Axe falls on public spending
Thursday 3rd June 2010, 3:00PM BST.
Chief Minister Terry Le Sueur (left) with Treasury Minister Philip Ozouf as he outlines the proposals
UP to 67 jobs will be axed, overtime will be slashed and charges will be made for some previously free services in the first round of the biggest States cuts in generations.
Ministers announced long-awaited proposals yesterday for £12 million worth of savings to come into effect next year. However, they also revealed plans to spend an additional £3 million on what was described as ‘essential investment’.
The cuts, which are aimed at reducing each department’s spending by two per cent, form the first round of a major efficiency drive to slash States spending by a total of ten per cent over the next three years.
The cuts proposed by ministers include:
• Scrapping free school milk to save £183,000.
• Reducing the number of States police officers and reducing overtime to save more than £221,000.
• Removing the Christmas bonus for people receiving some forms of benefit and pension.
• Reducing the budget to advertise Jersey as a tourist destination by £175,000.
• Axing three management posts at Highlands College to save £210,000.
Outlining the proposals, Treasury Minister Philip Ozouf said: ‘It is important to stress that these are just proposals and nothing has been finalised yet.
• The full list of proposals: Click here
Read the full story in the Jersey Evening Post. Click here for subscription details. Individual editions are also available online.
The Queen's Diamond Jubilee
JEP Jubilee Editions
Saturday 2 June: Guide to Celebrations
Wednesday 6 June: Souvenir of Events
View The Queen in Jersey supplement
Travel
To, from and around the Island
Airport Arrivals/Departures
Harbours Arrivals/Departures
Bus Information/Timetables
This is Jersey
Jersey Evening Post
Useful links
WE need to make cuts, huge cuts but not sure taking free milk away from children, and reducing the money for our already stretched police force is the way, perhaps stopping work on non essential road works would save some money, perhaps not giving money to unemployed people for “Essentials” such as a washing machine and putting benefit cheats in prison would actually be more productive
Report abuse
Reducing the budget to advertise Jersey as a tourist destination by £175,000. – Surly this will also cost us money in people who then dont visit Jersey?
Getting rid of some of the hobbie bobbies sounds good though!
Report abuse
Scrapping school milk, again its the Kids who lose out. on minute its school teachers striking now we want to take there milk away too.
Why doesn’t Ozouf look closer to home and within his own department and scrap the 2 UK employees in the Treasury he brought over to do 1 Jersey mans job!!
Report abuse
These are just proposals and they will have to go to the States for approval where quite a few of them will be derailed.
I can see the school milk proposal failing to get through as the country constables and deputies of the save the cow party gang up with the people’s party members in town to stop it and there plenty more sacred cows that will survive the axe and still be munching contentedly on the rich feed in the taxpayer’s barn next year!
Phillip Ozouf tried to move towards balancing the budget last time by raising taxes on tobacco, alcohol and fuel and the proposal was decisively thrown out.
I doubt the States have any more stomach for tax hikes or service cuts now than they did then.
The secret of Jersey government is…
there is no government!
Report abuse
Not before time. Most of the savings are common sense and should have been done ages ago. I feel sorry for those who will be made redundant as a result but these are the times we live in
Report abuse
What don’t the states members look within to make cuts, for instance axe all their free parking. Then they could rent these spaces out to the general public to bring some income in. Another thing which would help instead of reducing the number of police offices, would be to reduce the number of states members, as I am sure we will make a greater saving, if not on salaries then surely having less of them would save on the number of stupid costly mistakes they make i.e. booking an fx on the incenerator Mr Chief Minister (who surely should be retired by now).
Report abuse
“Reducing the number of States police officers and reducing overtime to save more than £221,000″
Thats cutting 1 person then.
Having looked at the proposal document, it is all FLUFF.
Make some real cuts to waste and over inflated fat cat salaries NOT SCHOOL MILK .
Ask the public they will tell you where the States waste is.
