SHIRKERS BILL LOCAL GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY BACK TO WORK BRITAIN ACT 2025 SACK CORRUPT CIVIL SERVANTS COUNCIL EXECUTIVES AND TOWN PLANNERS TO REDUCE THE NATION'S PENSION BLACK HOLE BLOODSUCKING LEACHES RACHEL REEVES VAMPIRE CHANCELLOR MEMBERS OF PARLIAMENT MPS KING CHARLES

It is alleged that local councils seem to be mostly working from home, with some authorities even paying the heating cost of those potential shirkers. Meaning productivity is down roughly 40%, not including the errors being made as lazy officers cannot be bothered to check figures in paper files, where that would mean a trip to the office. Any work that can be done from home might easily be replaced by AI artificial intelligence, where the pathways have already been established to allow decisions to be made remotely.

It seems to us a golden opportunity to wipe out over-staffing of local authorities, and improving the efficiency of operations, in the process reducing council tax bills for ratepayers. We wondered if it would be possible to draft a Bill for Parliament, for the express purpose of modernising local government, eliminating human decisions that discriminate, hence with inbuilt corruption, to increase productivity in these administrative fiefdoms, for the public good?

We wonder if the UK might incorporate data already collected by General Communications Headquarters (GCHQ) to ensure that Executive management in local authorities do not have any hidden agendas, and are not getting any secret payments or enhancements. Or are prevented from interfering with or otherwise meddling with AI operations, to in any way steer decisions away from their logical conclusions. Especially as concerns planning applications, grants and refusals based on Town and Country Planning rules and Permitted Developments; the aim being protection of the public purse.

THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT EFFICIENCY AND ACCOUNTABILITY ACT 2024

Preamble:

This Act recognises the urgent need to modernise local government operations to enhance efficiency, improve service delivery, and reduce the burden on taxpayers. It aims to address the decline in productivity observed in recent years and ensure that local authorities effectively utilise public resources.

Key Provisions:

1. Performance Targets and Key Performance Indicators (KPIs):

i) All local authorities shall establish clear, measurable KPIs for all departments and services.

ii) These KPIs shall be publicly available and regularly reviewed to assess performance and identify areas for improvement.

2. Return-to-Office Policy:

a) All local authority employees shall be required to return to the office for a minimum of four days per week.

b) work arrangements shall only be permitted where demonstrably necessary and with prior approval from the relevant department head.

3. Modernisation of Services:

Local authorities shall actively explore and implement innovative technologies, including artificial intelligence (AI) and automation, to streamline service delivery and improve efficiency. This includes the development and implementation of AI-powered systems for

a) Automated decision-making: For routine administrative tasks, such as processing applications and issuing permits.

b) Data analysis and predictive modelling: To identify areas for service improvement and proactively address potential issues.

c) Customer service: To provide 24/7 access to information and services through online portals and chatbots.

4. Accountability and Transparency:

Regular audits shall be conducted to assess the performance of local authorities against established KPIs.
The findings of these audits shall be made publicly available to enhance transparency and accountability.

a) Reduced funding allocations.
b) Intervention by central government.
c) Potential for removal of elected officials in extreme cases.

5. Employee Training and Development:

All local authority employees shall be provided with training and development opportunities to enhance their skills and adapt to the evolving demands of their roles.

a) This may include training on the use of new technologies, data analysis, and customer service.

6. Integrity and Transparency:

Independent Oversight: An independent oversight body, comprised of legal experts, data scientists, and independent citizens, shall be established to:

a) Monitor the ethical use of AI: Ensure that AI systems are used fairly, transparently, and without bias.

b) Investigate allegations of misconduct: Investigate allegations of corruption, bribery, or undue influence within local government.

b) Review and approve all AI-powered decision-making systems: Prior to implementation.

7. Data Sharing (with safeguards):

In cases of suspected corruption or significant deviations from established procedures, limited and controlled data sharing may be permitted between GCHQ (or other relevant intelligence agencies) and the oversight body.

