ACROSS the Channel Islands and the UK, countless businesses have found themselves under severe economic pressure with insufficient income to meet their outgoings. In virtually every case, those operations took drastic action to cut costs.

What they did not do was axe services. The first port of call was to tackle the biggest individual item of expenditure – staff salaries. Reviews of services might have followed but the imperative was to remain in business on the basis of what money was coming in.

Contrast that with the response of Health and Social Services and the out-of-kilter approach is frightening.

Looking at the health side alone, it has ward managers (sisters), above them modern matrons, then it has senior managers, then deputy directors and directors above them. How many of these positions have their own PA and to what degree is the hierarchy replicated in the social services part of the department’s mandate? It also has HR, IT and procurement teams, which are replicated throughout the rest of the States.

No private sector business person, especially those who have had to cut their own costs, will believe HSSD when it says no staff savings are possible, particularly given the duplication that exists elsewhere in government.

It is also pretty clear that HSSD is looking at its problems as being individual to its particular silo when this is, particularly in the light of the fundamental spending reviews, an issue for the Policy Council to coordinate.

What HR, IT and procurement functions can be absorbed centrally and what savings made as a result? What pressure was brought to bear on the Public Sector Remuneration Committee to pay a rate for nurses and others that actually attracts them but is cheaper than paying through the nose for agency staff and locums?

What help was sought from the council to flatten management tiers and what financial aid was requested from Treasury and Resources to help fund redundancies for the longer term savings?

HSSD has provided islanders with no indication of the steps it took to attack its own cost base before reducing the services it provides – and that’s why the cuts are viewed with suspicion.