I’ve always thought gold-plate to be a bit false…. looks shiny at first glance but it’s probably a lump of wood underneath.

Now solid gold is a different matter, but that is the reserve of others that it would be too crass to name….

The wonderful Sunday Times had the same story with the word “Bureaucrats” inserted instead of civil servants” just to make it clear the civil service is simply a bureaucracy and not worthwhile

It also says (quite correctly) that the cost of civil service pensions has risen 50% in the last 5 years, and this is not sustainable.

Don’t see many lefties talking about that though do we?

Shouldn’t the Telegraph be happy?

More retired civil servants = more people entering the demographic that makes up 90pc of its fast shrivelling readership base.

@Tyler #3:

“It also says (quite correctly) that the cost of civil service pensions has risen 50% in the last 5 years, and this is not sustainable”

No it doesn’t; it say that costs have risen by 30% over 4 years.

“Don’t see many lefties talking about that though do we?”

Have you actually been reading this site recently?

More relevantly; we don’t see “righties” talking about the fact that as a result of the reforms already imposed, 2010-11 is the peak year in cost as a proportion of GDP. The implication in the Torygraph report is that costs will continue to spiral upwards; which is of course unapologetically mendacious.

@ 2 “The wonderful Sunday Times had the same story with the word “Bureaucrats” inserted instead of civil servants” just to make it clear the civil service is simply a bureaucracy and not worthwhile”

The Telegraph has a habit of slipping into tabloidese from time to time, but it’s sad to see the Times following suit.

Hang on… doesn’t this ratio suggest that fewer people proportionately are becoming civil servants? Is the Telegraph’s solution that we create more “bureaucrats”, or just steal people’s pensions? It would be lovely if it could clear that one up…