Vote Tory and bankrupt The Guardian

If traditionalists are looking for a Tory policy that they can embrace with enthusiasm surely it is this:

"The Conservative Party has promised to overhaul advertising for public sector jobs in a move that could potentially hit The Guardian newspaper.  Shadow chancellor George Osborne has vowed to move all public sector job ads from newspapers to a new official website if his party comes to power after the next general election.  This plan could result in newspapers, particularly The Guardian's Wednesday Society section, losing around £790m spent by local and central government on job ads each year. The dedicated public sector website would only cost an estimated £5m."

Taken from BrandRepublic.com.

Comments

[michael mcgough]

Was this Polly's idea?

[leon]

Heh, funny.

[James Maskell]

So the Guardian will lose money and policies...

[Adrian Owens]

We've done this at local council level and saved tens of thousands. The worry though is that job ad prices will inflate on the web, so that any saving will soon evaporate.

The much more important issue is to eliminate many of the "non-jobs" in the public sector. A system to scrutinise each vacancy as it occurs to decide whether to recruit a replacement is a fairly easy win.

[Ted]

Could a junk mail filter be installed to remove any adverts for non-value add jobs (i.e. rubbish bin inspectors, race relations co-ordinators etc.) - so not only a £765m saving but potentially additional public sector savings!

[Sean Fear]

We could certainly delete any job which has any of Race/Diversity/Equality in its title.

[Glyn Holford]

Excellent idea - we need some creative destruction in the public sector after all!

[Andrew Woodman]

One policy I'm sure we can all get behind!!

[John Wilkinson]

It's a nice idea, but it'll never fly. Discrimination legislation means applicants have to have an equal chance of applying. Those without access to the internet obviously are at a substantial disadvantage therefore. And what are the chances of the party leadership tackling European discrimination regulations if it can't even get us out of the EPP?

[changetowin]

Nice idea. This should of course be framed properly - saving taxpayers money that can be reinvested in front line services. Not a vendetta against a newspaper!

[Opinicus]

Not to blow my own trumpet too hard but I floated this idea on this blog weeks ago. Nice to know I'm read, even if not appreciated!

Revenge on the Guardian will be very sweet.

If it cant go just on a website, give it to the Telegraph and the Mail.

[Og]

A proper idea, George. And tree-friendly.

Let's find another 50 of these and look forward to cutting £40bn from the first Tory budget WITHOUT AFFECTING SERVICES AT ALL.

I think we all know it can be done.

[Ted]

So advertising in the Guardian is equal access? Libraries have PCs, Job Centres have PCs, an increasing number of Post Offices have PCs etc. Don't see any problem there.

[leon]

"We could certainly delete any job which has any of Race/Diversity/Equality in its title."

Why not, it's not like racism/inequality/diversity deficits exist in our current utopia is it?

[Phil Taylor]

This is a great idea as state bodies are typically not run by people that understand value for money. In the private sector you think very hard before spending out on job ads in the Sunday Times and the Guardian. You almost always go to much the cheaper and better targeted trade press first.

In local authorities, which are relatively small organisations with very standard needs, they place very expensive ads in the ST and Guardian without engaging brains.

It is the same for schools where the Times Educational Supplement is something like a £250 million business whose entire revenue is taken straight out of the education budget. The school at which I am a governor is just about to place its second ad in TES for a headteacher.

Frankly the accessibility argument is rubbish. If people can't use the web, e-mail, etc they are pretty much by definition unemployable nowadays. You would have a hard time sustaining a case.

Not only would this measure stop the Guardian living off the state but Murdoch also. Double whammy!

[Sean Fear]

The problem is, Leon, that those doing such jobs rarely fulfill any useful function. And money spent on such jobs comes at the expense of issues that are vastly more important to the average taxpayer.

Overall, I'd say that job ads on the internet would reach a much higher proportion of the population than job ads in the Guardian.

[John Wilkinson]

My Council's officers have taken legal advice on 'PCs at jobcentres'. There aren't many, and notwithstanding how many there are, it's plainly markedly unequal access. Thus we don't advertise only online.

So without massive changes to British (and superior European) equality legislation, this idea will never see the light of day. Not until internet access is as common, and as cheap, as access to television. And that's obviously a long way off, especially for the unemployed.

[London Salmon]

Wild horses wouldn't stop me doing something like this, this is pure gold and now we should also focus our sights on the licence fee....