Report abuse
Get em out.
Ozouf = Incompetent
Le Sueuer = Incompetent
Scrap 10% of States employees who do nothing anyway – saving = £50M+
Hang on, dont we already pay the Zoo a couple of million quid a year…? Why are we paying them another £33k to let school trips / kids in anyway? See proposal document
Report abuse
Looking at these comments above it seems that some of you are not happy about free milk going and cuts to the Police force.
What did you expect!
We all complain about the States spend yet when they list the first round of cuts for review we all complain. When front line services get cut we all suffer, but thats what you all moaned about.
Don’t forget this is only the first 2% there is still another 7% to come!
We can not have your cake and eat it! unless you pay for it and i for one do not want a tax rise!!
Report abuse
How about reducing the Head of WEB’s salary from £280,000 to a more sensible figure. Do we think he could survive on £200,00 a year? I’m sure he could if he tried…turned the lights out when he went to bed, was economical with his heating.
Hey presto! £80,000 saved. This could be used to ensure that the next generation of islanders grow up with strong bones and healthy bodies.
Actually, forget that. Stephen Izatt is far more important that the current crop of kids. He’s in charge of the Watefront, you know.
Report abuse
Bring in a sur-tax of say 40% for income over £100k for a couple of years would clear the deficit.
Report abuse
By getting rid of one Deputy Chief Officer and one Chief Inspector that should save about 75% of the £ 221,000 scheduled to be axed from the police budget. The Superintendent then could be the de facto deputy chief. They should also get rid of some of the surplus senior civilian grades rather than the ‘sworn officers’. There seem to be far too many ‘non jobs’ in the cops.
Then get more officers out of their cars to save on fuel bills. Then get more out of their offices onto the street, to save on electricity and heating bills in the winter.
Report abuse
How about axing a few highly paid useless managers especially in the health service instead of targeting our police force or life guards, with the emphasis on life! Or deporting the scum that is at La Moye back to where they come from, who cost our island millions. Wake up Ozouf!
Report abuse
2. Kage
Totally agree. Visitors bring in money, to both businesses, infastructure, airport, harbour etc.
Finance will not continue to grow – fact, and secondary industries will be vital.
Very shortsighted.
Report abuse
The millionaire states members who run this island for the rich should put a few bob in the pot to show they are not biased towards working class folk,
These are the ones who will lose out.
They got us in this mess after being warned many times to cut their spending
Cutting back on their perks like free blackberries,free parking etc,even better cutting the number of states members(we don,t need so many)
There are many other options to cut back on instead of these ones that the people can lest afford.
Report abuse
If they had wanted to save £12 million why didn’t they just shelve the works to the avenue, most people would agree these were not essential.
If the resources we have were better employed then real savings could be made, it would shake up the old boys club though!
Report abuse
So you save £183.000 by getting rid of the school milk. How much will it cost the states in years to come when these children have bone and teeth problems?
Each year this debate comes up over school milk, and so far it has been thrown out after much time wasted.
The states just need to learn that have to stop spending money on unnecessary projects and consultants to tell us all what the majority of islanders already knew, but to the states we know nothing and we are always wrong!
I would have thought getting rid of a few senators would be more cost effective, the likes of TLS, TLM and include yourself Philip!
Now thats the school milk paid for, who next!
Report abuse
When is a cut not a cut ? The headline figure is £12m but then £6m into voluntary redundancy scheme and £3m more into ‘essential investment’ ? Come on the Jersey taxpayer deserves better than this – these proposals do not address any of the issues around public spending waste !
Report abuse
Whaffling words. Ozouf continues to super spin and pull the wool over our eyes. Problem is that he believes it himself. Getting rid of layers of middle managers who manage nothing is priority, not school milk. As they say in French : Un peu du vent !
Report abuse
School milk? Less than half the class drink it. Is your island so poor kids get malnourished unless they get free milk?
Strewth!
Report abuse
There’s a glaringly simple way to save around £50,000 of wasted tax payers money. Our formerly esteemed Housing Minister has taken himself off to sit on the back benches taking time out to go to Tenerife or wherever, whenever it suits him. After all, its nobody’s business except his!
Added to that is Senator Perchard’s diplomacy and people skills, it’s possible to get rid of those 2 and replace them with hardworking, honest politicians who want to do a professional and people based job and its around £100,000 of wasted funds saved and used better.
Report abuse
Ever thought about scrapping ridiculous and costly ideas such as the town park, wouldn’t that save 10m straight off the bat without having to cut essential services? How about the resurfacing of Victoria Avenue, how much did that ridiculous idea cost the tax payer, was it really essential, somehow I doubt it.
Report abuse
Its all well and good making cuts and its about time, but to cut tourism’s budget in a time when they need all the help they can get. If it was the banks asking for help,The states would ask how much do you need.
Why dont we start the cut backs with the states members taking a 10% pay cut, like most of the private sector.
Report abuse
Vultures praying on the weak, attack those who take advantage and not the innocent, This is yet another dig at the general publics benefits and not looking closer to home, at a time of crime on the rise and recession it is noticeable there is more social unrest hence the need for greater police presence. No Jersey child receives a low cost or free school lunch, so a small amount of milk going into their diet at least means they have some of the nutrients they need. I feel the greatest sin is removing the pensioners Christmas bonus, I am not a pensioner but I have family who at this time of year rely on the few extra quid, not to buy presents but to pay towards heating or a little bit of extra food, the elderly over here do not have it as bad as the UK, but they are not exempt from nasty taxes like GST, the generosity of our local millionaire voluntarily handing out vouchers at Christmas means the over 70s do not have to choose heat or food at a cold time of year OAPs a man who needs plenty of thanks but this is filling a void left by the states of Jersey most of these people have fully paid up their social security working all their lives and this is the thanks we give them! with hypothermia or starvation the elderly will fill the hospitals and cost a lot more than the meagre Christmas Box – take too much away and you will pay more in the long run!!
Report abuse
So treasury are losing 3 posts? Interesting they haven’t said anything about the 11 new posts advertised for the treasury department today on Cafe Cyril, the States intranet website. Most of these being at grade 10 or above.
Keeping it quiet, cover up again?
Report abuse
They suspended CPO Graham Power in 2008 it is now 2010 and still no conclusion
With the cost of the outside police force investigating, this has cost the Jersey Taxpayer nearly 2 million pounds.
2 million pounds
rs
Report abuse
Will our comments get past on I wonder? Or will they just be ignored. Ozouf do what your island is paying you for instead of sucking up to the rich of this island show interest in where you come from. Make these cut backs but God help you when you or your family need help from the emergency or health services and they can’t be there cause they are understaffed…
Report abuse
What a complete joke!!!
Just a year ago, they were boasting about spending £50million on helping the economy (ie. resurfacing the esplanade!!) and now they have over spent, they are totally incompetent!
Seriously, cutting school milk to save a few pennies?? why not just scrap education altogether, fools!
Our island once again is being run by no nothing truck wits.
Report abuse
Why are we copying the UK coalition government? Jersey is similar to a tiny UK council and they are acting like Jersey is a world super power being hit by the global credit crunch. The local budget should be small and simple to manage.
Report abuse
#9 Mark G – I would agree if we were in Greece’s position for example. But we are not. These ‘cuts’ are part of the political self interest game in my opinion, which has the Ministers identifying politically unacceptable areas to cut, the public crying out we need these services, but the root cause and the shameful waste which is prevalent throughout the states continues.
Until there is the political will this will continue until one day we will be like Greece.
Report abuse
Michael (10) How about reducing the Head of WEB’s salary from £280,000 to a more sensible figure
More to the point, what does the Head of WEB do?
