GREATER than ours. If we reduce to 15 Westminster and allow for 4, we get to the same number as Cardiff – some would argue 45 might be even more proportionate. Either way, we save.

    Sorry if anyone thinks these thoughts are familiar! I can honestly say that I have talked about these in one way or another for quite a while. De-Sovietising our economy is a good thing but we need some flair and vision as to how we do this.

    Thanks for sharing that of TUV.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 36 other followers

Open Unionism bookmarks

Our facebook group page

Party histories

Here's the history of the UUP.

Here's the history of the DUP.

Slideshow app for UUP & DUP flickrstreams

Follow this link for a great slideshow from the UUP flickrstream.

Follow this link for a great slideshow from the DUP flickrstream.

UK Parliament on flickr

%d bloggers like this: