Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
Join us FREE, we're FREE to use
Web's largest swingers site since 2006.
Already registered?
Login here
 | Back to forum list |
| Back to Politics |
| Jump to newest |  |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!" Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. " How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying?" How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. " Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left." But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? " After doubling the national debt Now the tories have trebled that again, the interest alone is almost two thirds of the annual Nhs spending budget. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? After doubling the national debt Now the tories have trebled that again, the interest alone is almost two thirds of the annual Nhs spending budget. " Scary! But then austerity measure didn't go well either - largely because money was 'cheap' back then. Now not so much. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. " So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee." All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. " Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well 
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/ | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/"I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'. Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'. Hence, again, HIT PIECE. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE. "So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?"FFS, do you actually read? I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it. Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The topic of the thread smacks of deja vu but with the shoe on the other foot. I'm not justifying it either way, more highlighting my belief that they are both as bad as eachother. " I agree, it is a broken record being echoed every tory / Labour change. The hope is it gifts them a get of out of jail card, the reality should be they have had plenty of time in opposition to have a clear plan for recovery. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Boy oh boy…. The excuses seem a little early, but best to get people accepting poor performances now, it will allow Starmer to say I told you so…. " Article in the guardian a couple of weeks ago, that Starmers labour is less popular than Blair’s and that starmer will struggle on every level to make any progress Reeves says economic growth will provide the taxes to pay for public services, but omitted to say how that growth will be achieved. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The topic of the thread smacks of deja vu but with the shoe on the other foot. I'm not justifying it either way, more highlighting my belief that they are both as bad as eachother. I agree, it is a broken record being echoed every tory / Labour change. The hope is it gifts them a get of out of jail card, the reality should be they have had plenty of time in opposition to have a clear plan for recovery. " I agree. Just hope we don’t have years of blaming the others like we have had for 14 years. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!" that is what blair and brown did when they knew they were going to lose to the tories,,, they sold off billions of britains gold reserves for a fraction of their worth,,, no wonder the country is getting worse every time we have a change of govenment,, they are all as bad as each other | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?"You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t. Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! that is what blair and brown did when they knew they were going to lose to the tories,,, they sold off billions of britains gold reserves for a fraction of their worth,,, no wonder the country is getting worse every time we have a change of govenment,, they are all as bad as each other "Errr no! While I agree with much of your sentiment, the gold was sold off between 1999-2002. Labour were in Govt until 2010. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
"What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p. No points were made. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made. "Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it "No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Every outgoing government leaves a shit show for the next. If all was all good, any government would not be voted out of office. So what's the point?" The irony of 14 years of Tories blaming the last Labour Govt for everything. Depending on how long Labour are in Govt we might likely now see the same. Also to point out to all those who are forever saying the Tories are better at managing the country etc. they aren’t clearly. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this. "Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate. Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt. BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to."There may well be posters who point towards Labour just as there are many who point everything towards the Tories. Welcome to football politics. Labour will without doubt struggle, at least initially, because it would be near on impossible to fix all of our problems. Blaming the Tories for all of those is wildly inaccurate, you know as well as I do that most of our problems have happened slowly, over decades. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
There may well be posters who point towards Labour just as there are many who point everything towards the Tories. Welcome to football politics.
Labour will without doubt struggle, at least initially, because it would be near on impossible to fix all of our problems. Blaming the Tories for all of those is wildly inaccurate, you know as well as I do that most of our problems have happened slowly, over decades. "So you concede this thread is valid and has stimulated discussion. Good
Labour will fail and IMO one of the key reasons is the size of the shitshow they inherit. The only thing that can save them is a global economic upturn that the UK tags onto. Get the books back in order with money flowing in and hope the public are patient enough to give them time. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
There may well be posters who point towards Labour just as there are many who point everything towards the Tories. Welcome to football politics.