What is so important about WEB that there is a need for WEB at all?
Is WEB a material QANGO, or just ‘jobs for the boys’?
Why does WEB not head the redundancy list?
BigB (7) Having looked at the proposal document, it is all FLUFF.
Too true.
Report abuse
Wake up and smell the coffee. Thats the FREE coffee for hospital staff before 11.00 am, most of whom can afford to buy their drinks ! Didnt see that mentioned in the list. Cutting police numbers, wont that increase crime? costing more in the long run? Durrell is an attraction, not a penny of tax payers money should be given to it.Do they give to Amaizin Maze ? Same thing. Lead by example, 5% cut in ALL States Members pay, no exceptions. Ouch.Non-qualies should be paying 25% tax, then after 5 years get 5% of that paid tax returned.That money could be invested and the States keep the interest earned.Maybe there would not be 1000+ unemployed then either. Crack down on Benefit cheats. Keep school milk, keep paying the pensioners their Xmas bonus.All sorted.
Report abuse
States Assembly savings = £58,000. What a joke. We could save about 1 million pa simply by getting rid of half the States’ members. There is no need to have nearly 60 politicians representing 90,000 people. There also needs to be a review of redundant highly paid ‘management’ posts in the States. In my opinion, the wasted cost is through unecessary layers of management, not the workers.
Report abuse
The states just waste money on over priced projects such as the bus station. Lets face it most of the member of the states would not be employed by the private sector, they would drive most companies to the wall.
Cut backs are one thing, but they need to increase the income as well, lets start by heavy taxs for the rich, capital gains tax on property developers.
States works paying for parking in the car parks, after all we all have to pay.
Report abuse
This cynical ploy of cutting the Life Guard service is designed to terrorize the public and is sick and about the only transparent thing done by this Govt recently even if by default..last time it was target the school milk and patient transport, now let’s conjour up the image of drowned tourists,just when we are trying to kick start a sorely neglected trade. well we the public see through you and do not buy it,the blatant attempt at conning us who are your employers don’t forget is tacky and typical….so go back and think again…unless that is you really do want to torpedo Tourism completely…cut the big salaries of Steven Izaat..and his ilk,a quater of a million paid out to so far lose more than 600,000.It’s no wonder Cameron has disbanded more than 50 Quango’s in his first week….let us follow his prudent lead.that’s where the real savings would be made.
Report abuse
oooh 67 jobs out of the supposed 6500 employees in the states..
Lifeguards, School milk. This is desperation. How about some REAL efficiencies.
Do we need 6 people to stare into a hole, or erect a bollard.
Do we need to fill out 67 different types of form for every states department.
Do we need to employ people in department X to liaise with department Y.
Do we need to consult with UK consultants evertime a states member f@rts.
Do we need to suspend anyone on FULL pay and then take months and years to decide.
Do we need to spend hours EVERY year in discussion with union members and representatives over pay when they already have agreed a pay deal?
No? What we need is someone with guts to shake the states.
Report abuse
Whilst I agree this whole situation is ridiculous and I agree there are MUCH better ways of saving money (no mention of cutting/freezing states members salaries and/or bonuses in the report I see), I can’t help but laugh at peoples suggestion to tax the ‘rich’ a higher percentage. That’s not really fair is it?
Tax the rich the same percentage of earnings as everyone else and they will still end up paying more taxes anyway. In fact most people on modest incomes pay a lower percentage of earnings than those with large incomes anyway.
Taxing the wealthy 40% whilst us poor, little ‘normal’ people pay 20% at most is defintely not fair. I really think people on modest incomes need to stop acting so hard done by all the time.
Rev
Report abuse
What we actually start needing to do is to cut the amount of inward immigration which is costing public services a huge amount of money.
When is the establishment going to wake up to this fact?
I still do not understand how, when Jersey is NOT PART OF THE EU, we are expected to allow EU citizens to come and work and reside in the island, when I can’t go and live and work in the EU (to get off the sinking rock.