This data sharing shall be subject to strict oversight and safeguards to protect individual privacy and civil liberties.
Data used shall be anonymized and aggregated: To minimize the risk of identifying individuals or compromising personal information.

Judicial oversight: A judicial warrant shall be required for any data sharing between intelligence agencies and the oversight body.

8. Transparency and Accountability:

a) The oversight body shall publish annual reports detailing its findings and recommendations.

b) All decisions made by AI-powered systems shall be subject to independent review and appeal.

One obvious way of reducing the Pensions Black Hole, is very Rishi Sunack in style. Simply impose new sanctions on those performing public duties, including banks and bankers, who break the law, or do not reach minimum productivity standards using time and motion algorithms to identify slackers. The country also needs new enforceable laws that instantly sacks corrupt officers, MPs and town planners. Indeed, anyone who is employed to provide a public service that attracts a pension. Rishi Sunack did this with harsh penalties for late filings, and removal of postal reminders to trap the forgetful into boosting treasury coffers.

With so much corruption in local government, why not reduce the pubic sector pension bill with instant sackings. Of course, first of all changing the rules to allow that. So that, instead of rewarding lying and cheating with renewal of employment in the same position, or even promotion. Make those shirking and clearly mis-applying policies, typically those who award planning consents to friends and developers - who then give perks to council employees and Councillors who assist in what amounts to procurement fraud.

A blitz on the corruption in local government and policing might not be popular with those on the gravy train, but sure as hell, will make a difference in slowly but surely weeding out offenders. A societal band-aid plaster.

For example, those planners and councillors found guilty of discrimination, awarding contracts to friends, or simply making irregular investments using public money, should be sacked for incompetence or impropriety, losing all benefits like publicly funded pensions as the penalty for misuse of public funds, or other abuses of positions of trust.

Such penalties should have the full effect of the law and new laws designed to ensnare fraudsters occupying official positions of trust.

REFORM - ADDICTIONS - ALCOHOLIC CRONYISMS

One of the biggest challenges in reforming the bureaucracy is likely to be gaining the support of politicians who may benefit from the current system themselves. This is one of the reasons why people choose to get into politics, apart from an aversion to physical labour.

The comparison to an alcoholic admitting they have a drink problem is apt. Just as it can be difficult for an alcoholic to acknowledge their addiction, it can be challenging for politicians to admit that the system they are part of is flawed or inefficient.

Overcoming this challenge may require a combination of factors, such as:

- Public pressure: If the public is united in demanding reform, politicians may be more likely to listen.

- Evidence of inefficiency: If there is clear evidence that the bureaucracy is inefficient or wasteful, it may be harder for politicians to justify maintaining the status quo. Evidence should not be buried, but claims to corruption fully investigated - and not by a police force that is paid by those being investigated.

- Alternative solutions: If there are viable alternative solutions that can be shown to be more efficient or effective, politicians may be more willing to support reform.

It's also important to note that even if politicians are willing to support reform, there may be other obstacles to overcome. For example, there may be powerful interest groups that oppose change, or there may be practical difficulties in implementing new systems and processes. This is called Red Flag politics. Red Flag lobbies are the enemy of transparency, justice and fair taxation.

Overcoming these challenges will require a concerted effort from a variety of stakeholders, including politicians, civil servants, business leaders, and most of all the voting public.

CONFLICTS OF INTERESTS

A valid point is that potential conflicts of interest that can arise when politicians and civil servants are involved in decision-making. They will not want to rock the boat: 'HMS Corruption.' It's a bit like not wanting to pay reparations for enslaving innocent Africans, used to farm cotton and other cash crops in the colonies. The backbone of the British Empire.

Implementing stringent checks on income, expenditure, and assets could be a useful measure to address this issue. Such checks could help to identify potential instances of corruption and deter individuals (politicians, council executives and planning officers) from engaging in unethical behavior.