[Tapestry]

Even better would be to stop recruiting. No adverts and no jobs. Now that really would save money, and get a load of bureaucrats off our backs.

But that wouldn't square with cameron's economic stability pre-tax cuts objective.

Is this one more for UKIP's portfolio of policies?

[leon]

"The problem is, Leon, that those doing such jobs rarely fulfill any useful function."

And you know this how? I've seen first hand how positions such as those actually help local Black and Minority Ethnic people.

I would argue that case by case they should be examined for their relevance and impact (with, where possible independent monitoring). A blanket dismantling is absurd.

[aristeides]

Bah - I sent this idea in to 100 policies in July!

[Praguetory]

The Guardian itself has made an enormous loss over the last two years. If you want to think of other ways of hurting the Grauniad, you could do worse than reading this

[Patch]

Typical short sighted Tory

Why should a web site cost only £5M! Seems an awful lot to set up a database and a web front end. There must be endless off the shelf packages that could do this or it could be hosted by one of the existing job site providers.

Has Mr Osborne realised that public sector workers will be able to spend endless working hours browsing this new website for a new job. They couldn't so easily sit at their desks flicking through the Guardian all day.

[Mark Wadsworth]

Patch - so what? They're not doing anything useful anyway.

Aristeides - this looks a lot like your 100 Policy idea that you let me have a look at back in June or July. Hmmm...

[aristeides]

Shall I publish it here? Otherwise it may never see the light of day! Patch will be pleased - I estimated the set up cost at £2m.

[Editor]

Let's publish it tomorrow aristeides and my public apologies to you for sitting on it!

[Serf]

They should simply put the website out to tender. If I were allowed to put a little advertising on the site I would bid £1 per year for the chance to run such a site.

[Sean Fear]

Leon, if a local council offered the average voter the choice of spending £100,000 on employing four new refuse collectors, or a new race and equality unit, what response do you think you'd get?

Having seen people like Lee Jasper and the lovely Ms. Engineer of Brent Council in action, I think I stand by my original view.

[aristeides]

Thanks, Ed.

[aristeides]

And I think you will find that I took that point into account too, serf!

[Michael McGowan]

Nice one, Sean.....but clearly Leon doesn't think that the views of the average voter count for much, unless of course an average voter has "official victim" status in which case that voter's views trump everyone else's?

[cameron gets "willie hortoned" - hilarious you tube "ad"]

reid and cameron on crime @ youtube

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xoyXmJBjflY

(hat tip to roger ailes...)

[Drew SW London]

I fear that the boy Gideon has already screwed up the plan; if Crapita know from the outset that the expected saving is £790 million/year, they'll persuade Sir Humphrey that a properly organised, PFI'd, ueber-planned IT project costing £3 billion is still a bargain (payback in under four years), and win the tender.

(It will, of course, cost £9.7 billion in the end, and will come online about ten minutes before the Last Trumpet)

[George Hinton]

Isn't there a commitment to a lean public sector, which would see a reduction in such adverts anyway?
The Guardian has done very well out of NuLab's public sector job explosion. The question needs to be asked, as to how much of this was fuelled by the old style socialist dogma of interference, jealousy, envy and the need to control and what originated by our dear friends in Brussels/Strasbourg who believe in the socialist dogma of control and interference.
Shouldn't there be a public enquiry, or one by the Met, as to how it is, that such job adverts always end up in the Guardian, which surely is a breach of competition rules?

[arthur]

What! Bankrupt the only newspaper that supports Dave. Still Polly Toynbee would be guaranteed a job writing the next Tory manifesto.

[Esbonio]

I believe it would be very helpful if all public sector jobs were advertised on the internet. Indeed it is a shame that more private sector jobs are not so advertised.

[Dave B]

"And you know this how? I've seen first hand how positions such as those actually help local Black and Minority Ethnic people."

Bureaucracy helps bureaucrats, meritocracy helps us all.

[TimberWolf]

Where does CCHQ advertise for staff?

[Josh]

That is the smartest thing George Osborne has ever said... EVER!

[Martin Smith]

Perfect strategy as well. Indicate the cost savings before the tax cuts, that way people are aware of them as distinct entities, and don't think of cost savings as something that was invented off the top of our heads just to justify tax cuts.

