Re: So, where do you cut spending?
An inconvenient truth. All spending cuts will hit someone in the wallet. All meaningful spending cuts in "social" departments will have to hit service delivery workers, because that is where your spending is. And consolidating services the way "real" businesses do will hit rural areas harder than urban ones, because economies of scale and sustainability only come through aggregating volume.
Originally Posted by Dan McCosh
Take your top 5 spending departments, and force each to cut 5% this fiscal year, while holding all other spending areas to 0% increases. In this year, develop zero-based budgets for all departments, aligning with their core businesses - aligning budget targets with an overall Government plan for the core business it ought to be in.
Note - sometimes, that core business is actually supporting regional economies ... which will mean delivering services "inefficiently." Small towns continuing to exist is a "public good" too - and of the type which elects governments.
Truth be told, each department will already know where the "fat" is. In fact, they've probably proposed those very cuts for years to the politicians, but have had them knocked back because of the impact in constituencies. All government spending, after all, serves more than one purpose - its nominal one (road building, schools etc), but also politically sensitive "rewards" or "regional supports." Your bureaucrats know where these untouchable spending buckets are, and most of the management would give their eyeteeth to be allowed to kill them, and do their actual jobs well. DAMHIKT.
So use this as an opportunity for replacing "legacy" ways of delivering essential services with ones which meet upcoming needs. You'll never have a better opportunity to ignore political sacred cows, discard bad practices, and rebuild on best practices.
Last edited by TomF; 12-29-2012 at 09:54 PM.
If I use the word "God," I sure don't mean an old man in the sky who just loves the occasional goat sacrifice. - Anne Lamott