Labour will without doubt struggle, at least initially, because it would be near on impossible to fix all of our problems. Blaming the Tories for all of those is wildly inaccurate, you know as well as I do that most of our problems have happened slowly, over decades.
So you concede this thread is valid and has stimulated discussion. Good
Labour will fail and IMO one of the key reasons is the size of the shitshow they inherit. The only thing that can save them is a global economic upturn that the UK tags onto. Get the books back in order with money flowing in and hope the public are patient enough to give them time."You're in a bit of a narcissistic mood this morning  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
There may well be posters who point towards Labour just as there are many who point everything towards the Tories. Welcome to football politics.
Labour will without doubt struggle, at least initially, because it would be near on impossible to fix all of our problems. Blaming the Tories for all of those is wildly inaccurate, you know as well as I do that most of our problems have happened slowly, over decades.
So you concede this thread is valid and has stimulated discussion. Good
Labour will fail and IMO one of the key reasons is the size of the shitshow they inherit. The only thing that can save them is a global economic upturn that the UK tags onto. Get the books back in order with money flowing in and hope the public are patient enough to give them time.
You're in a bit of a narcissistic mood this morning "Only this morning? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? After doubling the national debt Now the tories have trebled that again, the interest alone is almost two thirds of the annual Nhs spending budget. Scary! But then austerity measure didn't go well either - largely because money was 'cheap' back then. Now not so much." Austerity was a success. The squeezed people as hard as possible, and still counted on their support in the voting booths. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to."The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem. "Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?"And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?
And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet."Search script kiddie, people who have no idea or understanding what they are copying and pasting. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?
And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet."It was a rhetorical question Buddy | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?
And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet.
Search script kiddie, people who have no idea or understanding what they are copying and pasting."Feel free to explain what is you think I don’t understand? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?
And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet.
Search script kiddie, people who have no idea or understanding what they are copying and pasting.
Feel free to explain what is you think I don’t understand?"The report of mismanagement of public money you created a topic about. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?
And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet.
Search script kiddie, people who have no idea or understanding what they are copying and pasting.
Feel free to explain what is you think I don’t understand?
The report of mismanagement of public money you created a topic about."Erm not sure why this is so hard Buddy. You do talk in riddles. Are you saying I don’t understand the report? If so what is it precisely I don’t understand in that report? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?
And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet.
Search script kiddie, people who have no idea or understanding what they are copying and pasting.
Feel free to explain what is you think I don’t understand?
The report of mismanagement of public money you created a topic about.
Erm not sure why this is so hard Buddy. You do talk in riddles. Are you saying I don’t understand the report? If so what is it precisely I don’t understand in that report?"You never read it. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? The list of labour excuses shows no sign of stopping, and they're not even in Govt yet. How do you come to that conclusion? The Tories have spent 14 years blaming Labour for what they inherited in 2010. The PAC is cross party, Hillier is the Chair but the Committee has to agree on content but is signed off by Chair. Are you saying PAC is lying? How do I come to what conclusion? Did the PAC say it or did she say it? You've quoted her, personally. Ah I see. The facts in the report will still stand regardless of what she has said. Be interesting to quote the exec summary. Either way, is she wrong? Are the next Govt inheriting a shit show? Personally I would also make sure everyone knew the mess because you can be damn sure the Tories will be criticising a Labour govt once in and ignore the mess they left. But instead of writing any of that you decided to C&P a left wing piece with not thoughts of your own. Of course the next Govt are being left a shitshow, every Govt in history is, that's how we get change, the electorate have enough and vote for someone 'new'. I maintain its her job (along with others) to scrutinise what the Govt are spending, she could always try do something about it instead of writing hit pieces. So sorry (not sorry) Feisty for cutting and pasting something that caught my eye! So how does not doing that square with quoting sources or providing evidence etc? If you follow PAC then you will know THEY (not SHE) do what you are saying. I don’t think the PAC Report is a “hit piece” that undermines the whole point of the committee. All you have done in C&P a hit piece from Byline off all publications and I'm concentrating on her because she is the one saying things. I'm not saying the report is a hit piece. So far you nor Byline have actually provided the report. Oh dear do you want me to help you get dressed and eat as well
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/200651/the-big-nasties-future-spending-problems-for-government-laid-out-by-pac-chair/
I've already seen it. I said no one speaking about it has provided it, hence my thoughts on 'hit piece'.