Report abuse
Chubber
You forgot to mention that we also didn’t need to waste £9,000,000 on the overpayment for that eyesore down at La Collete!
Report abuse
How about cutting the states HR departments, how many people are in well paidHR jobs throughout the states, including trading companies?
Report abuse
Well said Dave # 40. H.R. is a ‘non job’. These people frequently select all the wrong types for posts in States departments. They seem to pick those who can ‘talk the talk, but not walk the walk’. The sycophants get promotion, whilst real workers and people who know how to do the job get overlooked.
Report abuse
All of the above comments make sense the average “jersey man” or woman knows what distrastious mistakes our ministers make and i learnt today that the HYDRO POOL in the general hospital is to close by december. who`s STUPID idea was that, many people use that pool for many different reasons and personally i have been in the pool for physio on several occaisions.what will happen when the pool closes will result in people having to occupy hospital beds for longer and at more cost to the ratepayers.THINK AGAIN MINISTERS GO BACK TO SCHOOL AND DO YOU SUMS RIGHT
Report abuse
How are we to make any judgement about what is or is not good economic sense unless we are allowed to see the figures.
Freedom of information….
Report abuse
For months most people on this site have been shouting for cuts, now that they have only just started stop complaining, it is after all what you wanted. That is why the teachers marched to try and stop the cuts. These are the tip of the ice berg. Next it will be severe cuts in health and education. The only solution is to scrap zero 10 taxation and introduce progressive tax. Those with the broadest shoulders should bear the burden. And of course get rid of Oz and le Sueur, they couldn’t run a bath never mind an ecomony
Report abuse
32. Trinity Tom
“Durrell is an attraction, not a penny of tax payers money should be given to it.Do they give to Amaizin Maze ?”
It is unclear if this was a “tongue in cheek” comment but to clarify:
aMaizin! Adventure Park receive no subsidy from Education, Sport and Culture…or any other States Department.
Report abuse
No.42 That’s part of the problem Andy, things like the Hydro Pool. Can we trust that the cost or cost benefits of the pool have been properly assessed? Can we trust that having people on sick pay for longer or as in-patients won’t cost more in the long run?
I might agree with certain cuts if I could trust that those choosing what gets cut had looked at the bigger picture and properly assessed the costs that will transpire because of these cuts, but I just can’t trust that a proper assessment has been made. The decisions just look too easy almost, make life more difficult for those that are already struggling while failing to deal with the abundance of non-jobs in the States and the regular and sometimes completely unnecessary use of ‘consultants’ from the UK.
Report abuse
Mr Ozouf I think you need to get your rubber out and erase your proposal from your draft too cut the lifeguarding at Havre Des pas swiming pool.It is owned by the States with a commercially leased cafe there and a public amenity.I think on these grounds alone the States have a duty of care.A ridiculous proposal to save £25,000 which will only be seen as such when someone drowns or is injured god forbid.
Please lets have an element of comonsense approach to this particular issue.
Report abuse
the future (43) How are we to make any judgement about what is or is not good economic sense unless we are allowed to see the figures. Freedom of information….
What sense! The UK government is about to open the books on all government spending, online.
If there are ‘old boy’ ‘kickbacks in Jersey’ what could be better than thousands of islanders working as unpaid auditors of the public purse, their purse. It would put a real boot up efficacy. We may also shed a few of the overpaid civil servants that we import from off island.
Report abuse
As visitors to your lovely island (almost every year for the last 30 )we are very conscious of the rapid decline in the number of hotels.
We have been feeling for the last few years that our presence is resented by many Jersey residents.This year sadly could possibly be our last visit.
If you want visitors surely you don’t cut your tourism budget! But we just feel we’re NOT required on voyage.