[Yet Another Anon]

Overall, I'd say that job ads on the internet would reach a much higher proportion of the population than job ads in the Guardian.
Most Public Sector jobs are on the internet anyway, they get advertised perhaps too widely in papers - why not put them just in the free newspapers that are available in railway stations, on buses and in bus stations and scrap the rest of the newspaper ads? Might be too soon to withdraw them entirely from newspapers.

[Richard]

Firstly, why are all the advertisments in the Guardian? I have always wondered this.

Secondly, can we expect the Tories to call for the abolition of the diversity co-ordinators, smoking cessation officers and shovel inspection custodians? Ok, so I made that last one up but I doubt it will be long before one is created.

[Tory Loyalist]

What a meanminded plan. Polly's Guardian is Dave's most enthusiastic ally among the broadsheets.

But as we have noted previously, there is no honour among Cameroons.

[steve]

Good idea, now target the £120billion per annum spent on quangos plus the huge general advertising and PR bill of the government. A few more ideas like this and I might start thinking that at last the silly season is over in the Tory camp.

[TomTom]

Overall, I'd say that job ads on the internet would reach a much higher proportion of the population than job ads in the Guardian.

Advertising in The Guardian is self-selection - it finds people with the right ideological perspective..............on Dave's current trajectory The Guardian will keep its franchise

[Milton]

Steve:

"Good idea, now target the £120billion per annum spent on quangos plus the huge general advertising and PR bill of the government. A few more ideas like this and I might start thinking that at last the silly season is over in the Tory camp."

£120bn spent on quangoes?! That's 10% of GDP! What on Earth are you talking about!

[Happy Tory]

This is an outstanding idea from George Osborne. Very clever, very strategic, very helpful indeed. Keep up the good work.

[James Maskell]

"That is the smartest thing George Osborne has ever said... EVER!"

Bearing in mind the competition, Osborne was hardly struggling...

[greg]

What a bloody ridiculous idea. Still if foxhunting works for Labour...

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

I agree with Sean. I want to smash the TV when that smug know-it-all and Livingstone apologist, Lee Jasper, appears on it. Funded by the taxpayer and never even been elected to a parish council, Jasper almost certainly found his position in the Guardian. If non but highly paid jobs disappear as a result of not advertising in the Guardian, then people like Jasper won't be clogging up our TV screens.

[greg]

What a bizarre argument. The fact that the Guardian is often where public sector jobs are advertised doesn't mean that they would otherwise not exist! They would just be advertised somewhere else. I suspect that jobs like Lee Jasper's are probably only advertised because legislation demands it.

[Matt Davis]

Lee Jasper was well known to Comrade Livingstone considerably before he was gifted his pointless massively overpaid job by crony Ken.I doubt very much if it was even advertised at all, most of Livingstone's cronies have been blessed with non jobs as "advisors" at our expense.

[RedSam]

Once you Tories have finished your own little masturbation exercise, why not pick up a Guardian and apply for a Local Government job advertised there by your esteemed Tory shire Councils?

Where is the discussion on Nigel Farage's comments today? Are people too scared that you guys will express disappointment of an opportunity missed and show the party to be the same old Little Englanders that rebelled against its own government?

I dont think much of John Major, but he had the balls to be pragmatic and carry out his mandate on Europe.

Same old Tories...

[James Maskell]

"Once you Tories have finished your own little masturbation exercise, why not pick up a Guardian and apply for a Local Government job advertised there by your esteemed Tory shire Councils?"

Give me five minutes...Im a little busy...

[Justin Hinchcliffe]

Give me five minutes...Im a little busy...

Taking Lulu for a walk?

[Tory Loyalist]

Where is the discussion on Nigel Farage's comments today?
________________________________________________________

If Nigel Farage says that CCHQ indicated he might be offered a safe Tory seat, then I believe him. Plenty of ex-Labour MPs have been bought that way before.

Let's face it, after the last European election, the party has a vested interest in destabilising UKIP.

[James Maskell]

A joke crumbles before my eyes!

As for Nigel Farage, how do we know thats the truth? He could have made that all up to make the Tories look bad. Its all BS I think.

[Tory Loyalist]

Farage is a courageous patriot who was a Tory for years before joining UKIP

Anonymous CCHQ denier is - well - anonymous CCHQ denier. And he/she would say that anyway, wouldn't they?

I know who I prefer to believe.

[Richard]

"Once you Tories have finished your own little masturbation exercise, why not pick up a Guardian and apply for a Local Government job advertised there by your esteemed Tory shire Councils?"

If a Tory council is advertising for this jobs then that displeases me even more - they ought to know better!