Having read it yourself, you'll know it's the 'first special report' and focuses on her view of the 'lack of long term thinking', not 'theirs'.
Hence, again, HIT PIECE.
So you think she is abusing her position as Chair of PAC? Is the content of the report not true?
FFS, do you actually read?
I'm not questioning the 'report', I'm questioning her own additions to it.
Do you agree that all Govts are slow and lack long term thinking?
You were doing what you often do and focusing on one aspect to seemingly undermine the actual point. “Look over here look over here”. Although you’ll say you weren’t.
Yes Govt is bad at long term thinking and planning due to electoral cycle.
What is the actual point? The OP is a c&p.
No points were made.
Well it stimulated discussion so the point is clear enough. Sunak’s govt leaving shitshow for next Govt. At least so far we have not had anyone try to deny it
No one is gonna deny it, as already said, the reason we get new Govt is because the incumbent is leaving a shitshow. Every single time. You know this.
Oh there are a few posters who might try. There are posters who will point at Labour and say they were/are worse. There are posters who over the next few years will be attacking Labour for not making things better quickly enough. So being reminded about the shitshow in advance is appropriate.
Just one example - NI reductions. Popular to get a tax cut. Not really sustainable. So Labour will either have to reinstate or find other ways to raise revenue. People will blame Labour for putting up taxes. But it is a bear trap set by Hunt.
BTW Nobody forced anyone to post in this thread. You chose to.
The basics of the report is mismanagement of tax returns the 'people's voters' money and the only cure is an increase of money coming in through tax or ni contributions, the glaring point is the mismanagement of money, but as usual point a finger and say look over there not at the problem.
Who manages the money? More to the point, who sets policy and direction and determines which things to prioritise. Who then changes tack and removes or reduces funding for previous priorities and switches it to new priorities?
And your response was that Labour will have to reverse the ni cut to get more money or other ways through tax, the report went straight over your head or it has not sunk in yet.
Search script kiddie, people who have no idea or understanding what they are copying and pasting.
Feel free to explain what is you think I don’t understand?
The report of mismanagement of public money you created a topic about.
Erm not sure why this is so hard Buddy. You do talk in riddles. Are you saying I don’t understand the report? If so what is it precisely I don’t understand in that report?
You never read it."Ok Grandad if you say so! So you can’t answer my question then? You can’t tell me what it is I don’t understand? Or is it you simply cannot explain the whole topic? Feeling a bit Twilight Zone now Mr B!!! Curious to know have you ever worked in Central Govt? Project/Programme delivery on Govt projects? Govt policy development? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!" But wait hang on the Tories blamed and still blaming labour, how many years of austerity have we had to put up with? I don't think the next government will get as long as the Tories have had to sort "it" out. Still I'm sure multi millionaire Sunak will be really concerned....not! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!" . We can safely ignore the content of the report. Sadly during Covid an enormous amount of money was spent saving lives . People became accustomed to being paid to do nothing and we are still paying the price . Just think of all the great achievements of the government and the extensive help given to the less well off in society. Increased welfare benefits and housing support. Some of the merchants of doom and gloom on here fail to recognise all these achievements. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!. We can safely ignore the content of the report. Sadly during Covid an enormous amount of money was spent saving lives . People became accustomed to being paid to do nothing and we are still paying the price . Just think of all the great achievements of the government and the extensive help given to the less well off in society. Increased welfare benefits and housing support. Some of the merchants of doom and gloom on here fail to recognise all these achievements. " Wish there was a “my sides are splitting” emoji! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!" Kind of goes with the territory of an incoming government, hence the need for a new party in office. Blaming the previous government is day one of political learning and forgetting the fact that they complained about it when the roles were reversed. Question is are Labour up to the job of sorting out the shit show. They have been saying for years that they are better so the time to prove it is approaching fast. I do hope so. Alternatively we may be in for 5 years of excuses | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess! Isn't it her job to ensure we get 'value for money'? " It was the Tories job and they've fucked up really badly | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Question is are Labour up to the job of sorting out the shit show. They have been saying for years that they are better so the time to prove it is approaching fast. I do hope so. Alternatively we may be in for 5 years of excuses" I don't think any incoming government is going to be able to sort out the massive steaming pile of shit the UK is in the middle of. I don't think even the Lord Almighty could do it either. It will be more "tinkering" around the edges, avoiding (mostly) the next set of rocks in the water (with a few scrapes and bumps) before careening in to the next set 2 mins later...and on...and on...it goes. It's always been like this. Perhaps not as many "scrapes" over a long period of time, but now they are constant and relentless and unending. This is the "new normal" and I see no way out, because there is none. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!" . Who cares about the public accounts committee ? A report such as this hardly helps anyone. Let's look at the governments achievements . 1. Help to the unemployed and disabled. 2. Payemts to ensure no one was in financial difficulty during Covid 3. Completion of the Elizbeth line . 4. Generous pensions for all public sector employees 5. Charging points for electric cars 6. Provision of social services. . If anyone thinks that the government has failed imagine Hoe much worse things could be . Angela Rayner is currently under investigation for failing to pay Capital Gains Tax on sale of a house in which she did not live. . | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"I want the Tories out but I don't want Labour in because they be much worse " Why? You always make a sweeping statement like this but never explain why? It may be true but it would be good to hear why you think so! | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"The next Government will inherit a long list of ‘big nasties’ from the Conservatives which will cost hundreds of billions of pounds to clear up, a report by the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee, warns today. After a year when her committee examined projects across Whitehall, the NHS and schools the chair of the Commons Public Accounts Committee, Dame Meg Hillier, lists what she calls a catalogue of “big nasties – essential spending which cannot be put off”. The list includes failed projects to tackle crumbling schools, hospitals, public health laboratories, outdated IT and renewing and refurbishing Parliament. She warns: “All too often, we have seen money misdirected or squandered, not because of corruption, but because of group-think, intransigence, inertia, and cultures which discourage whistle-blowing. On occasion, the scale of failure has been seismic, such as HS2 or Horizon in the Post Office, or the procurement of PPE during Covid. Other times, there has been a systemic failure to be agile and adaptable as events unfolded.” Unless this is tackled she warns: “my successors as chair of the PAC will be doomed to a cycle of broken promises and wasted cash in perpetuity.” The report produces eye-watering shortfalls of money showing where short-termism by the present Government has worsened the state of public services. [Byline Times] Hmmm this PAC report sounds like it will make for grim reading. Not sure anyone in opposition should want the gig. Let Sunak et al clean up their own mess!. Who cares about the public accounts committee ? A report such as this hardly helps anyone. Let's look at the governments achievements . 1. Help to the unemployed and disabled. 2. Payemts to ensure no one was in financial difficulty during Covid 3. Completion of the Elizbeth line . 4. Generous pensions for all public sector employees 5. Charging points for electric cars 6. Provision of social services. . If anyone thinks that the government has failed imagine Hoe much worse things could be . Angela Rayner is currently under investigation for failing to pay Capital Gains Tax on sale of a house in which she did not live. . " Not up to your usual standard Pat  | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? " This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office." Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do?" Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better." You're probably right. There's a list of countries by national dept on Wiki and to me, every country is on the list (UK close to the top). So who is the creditor? (I'm not an economist). | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. " It did work. This was the aim. " There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better." | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better. You're probably right. There's a list of countries by national dept on Wiki and to me, every country is on the list (UK close to the top). So who is the creditor? (I'm not an economist)." In the UKs case most likely pension funds. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. It did work. This was the aim. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better." Very cynical. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. It did work. This was the aim. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better."