Report abuse
The only solution for Jersey’s ‘cash problem’ is a tax increase (for high earners only) combined with no spending on avoidable/uncalled-for projects and, of course, a massive cut in the benefits paid out to the wealthy (a low pension or even no pension for the well-heeled – they don’t need it!). What’s needed is a system overhaul, a tax-and-ration formula, a take-from-fat-purses solution…not Robin-hood-in-reverse tactics!
Re: (17) “So you save £183.000 by getting rid of the school milk. How much will it cost the states in years to come when these children have bone and teeth problems?”
Well said PJ, a bit of forward thinking there!
Report abuse
Born Warrior – Why should the rich pay higher taxs and if this can be justified then why would they want to stay in Jersey when every other jurisdiction is bending over backwards to get them to move? And let’s face it, it is the favourable tax rate and not our climate that attracted them here in the first place
To carry your argument to its logical conclusion would be the complete to segregation of the rich from the poor as for example has been achieved in Monaco. As it is the poor who are the problem as it is they who consume the services and benefits and contribute very little in the way of taxation – even with GST – then it will be the poor who will suffer from your proposed policy whilst the rich, without the burden of having to support the rest of us will be better off. Sorry but whose side are you on?
Report abuse
All these cuts why oh why do they not look closer at ways we can increase our revenue
Lets get this casino up and running now!
We have missed a trick with our waterfront we should have spent our money on getting the cruise ships in i have spoken to some one in Guernsey and his shop has taken more money in the first 6 months this year than the whole of last year with his shop in jersey just think an extra percentage of 4000 people shopping spending money restaurants ext: we are just so blind to the Finance trade and have forgotton all the other ways to make money
Report abuse
I agree with Sanity.
Report abuse
Born Warrior 50
“How much will it cost the states in years to come when these children have bone and teeth problems?”
Why do you think it is the reponsibility of the public purse to nourish the kids?
The parents should be more responsible and perhaps buy their own milk.
What is the point of schools providing milk if the kids are allowed to eat all the sweets and drink all the fizzy pop they like when they get home??
Report abuse
Sanity 51.
Perhaps you misread, I wrote:
“The only solution for Jersey’s ‘cash problem’ is a tax increase (for high earners only) combined with…”
In other words, higher INCOME tax. A tightened grip on greedy landlords and the people who work and earn high salaries in Jersey…neither category will up and go anywhere.
And I’m on my side, because if I pay a little more tax in order to support the disadvantaged, they won’t come stealing from me while I’m snug in bed at home.
Strangely enough, benefits benefit the haves as much as the have-nots. Such resources allow the have-nots to live with dignity, and the haves to live without fear of being relieved of their property.
We must never allow the disadvantaged to become so poor that they decide to take what they don’t have (with force) from the more fortunate…
Report abuse
Sanity @ 51 I agree in taxing the rich at greedy levels is not the way forward, but you are wrong about why the rich are in Jersey.
They move or stay here because its a safe environment, close (enough) to other countries but the main reason is that they can leave all there money to their children. There is no inheritance tax. I think you underestimate this fact. The UK Gov. takes 40% after a £325,000 after all assets are counted, cars house etc. Simple figures a wealthy person with £5 million would pay the UK taxman £1,830,000 Living in Jersey nothing.
Tax on wages after earning £38,000 in upped to 40% after £150,000 its 50%. in the UK.
I would like to see no tax increases without the States getting their very shoddy house in order. Scrap the waste of £400,000 on Cheapside for a start, and privatise what can and should be done by the private sector.
Then you will see, one foreman and ten workers, not one manager, one foreman, and four workers standing by a brand new lorry replaced every three or four years, by another manager, with an assistant.
Davey.
Report abuse
Cuts need to be made but in the right areas.
Re the pool in the hospital, I have learnt to walk again 3 times in that pool. Without it I would have occupied a bed for weeks longer….FACT.
Another great idea by shortsighted management and ivory tower politicians, who have never had to live in the real world.