Implementing such a system would require careful consideration and planning. It would be necessary to establish clear guidelines and procedures for conducting these checks, as well as ensuring that they are carried out in a fair and impartial manner. The algorithms already exist in anti-money and anti-terrorism routine checks.

There is no invasion of privacy where the interests of the already State allow such methods. They are necessary in difficult to enforce in cases where individuals are deliberately trying to conceal their financial activities.

The risks of corruption outweigh the potential negative consequences of such a system.

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE

An AI chatbot could potentially analyze current legislation and identify areas where bureaucracy could be streamlined. It could do this by:

- Identifying redundant or outdated laws: AI could compare current laws to each other and to historical data to identify laws that are no longer relevant or that overlap with other laws.

- Identifying inefficient processes: AI could analyze government processes to identify inefficiencies and bottlenecks that could be eliminated or streamlined.

- Assessing the impact of changes: AI could simulate the potential impact of proposed changes to laws or processes to ensure that they will not have unintended negative consequences.

However, it's important to note that AI is not a substitute for human judgment. While AI can provide valuable insights and recommendations, it is ultimately up to humans to make decisions about how to reform the bureaucracy.

IMPLEMENTATION EXAMPLES

AI can be implemented in a way that is transparent, ethical, and free from bias, it could potentially lead to a number of positive outcomes.

By replacing jobs that are not needed, it is possible that some individuals could be freed up to join the workforce in other areas where there are skills and manpower shortages. This could help to address labor shortages and boost the economy.

The transition to an AI-driven administration may be challenging. There may be resistance from those who fear job loss, and it may take time for individuals to acquire the skills needed for new roles.

The potential benefits of replacing administrative non-workers with AI will depend on a number of factors, including:

- The types of jobs that are replaced: If AI is used to replace jobs that are low-skilled or repetitive, the impact on the workforce may be significant, such as forms that tick boxes that is ideal number crunching where computers excel.

We are not suggesting the AI is used to replace jobs that require human judgment and creativity. But there is very little creativity in managing council budgets or giving planning consents - where local plans and housing needs and provisions should be automated based on geographical needs, not favour to old farming mates and vendettas that have already cost councils £millions of pounds of tax payer's money.

- The availability of new jobs: Even if individuals are able to transition to new roles, there is no guarantee that suitable jobs will be available.

The effectiveness of AI: AI must be able to perform its tasks effectively and reliably in order to justify the replacement of human workers.

ECONOMIC IRRESPONSIBILITY

In her first major speech as Chancellor, Ms Reeves said she had discovered how bad things are in her first 72 hours in the job as she grapples with the legacy of "14 years of chaos and economic irresponsibility". Treasury analysis she saw over the weekend showed the UK's economy would have been £140billion bigger - with £58billion more for public services - if it had grown at the average rate of OECD economies during the last 14 years. It appears she has settled for long-term decline that will be outstripped by inflation year on year. Real term increases in public spending announced by the Chancellor cannot possibly be supported by the lamentable growth targets. She is battening down the hatches as best she may, without dealing with the rotten apples in the barrel.

Thousands of council jobs might go using AI administration to shore un the Pension Black Hole. There are councillors pulling down expenses when almost all planning decisions are delegated to officers. In many cases councillors are bullied and brainwashed into silence. When they should be asking questions. But don't.

And that goes for civil service jobs and duplication of effort. The UK might operate more efficiently without the armies of civil servants, non productive workers in plum jobs who produce nothing and simply gum up the works with more red tape, obfuscation and negativity - seeking to justify (build) their part.

Criminal charges should be brought against Southern Water, Northumbrian Water, South West Water, United Utilities, Thames Water, Wessex Water Anglian Water, Severn Trent and Yorkshire Water for persistent discharge of sewage into our rivers and seas. The penalty for long term non-compliance could be loss of their franchise, as part of new statute.