Friday, 19 December 2014

Four in 10 jobs could go at CLG

Up to four in 10 jobs could be axed at the department for Communities and Local Government following the spending review, it has been announced.

The department, which is facing a 33 per cent cut in its administrative budgets from 2011 to 2014, is facing an overhaul of its top structure.

The number of director generals at the department will be halved from six to three, while at the next most senior grade, six of the 21 director roles will be axed.

Sir Bob Kerslake, who becomes permanent secretary of the CLG on 1 November, said that he intends the restructure to be completed within two years.

He said 40 per cent of the jobs might go and a voluntary redundancy will be offered to civil servants. Job cuts will be made in sequence, from the top down.

Sir Bob said: ‘We’ll do more enabling and less intervening. We will be smaller department but stronger and we will play a more strategic role, punching our weight in Whitehall.

‘We are streamlining at every level and it starts at the top. This is an opportunity to improve the way we work. It is my intention that we move at pace to reduce the certainty for everyone.’

Two of the new director general roles will cover localism and neighbourhoods while the third will involve leading finance and corporate services.

Readers' comments (19)

  • How would anyone know that any jobs had gone?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Eva Silver

    The public and voluntary sectors, under-delivering at too high costs because they employ the wrong people the unemployable and don’t manage them.

    A significant proportion are these staff because they’ve been allowed to get away with murder for years, unchallenged in the absence of firm and consistent management within their organisations and protected to the hilt by an employment law regime

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Owen Hart

    Yep on all of the above. The PAC absolutely slated this hopeless department in their last report. Any chance we can make it 6 in 10 jobs?

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • What a sad, nasty little bunch. We are talking about people's livelihoods here.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Owen Hart

    Yes. Useless, incompetent people's livelihoods. Helen Giles hit the nail on the head in her IH article earlier on:

    http://www.insidehousing.co.uk/community/blog/root-of-all-evil/6512146.blog

    "A significant proportion are UNEMPLOYABLE because they’ve been allowed to get away with murder for years, unchallenged in the absence of firm and consistent management within their employer organisations and protected to the hilt by an employment law regime which has pretty much scotched the concept and practice of personal responsibility for anything in the workplace."

    No tears will be shed by the rest of us...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • I'm guessing that many posters on here are tenants- be careful what you wish for here as as these cuts bite, so the non-essential staff and budgets. We have all gotten used to over regulation, constant inspection, kloes, kpi's and in many cases generous budgets for tenant involvement.

    Will jobs going at the DCLG you can bet your bottom dollar that they'll be less rigourous monitoring of landlords and that could mean that tenants have fewer channels to challenge poor performance.

    This cuts will work they way down the scale, and you can be sure that dedicated tenent involvement staff and budgets for training and the annual TPAS jolly up will go to.

    Yes, there is always deadwood to be cut out at all levels, but we all have been spoiled these years past with a heyday of generous budgets and staffing that simply isnt sustainable.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • 1) I love the way in this country we are always pleased to see people put out of work.

    2) As Anon at 1:14pm says, I think 'involved' tenants should be careful what they wish for. If there is less emphasis from regulators on tenant involvement then organisations will start cutting the budget for involvement activities.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Owen Hart

    Re 1) above that is not so. I am always appalled when real English businesses are allowed to be sold to foreigners and asset stripped eg Corus Redcar, Cadburys with the Kraft debacle and so on. However when it comes to pointless timeserving civil servants occupying NuLab created non-jobs at the expense of the taxpayer I'm with Helen Giles. Get rid of them and good riddance.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • The public sector has no other purpose than the preservation of the public sector. The job is to preserve the job. That is its function.

    But there is a much more pernicious role that the public sector performs. That is to exert the power of the state against the individual.

    My only regret about the destruction of the public service is that there is 20% of it who really are socially and civicly committed for the common good.

    They are unfortunately the casualty of the fire that's needed to expunge the useless, time-serving, incompentent and useless rump.

    "Involvement activities", as described by the poster above, is a classic example of a potential service for good captured and subverted by the duffers.

    There has never been any involvement. It is always lip-service.

    Now real power is being exercised. Many of us who have borne witness to the shambles of the public sector will be celebrating what is taking place.

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

  • Owen Hart

    Absolument! I know I am...

    Unsuitable or offensive? Report this comment

View results 10 per page | 20 per page

Have your say

You must sign in to make a comment

sign in register

Newsletter Sign-up

Related

Articles

IH Subscription