BBC Blog Network

User Profile

Bell_4_Goalie

Listed below are comments made by Bell_4_Goalie between Friday, 7th August 2009 and Wednesday, 14th October 2009.

«Newer
Older»

Rising slowly 2:42pm on 14 Oct 2009 I am a bit suprised that having 4,200 more people than expected in employment will create a windfall of billion pounds.
A useful measure that no-one seems to quote (no-one knows?) is what the nations wage bill is. With all the short working weeks, pay cuts, withheld bonuses and fewer people in jobs, the nations wage bill must have dropped sharply.
Count it, don't follow it (redux) 2:45pm on 13 Oct 2009 Steph, your claim that fungibility is important highlights one thing. Economists know the price of everything and the value of nothing. Given the financial chaos of the last two years, why should we take anything an economist says seriously? There is more to life than a balanced book.
It DOES matter what the money was spent on, as others above me have so eloquently explained.
Has he got a Legg to stand on? 09:18am on 13 Oct 2009 Just because the corruption, fraud and amorality of MPs is so rife as to be the norm, does not mean they can excuse themselves as 'just following the rules'. Did none of them have the decency to think that just because their chum had got away with a dodgy claim, perhaps they should show some moral authority and work to the standards we expect?
Just because your duck house/porn film claim was signed off doesn't make it okay. It just means that the Commons Fees Office was complicit in the fraud!
Asset sale: Deja vu? 2:29pm on 12 Oct 2009 Having listened to 5Live at lunchtime, it seems that £11billion of this asset sale are local authority assets. For starters, the govt can not force the local authorities to sell these assets. Secondly, if the do agree to sell, the money goes to the local authority not the Treasury. Thirdly, the suggestion from the minister on 5Live was that money raised by the local authorities this wasy would be used to improve local services.
To summarise; Up to £11b of this money may not materialise. If it does it goes to local authorities, not government. And it would be spent, not used to pay off debt. SO HOW EXACTLY IS THIS ASSET SALE SUPPOSED TO REDUCE OUR NATIONAL DEBT?
And surely, if these things really are assets that may be valued by private industry, are they not also of value to the existing owners (us)? If the Tote and Dartford bridge produce revenue, is it not better to keep them and have a steady income than sell them for a one-off bonus? Sure as eggs is eggs, in 10 years time we will bemoaning the sale of these things to foreign owners.
Will he or won't he? 11:42am on 29 Sep 2009 #46 - Tris74.

Um, wow. I think this is a serious post? If it is, then I have to say I disagree totally with everything you have written.

During the past decade there were plenty of people who bemoaned Brown's changes to pension rules, who lamented his sale of gold at rock bottom prices (of his making), who cried out for interest rates to rise to curb the rise of house prices (and hence personal debt), who wanted some money setting aside for a rainy day, who didn't support the endless growth of the civil service and who could see that banks were lending wrecklessly. And we all had less access to the facts than Brown. So even those that were happy making hay perhaps did not realise the tightrope we were walking. Brown ceratinly did, or should have done.

