Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
deflation

Whitehall Chiefs Over-Ruled By Labour Ministers

Recommended Posts

Reported on 5live on the BBC :o earlier. This now on the website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8690312.stm

"Civil service chiefs lodged formal protests at spending decisions by Labour ministers in the dying months of their rule, the BBC has been told. It culminated in the "nuclear option" of demanding written instructions from their political masters, union leader Jonathan Baume said. There was dismay at Labour's use of public finances, he added."

Not quite the 'same old thing' as spun by Darling yesterday.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reported on 5live on the BBC :o earlier. This now on the website:

http://news.bbc.co.u...ics/8690312.stm

"Civil service chiefs lodged formal protests at spending decisions by Labour ministers in the dying months of their rule, the BBC has been told. It culminated in the "nuclear option" of demanding written instructions from their political masters, union leader Jonathan Baume said. There was dismay at Labour's use of public finances, he added."

Not quite the 'same old thing' as spun by Darling yesterday.

i cant understand how anyone (apart from union chiefs and career benefit claimants ) can support labour. this is nearly treason and i hope some of them can be accused of criminal neglect and recklessness. yet you have these people who always say we have only voted labour all our lives

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reported on 5live on the BBC ohmy.gif earlier. This now on the website:

http://news.bbc.co.u...ics/8690312.stm

"Civil service chiefs lodged formal protests at spending decisions by Labour ministers in the dying months of their rule, the BBC has been told. It culminated in the "nuclear option" of demanding written instructions from their political masters, union leader Jonathan Baume said. There was dismay at Labour's use of public finances, he added."

Not quite the 'same old thing' as spun by Darling yesterday.

"There was dismay at Labour's use of public finances, he added.".

Well, if he, a Union Leader, was dismayed by Labour's use of public finances, it must have been very bad indeed. mad.gif

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

is plod looking into it?

It's not illegal. As elected officials, they can do want they want, pretty much, but to be asked to put it in writing shows how wrong the whitehall officials feel the decisions were.

They interviewed old Labour voters in South Shields yesterday where Milliband was. Why are so many old folk proud / stubborn / pig-headed (delete as nec.) to have voted Labour for 60 years? I've voted for 3 different parties in less than 30 but I suppose I'm a typical 'floating voter.'

Edited by deflation

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Civil service chiefs lodged formal protests at spending decisions by Labour ministers in the dying months of their rule, the BBC has been told. It culminated in the "nuclear option" of demanding written instructions from their political masters, union leader Jonathan Baume said. There was dismay at Labour's use of public finances, he added."

Shocking.

And unsurprising.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not illegal. As elected officials, they can do want they want, pretty much, but to be asked to put it in writing shows how wrong the whitehall officials feel the decisions were.

They interviewed old Labour voters in South Shields yesterday where Milliband was. Why are so many old folk proud / stubborn / pig-headed (delete as nec.) to have voted Labour for 60 years? I've voted for 3 different parties in less than 30 but I suppose I'm a typical 'floating voter.'

On the contrary, do they not have a duty of care and can they not be found negligent? Cameron had better make this entire mess very public or he will end up being tarred with it...

In future, the best way to avoid these things is to provide a public register on the internet...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It's not illegal. As elected officials, they can do want they want, pretty much, but to be asked to put it in writing shows how wrong the whitehall officials feel the decisions were.

They interviewed old Labour voters in South Shields yesterday where Milliband was. Why are so many old folk proud / stubborn / pig-headed (delete as nec.) to have voted Labour for 60 years? I've voted for 3 different parties in less than 30 but I suppose I'm a typical 'floating voter.'

local authority bods have unlimited liability for their decisions....IIRC

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Would anyone agree that the reason they were spending like crazy was to keep the economic bubble going just long enough to try and get elected ?

i.e. Were they trying to buy the election at the countrys expense ?

