Increase in public sector workforce numbers and the 5 year vision for the Public Sector

1240/5(2479)

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE PRESIDENT OF THE FINANCE AND ECONOMICS COMMITTEE BY DEPUTY G.C.L. BAUDAINS OF ST. CLEMENT

ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON TUESDAY 10th MAY 2005

Question

Would the President –

1. explain why the public sector authorised workforcehas increased by89 for the year endingDecember2004, at a time when the private sector is decreasing?
2. confirm whether this increase is consistent with theFiveYearVision for the Public Sector, approved by the States inMay 2004, and, if so, how?
3. confirm when the Committee intends reducing the authorised public sector headcount limit?

Answer

1. One has tobe very careful to understand the terminology used in presenting the annualmanpower statistics. It is certainly true that the authorised public sector workforce has increased by89 for the year ending December 2004, andR.C.20/2005 clearly shows that thegrowth has been primarily in the fields ofeducation and health, two core social serviceswheremanpowerplans had been approved overanextendedperiod

H  owever, whilst the Deputy asks about the number of authorised posts, by far the more illuminating statistics

that fall from the Public Sector Manpower Report for December 2004, are in respect of the actual number of employees.

A  s at December 2004 the data apparently shows there to be 21 more employees than at December 2003.

However, after allowing for the Met Office staff transferred from the Airport to Environment and Public Services during that year, the underlying figures show an actual fall in headcount over 2004, albeit only 1. (Trading Committees are not included in the Manpower Report).

T h is fall was despite the actual staffing for the Education, Sport and Culture and Health and Social Services

Committees increasing by 72, for reasons I have already explained. It, therefore, follows that there must have been a corresponding reduction in other areas.

2. The fall in actual employeesand authorised headcount cap, outside ofthe frontline service growthawarded by the States, reflects the efficiencies which Departments are having to achieve as a result of the tight spending controls overall.

T h ose tight spending controls demand that more is done with the same or less resources, which is entirely

consistent with the Five Year Vision for the Public Sector approved by the States in May 2004, which requires efficiency savings of £20 million per annum by 2009. That cash saving will inevitably result in manpower savings over the period.

T  hose significant efficiencies and the associated reduction in headcount will occur over the five years to

2009, the first year of which is 2005. Although it predates the five year plan, the 2004 figures represent a worthwhile preliminary move towards a better, simpler and cheaper public service, and shows firm commitment by all Committees involved.

3. The Committee fully expects that as a result ofthe Five YearVisionfor the PublicSector and a reduced funding allocation there will be cuts to both the authorised manpower levels and actual numbersemployed this year.

W  hilst the analysis of authorised posts is not very meaningful, the important statistic being the actual number

of staff employed, there have been instances where Committees have hung on to unfilled posts, and I will be approaching all Committees to ensure that unnecessary vacant posts are returned.