Windfall For Tories As Firms Eye £4bn Contracts

[Cogs]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/polit...ts-1764007.html

Analysis by The Independent has revealed that leading companies including PricewaterhouseCoopers (PwC) and KPMG, have given the Tories nearly £500,000 since the start of last year as they attempt to build ties with the party that has a double-digit lead in the polls.

The firms involved already hold government contracts worth millions of pounds between them. More consultancy contracts would be on offer for auditors and consultants as the party would be forced to grapple with making vast savings across the public sector should it form the next government.

Some estimates put the amount to be spent on consultancy over the next three years as high as £4bn. The Home Office alone spent £96m on consultancy contracts last year.

The donations were not made in cash but through the use of staff and services, allowing the firms to build up a relationship with the party. PwC has handed the Tories staff "technical support" and "professional advice" worth more than £290,000 since March 2008. There are no records of any previous donations to the party, according to the Electoral Commission

.

As the article says, both Labour and the Lib Dems have taken advantage of similar offers.

How can this practice possibly be considered acceptable? They even have a paid-for MP now in Norwich North.

In a way I'd rather they were just handing over brown envelopes filled with cash, there is a sort of honesty to the exchange. Given that spending on consultants is pretty much universally recognised both within and outside the public sector as wasteful and offering poor value for money (not least because they were in many ways the architects of the targets culture in public services and the database state; when you have a hammer, all problems became nails), I wonder what sort of cuts have been pencilled in for them...by, er, themselves?

Edited July 29, 2009 by Cogs

[Tin Foil Hat]

This is completely expected. There are too few people who can visualise that the differences between Labour and Conservative are narrower than ever.

The tories always did look after their posh friends, and aspirational "middle class" slave workers who want to be posh at the expense of the rest of the populace.

They haven't changed their tune and there will be no big change when the sheeple vote them in. I bet a fiver they don't dismantle the growing police state and just continue.

Two years from now we'll have people with Stalin-esque David Cameron avatars.

100% guaranteed. It's contained. (apols to CGNAO )

[interestrateripoff]

I really don't think these sort of deals enhance democracy.

Aiming to keep the snout in the public trough?

[bogbrush]

Pity, the consultants bill would be the first and easiest thing to slaughter in public spending. Then reduced number of departments, then all IT projects, then you get into the painful stuff but you've already done a Hell of a lot there.

I always have nothing but contempt for anyone in business who habitually uses consultants. Don't they know how to do their job?

[lowrentyieldmakessense(honest!)]

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/polit...ts-1764007.html

.

As the article says, both Labour and the Lib Dems have taken advantage of similar offers.

How can this practice possibly be considered acceptable? They even have a paid-for MP now in Norwich North.

In a way I'd rather they were just handing over brown envelopes filled with cash, there is a sort of honesty to the exchange. Given that spending on consultants is pretty much universally recognised both within and outside the public sector as wasteful and offering poor value for money (not least because they were in many ways the architects of the targets culture in public services and the database state; when you have a hammer, all problems became nails), I wonder what sort of cuts have been pencilled in for them...by, er, themselves?

yep lobbying by big business is great for the people

democracy anyone

[@contradevian]

I watched Coast last night. It covered Samuel Plimsoll, he of the the famous "Plimsoll Line."

At his time over 300 sailors a year were going to their death in over loaded ships, due to greedy ship owners.

Plimsoll stood for Parliament and became an MP and had to fight corrupt ship owning MP's to get a new Merchant Shipping Bill passed against the vested interests of the day.

It still required the SS London disaster and loss of over 200 lives, for public uproar to get the new Shipping Act passed. This nearly brought down the Disraeli government.

Secondly the ship was overloaded with 1,200 tons of railway iron. The final factor is seen as 50 tons of coal which was stored above deck, which after the decks were washed by waves blocked the scupper holes, which prevented drainage of the seawater.

The point of all this, is that Parliament has always been corrupt and only acted in the interests of its members, not the people they laughably represent.

[Cogs]

yep lobbying by big business is great for the people

democracy anyone

Lobbying by big business I dislike but I can live with. There are arguments that entities representing capital and jobs should be heard (if not necessarily obeyed).

Its the level of incest and fluid boundaries/revolving doors I'm uncomfortable with.

Chloe Smith worked for MPs 'bag carrying'. Then she worked for Deloitte. Who sent her to Tory central office. And now "Deloitte's Chloe Smith" as Accountancy Age has it, is a Tory MP. She still however works for Deloitte, she is just on a secondment. I want to be clear here: I don't have a problem with people moving from business to politics, its the weaving back and forth and back again I specifically dislike.