Come on Cameron, campaign for an end to the non-jobs!

[Richard Carey]

Farage is a courageous patriot who was a Tory for years before joining UKIP...I know who I prefer to believe.

And here I thought the chinless wonder Farage was just another eogotistical twit - oh, wait, he is!

He's also just another opposition politician, TL - and as for your preferences, your handle is looking more ironic by the day!

[Tory Loyalist]

Well Richard, because I prefer to stand my ground, I choose to stay with the party I've belonged to for 35+ years rather than join the exodus to UKIP, understandable though it may be.

On another thread you've revealed your taste for telling tales out of school about party dissidents, so it seems my decision to remain pseudonymous was a wise one.

[Ben Redsell]

RC at 2037 and TL at 2057. Interesting point. Firstly there is no exodus to UKIP. That's Nigel Farage's little fantasy. Secondly will people please remember they are an opposition party? There are issues that I might agree with Labour on (although I can't actually think of any but you know what I mean) but I wouldn't go and join them! They are the opposition. The vast majority of the ideology I have is still within the Conservative Party. Indeed the Conservative Party is probably closer now to the ideology of 1987 than it was five years ago. The world has moved on. People (i.e. voters) are actually listening to us again. We are driving the agenda. And yes the language may be different, but the message isn't actually all that different - a Conservative Government believes society can help fix things, a Labour Government believes the state is the answer to all ills (not the problem!)

[toryabc]

There are several websites running now just for public setor jobs. As someone who has been involved in running one of the UK's top10 recruitment websites, equal opps is a red herring which many pro Guardian users throw up. Many,many effectiveness studies and user research programmes have demonstrated that there is in fact no barrier to access from the web. Often the opposite is true!

Competition is rife and price cutting rules the market, hence there is only downward pressure on rates. Also it has helped keep the printed media keep their rates down. The problem is that, many public sector recruitment ad budgets are handled by agencies who only make any money by booking expensive newspaper adverts. So they are not interested in it, whilst Universities, Higher and Further education centres have been having to stretch their spend for years, unlike local government...

There are many case studies, where employers now only use the printed media IF recruitment via the web has failed.

The best place for info on this is www.enhancemedia.co.uk, who do a half yearly survey of online recruitment media and effectiveness. They also provide helpful demographics etc

[TomTom]

£120bn spent on quangoes?! That's 10% of GDP! What on Earth are you talking about!

It is part of the poor comprehension of British politics and institutions in this country.

The £120 billion figure refers to the sum of public spending administered by quangoes not the cost of running them

[John Irvine]

"Firstly there is no exodus to UKIP. That's Nigel Farage's little fantasy"

Ben it's interesting that you claim to know that.

Surely only a party employee with access to membership records would have access to such information.

[John Irvine]

"We are driving the agenda"

Rubbish! The current "Tory" agenda is being driven by Blairite ideas. It's the victory of Blair's "Cool Britannis" by other means.

Janet Daley gave an excellent analysis of this phenomenon over the weekend. Read it.

[Joe James Broughton]

A gimmick, I think (like the BBC threads) It's hardly the kind of thing which forumalates a potential government.

Of course, most of these jobs shouldn't exist anyway, and we should remove them. I don't see much need for phasing either.

90% of "Human Resource" people should probably be on the dole too, public and private. A thoroughly nasty disease which has developed out of good intentions, but has become an army of people who actually think they "run" organisations.

The growth in public sector employment in some areas is very marked.
In Doncaster (1997-2007) it is
Manufacturing down 19,000 to 14,000
and public sector up 15,000 to 26,000.

[Mark Demmen]

I've been critical of the Tory leadership recently but they are to be applauded if this is true. Universities have already cut recruitment costs by use of jobs.ac.uk.

How about following on by reviewing the position of the BBC, as suggested by Guido?

[Dodgy Geezer]

Put the adverts on the web, but organised so that they can be accessed by mobile phone as well as computer. Mobile ownership is virtually 100%.

If that doesn't sort out the discrimination problem, swap the public sector adverts to the Telegraph. Advertising in the Guardian discrminates against me - I don't like wading through lots of fascist filth to find a job....

[Cinnamon]

An excellent idea!

[gary, cheam]

why not just shift it to the daily mail instead, thus transferring the benefit to your ally. methinks someone hasn't thought this through (again)

[pass saliva drug test]

Thanks For Such A Nice Post