So...if you cut 104,000 people from the civil service - you can save £5 billion. But if you notice the cost of ID cards has an initial tag of £3 billion, then you have to maybe wonder about spending priorities.
Whilst removing "fat" from government administration may be seen initially as a good thing, we're really not talking about service efficiencies, but service cut-backs.
And that a supposedly Labour government should seek to suddenly dump over 100,000 government employees on the dole que is rather startling.
A policy that can work? Or something that will backfire? Expect negative repercussions, that's all I'll say:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3888745.stm
Union leaders have responded with anger to plans outlined by Chancellor Gordon Brown to axe 104,000 civil servants. The Public and Commercial Services Union (PCS) said the cuts would cause "carnage" and warned it could not rule out industrial action as a result.
But Mr Brown, who says hopes to free up £21bn a year, said those talking of strike action should "think again".
"We will not be diverted from what's got to be done to get more resources to the frontline," he told BBC Breakfast.
Some Labour MPs have also expressed concern at the UK-wide job cuts.
The job losses comprise 84,150 Whitehall jobs plus 20,000 from English councils and the devolved Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland authorities. More than 13,000 Whitehall jobs are to be re-allocated.