Of course, her candidature was really based on her burning passion to serve the people of Norwich as a devoted servant and all that is irrelevant and Deloitte's only involvement here is as a generous and patriotic employer giving an employee time for independent public service, but it does leave me feeling a little uncomfortable. If you voted for her, did you vote for Ms. Smith, the Tory party, or Deloitte?

Of course Labour has traditionally had the same sort of relationships with the unions (less so in recent years) but at least this was very much front and centre and everyone knew about it. And indeed, people didn't like it at all in the late 70s.

I thought the Tories were supposed to offer an alternative to clean up politics.

Edited July 29, 2009 by Cogs

[Snugglybear]

I thought the Tories were supposed to offer an alternative to clean up politics.

[Snugglybear]

BTW, does this mean that all those baring forts who did Accountancy in college, who used to stand in corners at parties and have people like me snigger at them, are now coining it?

If so, fudge!!

[Cogs]

BTW, does this mean that all those baring forts who did Accountancy in college, who used to stand in corners at parties and have people like me snigger at them, are now coining it?

If so, fudge!!

Well, Ms. Smith has a degree in English Literature. I don't really think these firms are especially about accountancy in the sense of sitting there with a calculator and a ledger book.

Actually, according to a recruiting thing I got sent years ago when I was a student, accountancy is about doing cool stuff like helping children in Africa, attending pop concerts and hanging out in glamorous locations around the world with sexy people. Sort of like being Madonna, but younger. So now you know!

Edited July 29, 2009 by Cogs

[Stop The Ride]

I find this pretty insidious. Deomcracy should be about the interest of the people not of companies (except in as much as the people decide that companies interests align with their own). Therfore companies should not particpate in the democratic process, only individuals should - this should extend to party donations in the same way as it does to voting.

But companies donating money has always gone on. I find this so much worse though - infiltrating their consultants and agendas into party machinery. No doubt PR Dave can spin it though.

[Wires 74]

At least in American `pork-barrel` politics the beneficiaries are usually in the State of the Congressman involved - this sort of thing which the Tories are indulging in seems to be on another level entirely built as it is around special interest groups and VI`s ...

Edited July 29, 2009 by Wires 74

[Timak]

I always have nothing but contempt for anyone in business who habitually uses consultants. Don't they know how to do their job?

I used to think the same until I became a consultant

I think it depends on what the consultants are for. I am a sole trader and work with a very specific software application. There isn't enough work each week for any one client to employ a full time member of staff so it makes sense to have me on site for a couple of days a week as and when needed.

However I find it utterly bizarre when the likes of Deloitte and Capita are bought in for bespoke IT system projects when an off-shelf application could work better and for a fraction of the cost.

[Wires 74]

However I find it utterly bizarre when the likes of Deloitte and Capita are bought in for bespoke IT system projects when an off-shelf application could work better and for a fraction of the cost.

Isn`t that true of any sort of Government procurement though - for example my wife works in a school and gets supplied with a laptop which costs the school budget the best part of £700 - it`s heavy , slow and just very , very basic -the same quality laptop even in a rip-off joint like PC World would retail for around £300...

[Timak]

Isn`t that true of any sort of Government procurement though - for example my wife works in a school and gets supplied with a laptop which costs the school budget the best part of £700 - it`s heavy , slow and just very , very basic -the same quality laptop even in a rip-off joint like PC World would retail for around £300...

Yep, sounds familiar.

Public expenditure could be massively reduced by just improving purchasing.

All they'd need to do is set up one website similar to Amazon where approved suppliers list their products and the public sector log on and buy just like they do at the moment.

No invoices and 30 day payment delays etc so no need for vast accountancy departments.

Easy

[Wires 74]

Yep, sounds familiar.

Public expenditure could be massively reduced by just improving purchasing.

All they'd need to do is set up one website similar to Amazon where approved suppliers list their products and the public sector log on and buy just like they do at the moment.

No invoices and 30 day payment delays etc so no need for vast accountancy departments.

Easy

The multi-national I work for are ruthless when it comes to IT procurement - I doubt they would buy the equivalent laptop for £200 if at all . Why Public sector procurement can`t be the same I do not know especially when you see the sort of wages Senior management earn supposedly for their expertise ( which would be worth so much more in the private sector as they keep telling us)

Edited July 29, 2009 by Wires 74