Report abuse
I’m sure Jersey Dairy must be delighted to hear that their revenue may drop by £183,000 at the stroke of Mr Ozouf’s pen.
Of course, it’s a ridiculous proposal, not least of all because a drop in Jersey Dairy’s profits will lead to a drop in the amount of tax they pay… but I’m sure our learned members will have seen this and decided that it’s a fair compromise. Then again, perhaps it will have further reaching effects. Perhaps the dairy will have to lay off a few staff to justify this downturn. Then of course they will need to buy less milk from the dairy farmers who, in turn, may also have to lay off staff. Now, what do we know about what happens when farmers are suffering financial hardship? Oh yes… they turn to the government for subsidies. Can anyone else see where this is going? I believe it is often referred to as the ‘butterfly effect’.
Children’s health issues aside, this has always been a very emotive subject when it comes to spending cuts and I suggest our elected representatives distance themselves from the idea as quickly as possible.
Report abuse
BS DeLuxe 54.
We all know that a daily intake of calcium (in this case in the form of milk) is essential for healthy bones. We also know that building bone mass during childhood is especially important because this is when bones are growing the most. And, without doubt, the healthier our bones, the less chance we have of broken bones, Osteoporosis and other fragile-bone related problems in later life.
How much do you think Osteoporosis, broken/fragile bones and calcium-deficiency in general currently cost the health service (taxpayer) every year? If the taxpayer spends on calcium (milk) now, the children will have strong bones for later life. Therefore, free milk is simply an ‘investment’ that will pay off in the long run.
P.S. Not to mention the effect this cut will have on the Dairy, employment…and so on and so forth!
Report abuse
Minor/Born Warrior
The Dairy make hardly any profit from school milk. The reason is simple: they need to have special equipment to package the milk in a size nobody else wants. It is hugely costly and inefficient.
School milk should be scrapped. Less than half of children opt for it, and of those, how many drink all the carton? If the idea is to stop calcium deficiency, it is an extraordinarily expensive and inefficient way of going about it. Much cheaper would be to buy a job lot of cheese triangles and give them out every day.
Same solution at about a tenth of the cost I should think.
Report abuse
Something for all the soak the rich advocates to think about.
How UK Tax system works (simplified!)
Great story here that sums up how the tax system in the UK works :
Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
So, that’s what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve.
‘Since you are all such good customers,’ he said, ‘I’m going to reduce the cost of your daily beers by £20. Drinks for the ten now cost just £80.’
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men – the paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his ‘fair share?’
They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody’s share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man’s bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay £5 instead of £7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid £49 instead of £59 (16% savings).
Each of the six was better off than before and the first four continued to drink for free, but once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
“I only got a pound out of the £20 saving,” declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, “but he got £10!”
“Yeah, that’s right,” exclaimed the fifth man. “I only saved a pound, too. It’s unfair that he got TEN times more than I!”
“That’s true!!” shouted the seventh man. “Why should he get £10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!”
“Wait a minute,” yelled the first four men in unison. “We didn’t get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!”
The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up!
The next night the tenth man didn’t show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something very important….
they didn’t have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works.
The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking elsewhere.
Report abuse
donald pond 60.
Cheese spread instead of fresh milk! You can’t really believe that those pale-yellow-odd-smelling-cheesy-ish triangles (which are too disgusting to mention never mind eat) should replace Jersey milk. You are obviously no food connoisseur, those strange-textured triangles are not far from ‘synthetic’! It’s healthier to eat the packaging than the rubbish inside…the ‘stuff’ should come with a health warning!
P.S. The Dairy already has the packaging equipment, so where’s the expense?
Report abuse
Born Warrior
I still do not believe it is the states (and taxpayers) responsibility to provide milk to school children.
What is the point of milk being offered (and how much actually gets wasted because kids don’t want it) when other areas of their vital nutrional intake are not being offered?