If so, is this illegal and should the person at the top who sanctioned this madness be prosecuted for mis-use of public funds ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I doubt signing off on projects in their last few months had that much effect on the economy overall, but we'll get details later I expect. Maybe there was a bit of 'new school' or 'sports centre' money in certain ministers' constituencies.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

Sounds like ass covering from the civil service, though I'm sure the last days may have turned into a bit of a free for all, remember that NuLabour were over spending and running deficits for 13 years, so permanent secretaries were acting in cohorts throughout that time. Both ex-ministers and the responsible civil servants should be dragged before the commons and made to explain their actions, if they can prove fraudulent behaviour or criminal incompetence they can maybe get whatever contracts signed declared ultra vires.

If the contractors involved put up a fight or refuse to modify the contracts it should be made abundantly clear that no future government work will ever come their way. Whomever got Jacqui Smiff to sign off on the ID card contracts this time last year should be taken out and shot, it was a cynical and undemocratic attempt to bind the hands of the next government.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/compensation-clause-in-id-card-contracts-angers-tories-1242598.html

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2010/05/14/id-card-contract-cancellation-could-be-costly-40088937/

Edited by sillybear2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a couple of Labour activists and a few voters on my Facebook, apart from calling them c**nts, is there anything mildly amusing a I can insult them with when presenting this link on my status?

That said I am a ‘fan’ of The Thick Of It page which is moderated by a load of salivating Labour gangbangers – I might just post it on there with the intro ‘you set of cuntz’

Sorry this is a petty post in light of the thread but as a couple have mentioned already, I find it a constant source of angst that any fooker would vote for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We saw this at work over the last few months. About £27 million worth of NHS / PFI spending rushed through before the election, after we had assumed it would be binned in the event of a Tory victory. Still it should hopefully keep my employed for the next 18 months. :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

It's not illegal. As elected officials, they can do want they want, pretty much, but to be asked to put it in writing shows how wrong the whitehall officials feel the decisions were.

Exactly the problem, our system was set up at a time when 'honourable' gentleman could be relied upon to act in the national interest and not take the piss too much, the problem is this gives undue power in the modern era to cynical and corrupt shits that are promoted beyond their abilities.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like ass covering from the civil service, though I'm sure the last days may have turned into a bit of a free for all, remember that NuLabour were over spending and running deficits for 13 years, so permanent secretaries were acting in cohorts throughout that time. Both ex-ministers and the responsible civil servants should be dragged before the commons and made to explain their actions, if they can prove fraudulent behaviour or criminal incompetence they can maybe get whatever contracts signed declared ultra vires.

If the contractors involved put up a fight or refuse to modify the contracts it should be made abundantly clear that no future government work will ever come their way. Whomever got Jacqui Smiff to sign off on the ID card contracts this time last year should be taken out and shot, it was a cynical and undemocratic attempt to bind the hands of the next government.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/compensation-clause-in-id-card-contracts-angers-tories-1242598.html

http://www.zdnet.co.uk/news/regulation/2010/05/14/id-card-contract-cancellation-could-be-costly-40088937/

On the ID cards was it Blunkett who introduced the idea / pushed them onto the agenda, then buggered off from politics to work for the company set make / distribute the ID cards? :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

We saw this at work over the last few months. About £27 million worth of NHS / PFI spending rushed through before the election, after we had assumed it would be binned in the event of a Tory victory. Still it should hopefully keep my employed for the next 18 months. :ph34r:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeremy-warner/7547537/Buying-votes-is-easy-when-the-bill-isnt-yours.html

'According to figures compiled by The Financial Times, ministers have made £7 billion of new spending pledges in the UK regions over the past two months, much of it on projects directly affecting Labour-held marginal seats, or areas bordering them.'

Edited by sillybear2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/comment/jeremy-warner/7547537/Buying-votes-is-easy-when-the-bill-isnt-yours.html

'According to figures compiled by The Financial Times, ministers have made £7 billion of new spending pledges in the UK regions over the past two months, much of it on projects directly affecting Labour-held marginal seats, or areas bordering them.'

I was contacted and asked to 'come up' with projects :o

I did, but I don't expect the money to materialise and don't depend upon it doing so. Didn't change how I voted BTW :D

Edited by LiveinHope

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

I was contacted and asked to 'come up' with projects :o

I did, but I don't expect the money to materialise and don't depend upon it doing so. Didn't change how I voted BTW :D

I'd have sent a one sentence reply :-

"First clear the £160bn deficit then we'll talk"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

http://www.telegraph...isnt-yours.html

'According to figures compiled by The Financial Times, ministers have made £7 billion of new spending pledges in the UK regions over the past two months, much of it on projects directly affecting Labour-held marginal seats, or areas bordering them.'

