WE ALL know that big public sector spending cuts are on the way.

What has taken me by surprise is the speed with which panic has set in locally among those working in the public sector. The tension must be palpable within NHS primary care trusts and police staff. Between them, the NHS and Merseyside Police could lose in excess of 6,000 jobs in the next few years.

There can be little doubt that the cuts are necessary. The retrenchment in the public sector is mostly a function of the last government’s largesse. According to the Economic and Labour Market Review, published by the Office for National Statistics yesterday, the number of jobs in Britain’s public sector grew from 5.2m in 1999 to 6m in 2009, although 120,000 of that expansion is accounted for by the reclassification of the Royal Bank of Scotland as a public sector organisation. About 366,000 jobs were created by the NHS and another 179,000 by local authorities. Most of the remaining new jobs were created by central government.

Of the regions of Britain, the North West was the biggest beneficiary from public sector jobs growth during the decade covered by the ONS report. We have 109,000 more public jobs in this region compared to 10 years ago.

Nor is it just geographical locations that will lose out. Some groups within society will suffer more than their fair share from the cuts. These will, of course, be the groups that are more vulnerable to employment discrimination. Such groups may find it harder to find new jobs to replace those they are about to lose. The public sector employs twice the number of women than men. It employs more older people than the private sector and slightly more disabled people, though ethnic minorities are evenly split between the public and private sectors.

So, the question now is not just whether the private sector will save the day by creating sufficient jobs to soak up those public sector workers made redundant, but whether, within the headline figures, women, older people and the disabled will get their share of any new jobs arising from private sector resurgence.

The omens aren’t good if the New Economics Foundation is to be believed. A centre-left think- tank, it asserts that deprived cities like Liverpool will not see enough jobs created to make good the job losses expected over the next few years.

The job cuts, though, may suit the Conservatives, irrespective of their economic necessity. David Cameron’s party wants smaller, less interventionist government. The Conservatives want to see the private and voluntary sectors take on many of the services currently provided by the pubic sector because, they argue, such organisations do a better job.

But the fact is the forthcoming radical surgery will be performed with a blunt instrument rather than a scalpel.

Will the new, leaner Britain be a happier place? It’s hard to know, but one thing is for sure, there will be pain along the way. Less policing of anti-social behaviour will make life more unpleasant for some. Cuts to PCT preventative health budgets will result in more chronic illness, resulting in more cost pressures at our hospitals.

Between 2002 and 2009, only one in four of all new enterprises created in England was based in the most deprived areas, says the NEF, despite decades of government programmes encouraging enterprise in regions with high unemployment. Merseyside’s business growth factors are less dynamic than those elsewhere. Expect lean times ahead.