Exactly! The end game was to fill the bank accounts of the greedy rich at the expense of those at the bottom. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. It did work. This was the aim. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better. Very cynical." Not wrong though | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. It did work. This was the aim. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better.
Exactly! The end game was to fill the bank accounts of the greedy rich at the expense of those at the bottom. "They do have a name for those who are at the bottom, they call rhem ordinary people. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office." Those figures don’t mean a great deal in isolation. The UK debt is approx 101% of GDP, and there is no single issue for this figure it is multiples, some outside of reasonable control, others not. Junior doctors strike, they are looking for a pay rise over 30%, it will cost billions to service that rise, where is the money going to come from? Wherever it comes from it would be at a cost of interest payments, because as you can see we haven’t got the income generation to service the uplift and yet they still continue to cause unrest and upset for something that simply cannot be given….. Austerity measures are essential to close down the spend, there also needs to be an upturn in manufacturing and services to uplift output, this is the only way same to inject health into the economy. Reeve, has an idea when labour began to govern, that is to continue more or less with what Hunt is doing, there will be no cash injections into public services, so expect more of the same until we manage to obtain a period of world stability. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Those figures don’t mean a great deal in isolation. The UK debt is approx 101% of GDP, and there is no single issue for this figure it is multiples, some outside of reasonable control, others not. Junior doctors strike, they are looking for a pay rise over 30%, it will cost billions to service that rise, where is the money going to come from? Wherever it comes from it would be at a cost of interest payments, because as you can see we haven’t got the income generation to service the uplift and yet they still continue to cause unrest and upset for something that simply cannot be given….. Austerity measures are essential to close down the spend, there also needs to be an upturn in manufacturing and services to uplift output, this is the only way same to inject health into the economy. Reeve, has an idea when labour began to govern, that is to continue more or less with what Hunt is doing, there will be no cash injections into public services, so expect more of the same until we manage to obtain a period of world stability. " A steady hand at the tiller and resisting knee jerk reactions to try and be popular would be a good start. Dull workmanlike politics for a couple of years devoid of scandal would be quite refreshing… …though it would kill the politics forum on Fab | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Yes I get it was a joke and probably not intended for the public domain. As for our debt, it is indeed a scary number, and suggests we are living beyond our means as a nation. But austerity measures aimed at reducing our national debt were despised and rejected. So what to do? Austerity was never going to work, it just made inequality worse. It did work. This was the aim. There's a massive problem in treating macroeconomics like personal finance it's massively different. Obama chose a different route to Austerity and that seemed to work a lot better.
Exactly! The end game was to fill the bank accounts of the greedy rich at the expense of those at the bottom.