With regards to Brown's personality. It is important. I don't want such a gauche, sour, egotistical, bullying man representing me and my country in international affairs. Building personal relationships is vital for successful business, and Brown is dire at this. And if is is ill (not that we know for sure, but he must be very stressed at the very least) then that most certainly is our concern. This is a man who can take us to war, raise our taxes and change our laws. I want such a person to be fit and well, and able to concentrate on the job at hand. As much as I dislike the man (I did vote for labour through the Blair years though), I do not wish him ill. If he is, he must stand down. His ego must not be allowed to get in the way of running the country (again).
Ball not going to ITV 3:44pm on 25 Sep 2009 Ha! Six replies in three hours. Clearly the public are gripped by the prospect of who will be the next fat cat at ITV. Give the job to Piers Morgan for all I care - ITVs problems will only be solved by a change in regulation, not a change of personnel.
Brown puts Trident on table 09:45am on 23 Sep 2009 This is spin at its worst. The decision (if it gets the nod) to cut from four to three trident subs is nothing to do with non-prolifertion. It is all to do with cost cutting. If Brown was serious about non-proliferation he would be cutting the number of missiles each boat carries, or the number or warheads we own. Reducing the number of submarines achieves nothing, because there is always one (and only one) Trident submarine at sea at all times. This policy is not changing. So we will still have the same number of active submarines holding the same number of missiles and warheads. The decision to have a Trident sub at sea at all times is because to only put one to sea in times of tension would be seen to escalate the situation. Having your fist permanently clenched is less threatening that clenching it only when your neighbour gets too close.
Whether it is possible to run a Trident programme on three boats is a mute point, still being debated in the MoD. With one boat on patrol, one on training excercises and (only) one in for maintenance there is no slack in the system. We now have a better understanding of the reliabilty of all the systems on the boats than we did 30+ years ago. If things operate exactly as intended, a three boat programme is *possibly* achievable. However if the unexpected happens and one of the boats is unusable for any length of time, that will be a massive stretch on resources. To keep one boat at sea would leave only one other boat, either in maintenance or training, but obviously not both. Would you rather have a good boat that no-one can remember how to use, or a highly trained crew on a boat with no valid MoT?
The UN Security Council will see straight through Brown's claims that his offer is to aid world peace. It is a cost cutting measure first and last, and a potentially ill-considered one at that. The cost savings would not be that large as the design costs, tooling costs, development costs etc are the same. The components would need to be more reliable (i.e. more expensive) and the training facilities would still be needed.
And what is the true cost anyway? The majority of work is British based. The companies involved pay tax to HMRC. The staff pay tax. They buy goods that have VAT on them. The shopkeepers pays tax. The shops' shareholders pay tax. I would suggest that the majority of the money is back in Treasury hands within two months of spending it. Does anyone know any figures for this sort of thing?
Why did they do it? 09:41am on 04 Sep 2009 Luibeg - I understand that dropping his appeal is not legally required to obtain compassionate release but the question remains "Why did he drop his appeal?" Surely he would want to clear his name of a heinous crime, if at all possible?

What odds Megrahi still being alive at Christmas (and out living his 3 month life expectency)? That would open up this sorry mess all over again...
Why did they do it? 2:36pm on 03 Sep 2009 #17 Fairlyopenminded - Well said.

The speculation for motives is pointless and unbecoming. The real issue here is not Megrahi's guilt, or deals that may, or may not, have been made to secure his release. In my opinion sending him home was both the humane and pragmatic answer, and one entirely in keeping with Scottish law.

No, the real issues here are:
a. the UK governments diplomatic handling of the situation, which has been dire
b. how to prevent similar situations in the future, where the UK government has no legal say in matters that have been devolved but affect us all.

I think even his greatest admirers (if he still has any) would admit that Gordon Brown does not come across as personable, diplomatic, tactful or charming. Therefore persuading the US that the decision was correct was always going to be a struggle, especially as it seems to contravene an agreement made earlier to keep Megrahi in jail for his whole term (though what a 'whole term' is is subject to debate). If there is even a hint that he was released for commercial reasons the US have every right to feel mightily aggrieved.

Labour have opened a Pandorra's box by granting partial devolution to (some of the) consituent nations of the UK. It is not at all obvious how a similar situation could be avoided in the future, even if it is presented better.
Gray report: Brakes put on 10:25am on 07 Aug 2009 I am a defence contractor who liases regularly with MoD staff at Abbey Wood. This leaked report tells us nothing new. A senior MoD officer recently confided to me that Abbey Wood would operate far better if staff levels were reduced by 75%. There are now so many people working at Abbey Wood (a huge 'village' complex) that there are not enough desks to go around - staff are actively encouraged to take flexy leave or work from home. Work from home? More like go to the beach! The human resources strategy is definately one of quantity, not quality. The few staff who are any good soon become institutionalised into a life of mediocraty and total lack of financial understanding.

The typical MoD officer's idea for saving money is to use cheaper materials, or do away with a belts-and-braces approach to safety and relaibility. Saving money by risking lives, whilst sat in their office (well, at home) and about to go on an 'Understanding People' course. They fail to understand that the real way to save money is to speed up the procurement process and use better project management techniques.

On the bright side, the new Chief Operations Officer at Defence Equipment & Support is a very capable and charasmatic man, with industrial experience. He did not shy away from making staff cuts when MD at a defence company, despite the fact that that company was an Employee Benefit Trust, not a PLC with shareholders to please. I only hope he is given the freedom to do what is required. The problems, however, start higher than that.

«Newer
Older»

^ Back to top

BBC MMVI

The BBC is not responsible for the content of external internet sites

BBC.co.uk

BBC Blog Network

Find and talk to the BBC's bloggers.

User Profile

Bell_4_Goalie