Elizabeth Peacock: Rethink required on public-sector pay

Admittedly some of the problems are of their own making, with unrest brewing in all parties where no one is prepared to rock the boat as they know that the public will not tolerate yet another election.

The big issue of the moment is public-sector pay with an out-of-control BBC pay strategy adding to the argument which shatters so-called ‘austerity’ – the word that is being used to describe the programme of cost control which in reality is ‘living within our means’.

Our Government just cannot continue spending as it has done in the past, nor can the BBC. There is little alternative but to control costs or increase taxes or licence fees, neither of which would be popular.

One of the big questions of the moment is should the one per cent limit on pay increases for public-sector workers be removed to allow greater increases and can it be done without damaging government policy and put in jeopardy the whole economic strategy.

The Opposition are right to point out that the one per cent limit on pay in the sector has been in place too long and has allowed public-sector workers to suffer from no increases other than entitled increments in the past seven years.

Some of the BBC salaries make the one per cent increase limitation look unreal and not in the same world.

The Chancellor Philip Hammond is not yet turning as he believes we must carry on controlling expenditure as our borrowings are too high and we are paying far too much interest. In policy terms he is right but the lower-paid need help. Some Conservative MPs are also saying that the one per cent limit should be scrapped to provide this help which must be targeted because some public-sector employees, like the broadcasters, are better off than their equivalent in the private sector.

The public sector of our economy contains a very large proportion of the nation’s workforce and therefore some of the members are inevitably at the bottom end of pay scales whilst at the other end of the management structure there are many highly paid managers who receive more than we pay our Prime Minister – something that is intrinsically wrong.

If we are to continue controlling our costs and providing help for the lower-paid we need flexibility and new thinking.

We must convince these highly paid people that they do not need an increase at this time. This action would undoubtedly upset senior doctors, judges, and senior management in education and in the NHS and the media people. Their response would be a measure of their commitment to the nation’s health.

However, there is a further area that could provide help to our finances that is our overseas aid programme where new thinking and a restructure would be appropriate to cut costs and still help when disasters occur.

Within the overseas aid area we should always have a fund that can be used at a moment’s notice to help with an international disaster anywhere around the world just as we have always done.

We should, however, take a very critical view of our international project support where there is inevitable leakage and support still going to countries which can now help themselves.

A really critical review of our thinking is overdue as better targeting would allow a large proportion of this finance to be available for use in Britain where it is needed.

This sort of approach will require our politicians to be brave as it will receive plenty of opposition.

We may well be one of the richer nations of the world but Britain must come first.

‘A Trump-like statement’ that summarises this new thinking would be appropriate with the media, including the BBC being brought in to report and support this approach with our politicians from all parties for once giving constructive support rather than the destructive variety which is the norm.

What we want is a one-nation approach to balancing the books in an equitable manner.

Elizabeth Peacock was Conservative MP for Batley & Spen from 1983-97.