I think we need the services of a mathematician who has studied the map colouring problem to evaluate that one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we need the services of a mathematician who has studied the map colouring problem to evaluate that one.

im sure they would have covered there asses on that by introducing a few enclaves within the regions

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Reported on 5live on the BBC :o earlier. This now on the website:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8690312.stm

It culminated in the "nuclear option" of demanding written instructions from their political masters, union leader Jonathan Baume said. There was dismay at Labour's use of public finances, he added."

Surely written instructions for the Civil Service from Govt. are mandatory at all points in time ?

Sounds like nonsense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the ID cards was it Blunkett who introduced the idea / pushed them onto the agenda, then buggered off from politics to work for the company set make / distribute the ID cards? :ph34r:

He did, but he "resigned" after revelations that he fast-tracked a visa for his lover's sperm-bandit's Filipino nanny. Later he was appointed as Secretary of State for the Department for Work and Pensions where he introduced the idea of using private companies to bully jobseekers. He "resigned" from that after his earlier undeclared business activities came to light. He then took a job with A4e - the largest of the welfare-to-work scamsters.

'David Blunkett gets down to business' [september 2008]:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/mandrake/2700424/David-Blunkett-gets-down-to-business.html

Although still not quite in the league of his former boss Tony Blair – whose annual earnings now reportedly top £7 million – David Blunkett managed to rake in an eyebrow-raising £380,000.

[...snip...]

The latest register of members' interests shows that the former home secretary's incomings over the past year or so were boosted by a £30,000-a-year salary from a Sheffield-based international training and support services company called A4e. This is supplemented by the £50,000 he receives each year from the Sun newspaper, £30,000 from a Texas-based security company called Entrust and £195,000 from his book The Blunkett Tapes.

[...snip...]

Blunkett, 61, the MP for Sheffield Brightside, has garnered some useful headlines for his new employers A4e with the Star newspaper in his constituency reporting in January: "A4e's free legal line wins Blunkett's approval". That was shortly before Blunkett took a job with the company.

'Storm over Blunkett role with private jobs firm' [February 2009]:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2009/feb/01/david-blunkett-private-companies

The MP for Sheffield Brightside, who resigned from the cabinet for a second time in late 2005 after breaking the ministerial code over a separate business interest, amended his entry with the House of Commons authorities last week after discussions with the Observer.

[...snip...]

Blunkett was a supporter of opening up the welfare system to the private sector when in government and has praised James Purnell, the new secretary of state, for carrying on reforms that were started when he was heading the department.

A4e, which is based two miles from Blunkett's Sheffield home, is currently bidding for a series of multi-million pound, five-year contracts under phase one of the government's flagship welfare reform programme, the flexible new deal. It has already been shortlisted in 12 of 14 regions of the country.

Absolute scum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest sillybear2

He did, but he "resigned" after revelations that he fast-tracked a visa for his lover's sperm-bandit's Filipino nanny. Later he was appointed as Secretary of State for the Department for Work and Pensions where he introduced the idea of using private companies to bully jobseekers. He "resigned" from that after his earlier undeclared business activities came to light. He then took a job with A4e - the largest of the welfare-to-work scamsters.

He had to resign again because of a conflict of interest in owning shares of a DNA testing company.

"The Department of Work and Pensions has admitted that there has been correspondence between DNA Bioscience and the Child Support Agency, which is part of Mr Blunkett’s department. The company wants to bid for the multimillion-pound contract for paternity testing which is due for renewal in 2008."

A matter close to his heart :lol:

Edited by sillybear2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Surely written instructions for the Civil Service from Govt. are mandatory at all points in time ?

Sounds like nonsense.

Yes but normally the senior civil servants 'write' the ministers policy for him and he just signs it.

In this case it seems the civil servants insisted that the politicians actually pen the policy instructions themselves.

There is a subtle difference

Edited by realcrookswearsuits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 277 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.