Thread: How many ill informed twits work for Government organizations?

I live nextdoor to some 'disturbed' bushland and there has been a recent effort to clean out the pest weeds and trees. The guys doing the cleanup appear to be quite well informed and are doing a good thorough job, however there is a large grove of camphor laurels that so far haven't been touched. They are starting to look like a sea of green in an olive brown landscape. I'm hoping they return to deal with the CL's before the funding runs out.

Well, it's like this....

The government feels the need to declare a surplus, and says to all government departments "Yay, and verily, thou budgets which thou has are now to be cut so we may achieve our surplus, so thou shall now offer unto us 2.5% of your budget back."

So your department has to find a way to save 2.5% (that's on top of the 3% it needs to find in order to fund staff payrises, otherwise all your good staff take off for greener pastures, and the 2% it needs to keep up with the CPI as well as the 2% it needs to keep up with Australia's growth rate).

Now, the department can't just go and chop 2.5% off everything it administers because the government doesn't want to see letters that say "Dear unemployed person, your unemployment benefit has been cut by 2.5% so we can have a surplus, we know you understand, hugz & kisses, your government".

So there are big buckets of money that are untouchable, which means much larger savings have to be made in other areas.

And the call goes out through the department, "Offer unto our benevolent government that which is not strictly in scope, or is not directly linked to measurable program outputs, or could otherwise be called icing on the glorious cake of our core functions, and we shall sacrifice it at the altar of MYEFO to appease the almighty surplus."

And so the fine tooth comb is put over all projects, and line items like "Training in invasive species recognition for team leaders of endogenous flora and fauna area rehabilitation work groups, $15,000" get offered up as potential savings, as, on careful reading of the department's policy and legislation, the policy guidance is that the program is clearly "Work for the Dole", which obviously does not include "Receive training for the Dole", therefore the item can be dropped as it is clearly out of scope. It is also noted that there was never a budget established for "Evaluating the effectiveness of flora and fauna rehabilitation work performed by "Work for the Dole participants", therefore there is no comeback on the department if a p-ss poor job is done of it.

A fair bit of the problem can be laid at the feet of the Public Service selection process.

Basically the job goes to the best liar - you have to claim extensive expertise in the area you are applying to, claim to be a paragon of virtue etc. etc. But no one really checks the background of these claims. So we have people laid off as 'checkout chicks' from a local business one week suddenly making legal advisements without any training, but being accepted as 'experts' because their job description says they are. And the staff who really have the knowledge & ability are passed over again and again until they get sick of it & move on, leaving the self appointed 'experts' in charge.

So having 'experts' ripping up native species because they are 'prickly' while helping weeds flourish is just par for the course these days.

Originally Posted by bsrlee

A fair bit of the problem can be laid at the feet of the Public Service selection process.

Basically the job goes to the best liar - you have to claim extensive expertise in the area you are applying to, claim to be a paragon of virtue etc. etc. But no one really checks the background of these claims. So we have people laid off as 'checkout chicks' from a local business one week suddenly making legal advisements without any training, but being accepted as 'experts' because their job description says they are. And the staff who really have the knowledge & ability are passed over again and again until they get sick of it & move on, leaving the self appointed 'experts' in charge.

So having 'experts' ripping up native species because they are 'prickly' while helping weeds flourish is just par for the course these days.

True, sad and bloody infuriating!!

Originally Posted by Fuzzie

however there is a large grove of camphor laurels that so far haven't been touched.

Could be some method in that bit of seeming madness. When I was involved in local weed eradication group for the bush I live near they preferred to slowly poison the larger trees while other things were growing to take their place, otherwise birds and things that were using the trees for nesting and stuff just get left high and dry and leave the area all together.

As for madly chasing the surplus we apparently have to have, that is called "responsible government " if the liberals do it. And they DO cut the payments of unemployed people. Just ask the single parents who have been put on "newstart" and loose $100 a fortnight at least. Its called encouraging people into work. Don't get me started.

The same answer as to how many grains of sand are there on the beach.

Cheers

Steve

Have to agree to a point TL, however in the particular case I mentioned
There is an absolute carpet of a pest introduced garden nicety that seeds
profusely. The birds also spread the seed. When smaller, and before seeding,
it is easy to remove. and I don't see why that was not explained and done!!!

Now come on Arthur be fair your thread heading is an open ended question.

It would have been easier to ask .........................nah forget it even the answer to that for Gov Depts would be two hard

Shouldn't that question read "How many ill informed twits are employed by Government organisations?".

Oh and TL, what surplus was that?

Bit of topic but replying to TL's comment which also was of topic.

Originally Posted by tea lady

Just ask the single parents who have been put on "newstart" and loose $100 a fortnight at least. Its called encouraging people into work. Don't get me started.

I have no problem with that for why should single parents receive more than those on Newstart or other pensions. What makes them so special or precious that they need more.

The real tragedy is that those on Newstart and other pensions get less (whilst they incur more costs in trying to look for work) and their payments should be increased to the same level as all other pensions or payments.

Might cost a bit more but then there is equity in the system.


Peter.

How many ill informed twits work for Government organizations?

My guess is 60% of them, Do I win a prize if I'm closest???

60% work or are ill informed twits??

surely that's more of a 40%/80% type of question

Originally Posted by artme

Mate asked what was going on. "These are prickly and obviously don't belong here"
sayeth a "leader".

I suppose we are lucky they were not the people to discover the Wollemi Pine. I have planted two Bunyas and a Wollemi, but the Wollemi died !

Regards
Paul