Like I said, if a child is exposed to fatty ready meaks, sweets and pop when they get home then the gulp of milk they got at school is hardly going to make much difference…..obesity, diabetes and other ailments need to be addressed.
Perhaps parental education is the way forward …. not milk.
With regards to Jersey Milks profits and tax payments….so what? They are a business and must find other ways to increase revenue….perhaps reducing their high prices might actually increase sales enough to increase profits!
It doesn’t make sense (as post 58 intimates) that we pay taxmoney to Jersey Milk which allows them to pay extra tax back????
Besides, the teachers will only moan because their working conditions shouldn’t include distributing milk in their workplace
Report abuse
Born Warrior
Nothing wrong with Le Vache qui rit. It’s hardly Colston Bassett but then, most kids couldn’t tell a Beaufort from a Comte. Chez Pond, we know a awful lot about cheese.
Warm milk in summer is disgusting.
Just think about your case. You say kids need extra calcium. You then suggest the best way to do this is to pay for the dairy to maintain bespoke equipment in order to deliver a large volume product Monday to friday, termtime only, that cannot be stored and has a one day shelf life, that less than half the class want.
It is total madness. If there is an epidemic of calcium deficiency then that is a public health issue. School milk is just a farcical waste of time and money. My kids don’t have it, I hated it, the dairy doesn’t care about it, I suspect teachers find it a pain to deal with. It’s just a large number of knee-jerk reactionaries that think it is somehow important.
Report abuse
geno
Re: How UK Tax system works (simplified!)
Wonderful! Now, when you get your breath back, could you please tell us ‘How Jersey’s Tax system works? Simplified, of course. Oh, and you can replace the beer with Champers, ey!
Report abuse
donald pond 64.
Where do you get your information from?
Do you have an informer in every school?
And just because your kids don’t have milk and you hated it, doesn’t mean that it should be taken away from the rest of the kids. As for the fact that it’s served up warm, well, I think that’s a bit of wishful thinking, this is Jersey we’re talking about here, not the Costa del Sol.
As Winston Churchill said: There is no finer investment for any community than putting milk into babies…and taking it away would be the last straw!
Report abuse
# 66 Born Warrior.
On this occasion I’m with Donald Pond (although I’m not that into cheese).
If he did have a spy in every school, I expect that the gathered intelligence would substatiate his comments i.e. waste of time and money, disliked by most children (other than the fatties and the greedies) and an extra burden on the teachers (except that unused milk finds its way to the staff room and departmental hidey-holes.
Churchill knew all about addressing audiences, that doesn’t make everything he said an indisputable fact.
Report abuse
BS DeLuxe 63.
“We are what we eat” and “An Englishman digs his grave with his teeth” were my mother’s favourite sayings. So, I have to agree with you when you say parents are responsible for what their children eat.
All the same, parents only have influence when children are at home and, in some cases, sadly, have little control over their own diets. In addition, chocolate, sweets, etc., are often used as ‘bargaining’ tools (e.g. “If you eat your vegetables, you can have dessert”), therefore, it’s quite natural that children perceive them as the most desirable foods.
However, banning what we know to be unhealthy foods sometimes even increases a child’s desire for them. This is why the States (rather than removing the availability of milk – one of the most important elements of a healthy diet) should be investing in ‘food perception’ training in the schoolroom…the Health services (taxpayer) will reap the benefits in the long run.
Report abuse
Rozel Aubin 67.
Re: “If he did have a spy in every school, I expect that the gathered intelligence would substatiate his comments…”
Exactly, you ‘expect’, you don’t know for sure. What we know for sure is that all nutritionists/doctors agree that calcium (milk) is necessary to build bone mass and decrease bone fragility…regardless of what Winston Churchill said.
Report abuse
Born Warrior
I really am trying to see your point, but I still feel parents should take more responsibility for the upbringing and wellbeing of their own children.
I believe a part of this is teaching children they can’t have everything they want and to ensure they are properly nourished.
Report abuse