Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Howard - put that into perspective. If every time an employee fouls up the manager would get punished or sacked. This is absurd. There has to be a sense of perspective.
I employ an administrator. If he makes a mistake then I have the responsibility but did not make the mistake. I need to identify the error and take steps to rectify it including, if necessary changing my procedures. This is exactly what the Minister did in a much more complex case than would appertain to a simple admin error by my administrator. The Minister should be judged by his/her actions and in this case PWC were called in to audit the bid, a move that turned out to be fully justified.
Ministers and Prime Ministers are and should be accountable for policy and how they conduct themselves. The detailed work lower down the organisation is another matter as I explained.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 21....wrong again....we cannot jump in and out of `Precedent`to suit our political persuasions............
Accountability is not just of policy but of their consequences.....eg...all the `U` turns..........
No Quarter given for cop-outs...............typical defence of a political allegiance...........
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
Reg -It is always difficult to make out what you say as you do not write properly in sentences but you are still, it seems, mixing fault and responsibility purely because it is convenient to your own political standpoint.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
# 23.....wish I could say the same about you but you are so extremely predictable e know exactly how you will respond
every time.
You are denying the responsibility of ``Ministerial Office`` because it is convenient to your own political standpoint.
Some what disingenuous as when Labour are in power you will be screaming for the head of Ministers..et alia despite
your ,present,sanctimonious ....``fault and responsibility``
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,888
Tit for Tat time, this thread will no longer worth reading.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Not fit for purpose...all depends rather on the purpose.
On the news tonight we hear that a 'foreign & commonwealth' soldier, say with 19 years of service, can be refused British Citizenship by the Border Agency's counting army summary justice 'convictions' as criminal offences.
This is being looked at again.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
At last howard, very well said chum
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
yes this goverment is unfit for purpose.so have the previous goverments since the end of world war 2.
Guest 693- Registered: 12 Nov 2009
- Posts: 1,266
Not sure about that Brian. This Government inherited an economy that nobody could put right; I think that the Tories haven't done themselves any favours in recent months, but I don't think they're unfit for purpose. Ed Balls is advocating spending more money to stimulate the economy, which means borrowing more money to pay for it. In the light of the Euro borrowing crises, that has to be madness. It's, I believe, a question of raising more money from those that can afford to pay more in taxes, and the Tories would never sanction that, but that's the price you pay when voting Tory!
True friends stab you in the front.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
Well, as it is Sunday, that must mean it's time to get around to reading Saturday's newspaper...
£40m, did I say? It is reported that costs could be substantially higher than that, plus at least one of the suspended Civil Servants has been consulting lawyers. I do not actually know for certain whether this person is a qualified accountant, but it is reported that she was an Executive Director at Goldman Sachs prior to joining the CS.
I wonder what allegory might be forthcoming to illustrate a situation where the administrator is more highly qualified than the boss?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
unfit andy c
they are unfit to govern
no other word for it
maybe if they get rid of the mouse???
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
why would an executive director at goldman sachs chuck it in and join the civil service, just doesn't ring true?
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
Executive Director titles get chucked about at Goldmans like confetti. It's not a particularly senior title, given that there are over 2000 staff above that grade, of which nearly 500 are partners, but most with the title of Managing Director. I have met bankers with similar inflated titles whom I would not trust to keep the score at darts.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
trust is one thing peter
but its the over inflated wage packet that goes with them
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
So what? The taxpayer isn't paying those wages, and it's an American firm anyway. So why the beef? Unless it's just the green-eyed monster talking.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
don't bring the "incredible hulk" into this peter.
Guest 745- Registered: 27 Mar 2012
- Posts: 3,370
Big sackings and removal of pensions in order
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
or shrek comes to that.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,942
Looks like even cameron saying more should be done(will be done) on the rich
maybe hes wrong to?
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS