-
Source: ONE News
Britain can save billions of pounds a year by embracing online
technology in public services, Prime Minister Gordon Brown will
say, weeks before an election being partly fought over soaring
government borrowing.
Brown will also say the Labour government, which has funded plans
to bring broadband internet to nearly all homes by 2012, "must
decide what action it will take to bring about universal access to
the next generation of superfast broadband."
The government has proposed to pay for this faster network by 2017
with a six pound ($12.9) a year tax on telephone lines although the
idea has been criticised for being unfair.
"Faster broadband speeds will bring new, cheaper, more personalised
and more effective public services to people," Brown will say,
according to extracts from his speech.
Britain's budget deficit is heading towards a record 12% of gross
domestic product this year, a figure comparable to crisis-hit
Greece, and both the Labour government and opposition Conservatives
are tussling over how best to cut it.
Labour promises to halve the deficit over four years but the
Conservatives, who could win power at a parliamentary election
expected on May 6, say that is not enough.
Part of either side's plans to get borrowing down after an 18-month
recession will fall under the heading of efficiency savings -
finding cheaper ways to do government business.
Brown will say that the government can save money and improve the
quality of public services at the same time.
"Shifts in existing spending, including being prepared to cancel
current projects ... together with more detailed plans ... in the
budget on Wednesday, will help us to save billions of pounds a year
in public sector costs in the next few years."
Brown has said about 12 billion pounds can be saved over the next
four years through smarter government.
Finance minister Alistair Darling is expected to dedicate part
of his budget to outlining what that means and how it can be
done.
Most economists treat government efficiency targets with heavy
scepticism, arguing that they are often too ambitious and tend to
be fallen back on to fill holes in fiscal policy plans or to make
spending cuts sound more palatable.