They do have a name for those who are at the bottom, they call rhem ordinary people. "Correct, austerity was imposed on ordinary people by the Tories. Then they kept voting for them for more brutal austerity. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Those figures don’t mean a great deal in isolation. The UK debt is approx 101% of GDP, and there is no single issue for this figure it is multiples, some outside of reasonable control, others not. Junior doctors strike, they are looking for a pay rise over 30%, it will cost billions to service that rise, where is the money going to come from? Wherever it comes from it would be at a cost of interest payments, because as you can see we haven’t got the income generation to service the uplift and yet they still continue to cause unrest and upset for something that simply cannot be given….. Austerity measures are essential to close down the spend, there also needs to be an upturn in manufacturing and services to uplift output, this is the only way same to inject health into the economy. Reeve, has an idea when labour began to govern, that is to continue more or less with what Hunt is doing, there will be no cash injections into public services, so expect more of the same until we manage to obtain a period of world stability. A steady hand at the tiller and resisting knee jerk reactions to try and be popular would be a good start. Dull workmanlike politics for a couple of years devoid of scandal would be quite refreshing… …though it would kill the politics forum on Fab "I think this is exactly what we will see from Starmer. He is reluctant to make pledges, acutely aware of the problems. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Those figures don’t mean a great deal in isolation. The UK debt is approx 101% of GDP, and there is no single issue for this figure it is multiples, some outside of reasonable control, others not. Junior doctors strike, they are looking for a pay rise over 30%, it will cost billions to service that rise, where is the money going to come from? Wherever it comes from it would be at a cost of interest payments, because as you can see we haven’t got the income generation to service the uplift and yet they still continue to cause unrest and upset for something that simply cannot be given….. Austerity measures are essential to close down the spend, there also needs to be an upturn in manufacturing and services to uplift output, this is the only way same to inject health into the economy. Reeve, has an idea when labour began to govern, that is to continue more or less with what Hunt is doing, there will be no cash injections into public services, so expect more of the same until we manage to obtain a period of world stability. A steady hand at the tiller and resisting knee jerk reactions to try and be popular would be a good start. Dull workmanlike politics for a couple of years devoid of scandal would be quite refreshing… …though it would kill the politics forum on Fab
I think this is exactly what we will see from
Starmer. He is reluctant to make pledges, acutely aware of the problems.
"The slight downside to making little or no changes is that in effect you are just continuing with Tory policies. If people think the Tory policies are OK then great but it means in a sort of roundabout way that Labour agree with the current direction | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"Didn't the last outgoing Labour government leave a note for the incoming Tories saying "I’m afraid there is no money. Kind regards – and good luck!”?? This is so tiring, it was a joke based on a note the tories left in the 60s says, " sorry chaps, no money left." Or words to that effect. The national debt is over 2.5 trillon, it was under 900m when Labour left office. Those figures don’t mean a great deal in isolation. The UK debt is approx 101% of GDP, and there is no single issue for this figure it is multiples, some outside of reasonable control, others not. Junior doctors strike, they are looking for a pay rise over 30%, it will cost billions to service that rise, where is the money going to come from? Wherever it comes from it would be at a cost of interest payments, because as you can see we haven’t got the income generation to service the uplift and yet they still continue to cause unrest and upset for something that simply cannot be given….. Austerity measures are essential to close down the spend, there also needs to be an upturn in manufacturing and services to uplift output, this is the only way same to inject health into the economy. Reeve, has an idea when labour began to govern, that is to continue more or less with what Hunt is doing, there will be no cash injections into public services, so expect more of the same until we manage to obtain a period of world stability. A steady hand at the tiller and resisting knee jerk reactions to try and be popular would be a good start. Dull workmanlike politics for a couple of years devoid of scandal would be quite refreshing… …though it would kill the politics forum on Fab
I think this is exactly what we will see from
Starmer. He is reluctant to make pledges, acutely aware of the problems.
The slight downside to making little or no changes is that in effect you are just continuing with Tory policies. If people think the Tory policies are OK then great but it means in a sort of roundabout way that Labour agree with the current direction"There is little room for a direction change, and to be honest you would need a backbone of steel to gamble on an outcome right now. The perfect start for Labour would be an end to the Russian war, and a cooling off period in the middle east. If that happens around the start to 12 months of a new government the changes would be felt quite quickly, leading to a sense of new government, new start. If that doesn't happen, I expect the unions to start pull the labour government apart. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
"If people see how Labour run Wales, Birmingham and London then you will know why they be worse" Northamptonshire, Thurrock and Woking are all Tory run and in the same state.. The core issue perhaps is a 50% cut in the grant from central government in the period 2010-2021.. That more of whatever colour haven't gone bust is a surprise given such cuts, and the cuts don't affect millionaires who donate then get a knighthood do they.. | |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| |||
| Reply privately | Reply in forum | Reply +quote |
| Post new Message to Thread |
| back to top |  |
