Innovation through subtraction

Central government, by default, is the purveyor of cuts. What can it do to help to encourage a sensible, rationale approach to clawing back the budget deficit?

Cutting sensibly should involve some agreement between central and local forces about what should go and why. The Big Society promises a different relationship between the centre and the local. The centre here might mean Whitehall or it might mean County, City or Town Hall. Local means those places that relate to the centre - local authorities, schools, neighbourhoods and so on.

It is difficult to see opportunities consequent upon the dire economic outlook. What might be good for children will be bad for somebody else, whether in terms of jobs or salary or simply having to work in a different way.

In the public sector the word ‘efficiency’ has been devalued. Politicians regularly talk about efficiency as an alternative to ‘cuts’. Generally the promise outstrips the reality.

Now the election is upon us in the UK, conversations about cutting public sector services will begin in earnest. These will not be happy conversations. Many children and families will receive less support. Many people will loose their jobs.

Children’s services -health, education, social care, police and youth justice- are about to experience huge financial cut-backs. Some might argue the biggest cuts ever are upon us.