The government’s failures following October 7 come as no surprise to those who have followed developments in Israel’s public sector over the past decades, Amit Ben Tzur, head of the Arlozorov Forum, the independent think tank founded by the Histadrut, told Davar in an interview. “You can’t reduce and make cuts and grind down budgets and workers and expect that in an extreme event of terrible magnitude, everyone will manage to provide everything in the way that’s needed,” Ben Tzur said. “Even if the system was in perfect condition, it would have been hard—all the more so for a system that’s been eroded over two decades.”
Davar spoke to Amit Ben Tzur leading up to last week’s Arlozorov Forum conference, which was called “A New Agenda.” (Founded in 2020, the forum is devoted to “the development of an advanced and innovative economy to reduce socioeconomic gaps and create inclusive and sustainable growth,” according to its website.)
There are many bodies, organizations, and conferences dealing with the question of restoration [following October 7]. What is unique about your approach?
There are two central points. One, the deep understanding of the important role played by organized labor in the process of restoration of civil services. Second, the macroeconomic view—from our perspective, the deficit is not the most important aspect of the budget.
Many bodies are planning reforms in the public sector for “the day after,” some of which are being done professionally and seriously. But almost none of them are dealing with the central issue. The ones responsible for providing services and restoring them are the public sector workers, and in order for the workers in the most important places—government ministries, the education and welfare systems, health funds, and so on—to give the support that Israeli residents deserve, they themselves need to be supported.
There are those that say that organized labor hurts the service provided to the public.
It’s a nice claim, which popped up somewhere in the eighties. There are always anecdotal examples, but we see from research around the world and familiarity with Israel that it’s simply not right. Workers are the most interested of all that their workplaces be as advanced as possible.
Often, the conflict happens when people want to enact a reform and forget to speak with the workers. But the workers know the places they work best. Dialogue is needed, not so that workers won’t be in opposition, but in order to learn from them. Top-down “reforms” simply don’t work.
What about the need for flexible employment?
Flexibility is definitely needed to deal with the constantly changing reality. We’ve experienced that with great force over the past four years. But an infinite number of reforms with the word “flexibility” in the title have been enacted over the past 30 years, which in practice led to impaired services and cuts.
From surveys we’ve undertaken in the public sector as well as the private, it’s clear that job security is something important. No one wants to lose their livelihood and their identity from one day to the next. In the public sector throughout the world and in Israel, the central motivating factor for workers is not salary or fear of being fired but desire to contribute to society.
What is your unique voice when it comes to the budget?
We’ve heard for many years that macroeconomic policy has one central goal—reducing the deficit. That’s the central outcome measure through which all economic activities are evaluated. We bring a completely different voice. The responsible policy is one that can see the long term, that has a goal of comprehensive growth in the state of Israel, the fruits of which all will be able to benefit from. In policy of this sort, the deficit isn’t a goal, it’s a tool. If the deficit leads to growth and resilience, then making use of it is the right thing.
In discussions that have taken place over the past year, we’ve heard only about 2 billion shekels for this or that, coalition funds or extraneous ministries. That won’t change the big picture: Israel has underbudgeted by 170 billion shekels annually compared to the OECD average. That’s compared to the average [budget], not the best. It’s a crazy gap, and in Israel, discourse about this is nonexistent.
No one in academia or in politics is speaking in these terms?
They are very conservative. Today there are a few new voices among economists, young Israelies who studied around the world and have perceptions that in other places are taken for granted. But faculties for economics in Israel are still run by an old, conservative perception. You can see that in all the various letters written by economists, which always call for reductions to the budget.
This interview was translated from Hebrew by Leah Schwartz.
