Emphasis on only Ernest. Maybe the private sector would have expanded more had demand for its goods and services not been reduced by public sector contraction?
Given that the 'liberal' welfare model is weak, I'm loathe to culling the public sector until such time as unemployment is sub-5%. The transition from employment 
to unemployment 
in the UK is a most horrifying fate indeed, and the FEAR of losing your livelihood could be suppressing consumer spending
'Liberal' welfarism worked during the Golden Age of Capitalism (aka the post-war economic expansion) when UK unemployment averaged 1.6% but it has averaged 7.4% during the Washington Consensus, while I suspect the more downside impact of globalisation may have contributed to an 'expanded' public sector in many developed economies
Local government employment rolls expanded by 57% in the 1960s, 38% in the 1970s, and and 11% in the 1980s. After such massive excess, rather than do any culling in the 1990s, rolls were expanded by 21% again, and again by another 11% through 2008.
Then of course they scream and moan and groan and holler over a roughly 3% cut after all of the above.
Of course, liberals were never serious about cutting spending 'later' or doing any culling this entire time. they're about as serious as the Harlem Globetrotters.
