|
-
Yet another Grayling failure
Amid the fluff and shouting over Brexit it has recently been announced that the privatised portion of the probation service is being returned to the public sector.
Two reasons the privatised system has proved unfit for purpose and has been an abject failure, plus of course on parr with so much false privatisation has managed to swallow an additional £500 million, much of which I suspect has found it's way into the back pockets of financiers and banksters.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
Amid the fluff and shouting over Brexit it has recently been announced that the privatised portion of the probation service is being returned to the public sector.
Two reasons the privatised system has proved unfit for purpose and has been an abject failure, plus of course on parr with so much false privatisation has managed to swallow an additional £500 million, much of which I suspect has found it's way into the back pockets of financiers and banksters.
Grayling must be a constant source of disappointment to his parents
Last edited by Mr B S Sniffer; 17/05/2019 at 10:27 PM.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 1 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Mr B S Sniffer
Greyling must be a constant source of disappointment to his parents
Depends, he is after all the perfect Tory, diverting taxpayers money into private pockets, the service and aftermath are immaterial and the taxpayer can pick up the costs.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 2 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
Depends, he is after all the perfect Tory, diverting taxpayers money into private pockets, the service and aftermath are immaterial and the taxpayer can pick up the costs.
Always thought a grayling, like a codling, was some kind of fish......he certainly has proved to be indigestible to a great many people!
On Yer Bike!
www.20splentyforus.co.uk
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
Depends, he is after all the perfect Tory, diverting taxpayers money into private pockets, the service and aftermath are immaterial and the taxpayer can pick up the costs.
That is the oddest of reasoning, the useless Grayling if he was a perfect Tory would have cemented the probation service into private hands like the utilities or PFI contracts so that it remained the perfect cash cow.
I would imagine the Tories don't like him either but he didn't do it on his own.
The problem of a poorly performing probation service that he tried and failed to address will return.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by local
That is the oddest of reasoning, the useless Grayling if he was a perfect Tory would have cemented the probation service into private hands like the utilities or PFI contracts so that it remained the perfect cash cow.
I would imagine the Tories don't like him either but he didn't do it on his own.
The problem of a poorly performing probation service that he tried and failed to address will return.
He didn't try to address anything, what he did was simply follow Tory dogma and provide yet another profit stream for financiers, funded by the taxpayer.
Introducing a profit take into a publicly funded service is hypocrisy and stupidity of the highest order.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
He didn't try to address anything, what he did was simply follow Tory dogma and provide yet another profit stream for financiers, funded by the taxpayer.
Introducing a profit take into a publicly funded service is hypocrisy and stupidity of the highest order.
He did he tried (and failed) to address horrendous re-offending rates 58% and half a million crimes committed each year by released prisoners and that's just the tip of the ice-berg as the ones they got caught for.
The public sector failed spectacularly to address this problem for years.
Grayling and the Conservatives simply brought in an ill though scheme where three of the contractors went into administration, they clearly didn't have a profit stream.
Profit is not a dirty word, failure is, people earning a reasonable living from providing a valuable public service is not bad.
If Grayling had taken away an effective publicly owned probation service then your comments might have some merit, he just replaced bad with more bad.
Bringing back the failing probation service as it existed is not something they should do.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
He didn't try to address anything, what he did was simply follow Tory dogma and provide yet another profit stream for financiers, funded by the taxpayer.
Introducing a profit take into a publicly funded service is hypocrisy and stupidity of the highest order.
You need to speak to Anderson on that topic!
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by local
He did he tried (and failed) to address horrendous re-offending rates 58% and half a million crimes committed each year by released prisoners and that's just the tip of the ice-berg as the ones they got caught for.
The public sector failed spectacularly to address this problem for years.
Grayling and the Conservatives simply brought in an ill though scheme where three of the contractors went into administration, they clearly didn't have a profit stream.
Profit is not a dirty word, failure is, people earning a reasonable living from providing a valuable public service is not bad.
If Grayling had taken away an effective publicly owned probation service then your comments might have some merit, he just replaced bad with more bad.
Bringing back the failing probation service as it existed is not something they should do.
No-one said profit is a dirty word, I worked in one of the most profit orientated environments, but we earned our profit in direct competition with many others, not on the backs of the taxpayer.
These failed companies went into administration after racking up debts, all too often created by overpaying directors and "shareholders" then having milked the system for as much as they could, just shut up shop and bail out, then leave the taxpayer to pay the bills and pick up the wreckage.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
No-one said profit is a dirty word, I worked in one of the most profit orientated environments, but we earned our profit in direct competition with many others, not on the backs of the taxpayer.
These failed companies went into administration after racking up debts, all too often created by overpaying directors and "shareholders" then having milked the system for as much as they could, just shut up shop and bail out, then leave the taxpayer to pay the bills and pick up the wreckage.
You might want to look into Aurelius working links parent and realise that opening government contracts to our European friends has its downsides as Jeremy Corbyn has discovered which is amongst the reasons why he is a super hiding Euro-Sceptic.
Tony Benn (Viscount Stansgate) who inspired Jeremy, made a rather prophetic speech some years ago saying Britain must leave the EU to restore democracy the old sage clearly thought a bit harder than many labour politicians today.
You simply cannot have your socialist nationalised industry model and remain an EU member.
Read this on the proposals for an EU wide railway network;
The 4th railway package aims to remove the remaining barriers to the creation of a single European rail area. The proposed legislation would reform the EU's rail sector by encouraging competition and innovation in domestic passenger markets.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/p...ilway-package/
Which perfectly explains why Labour face three ways to try and appease everyone but ultimately failing them all.
The fence is proving very uncomfortable for them and explains their terrible performance in the local elections with the EU elections looking to go the same way despite the lamentable performance of the Conservatives.
Last edited by local; 19/05/2019 at 08:13 AM.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by local
Tony Benn (Viscount Stansgate) who inspired Jeremy, made a rather prophetic speech some years ago saying Britain must leave the EU to restore democracy the old sage clearly thought a bit harder than many labour politicians today.
Why would you refer to Tony Benn as Viscount Stansgate? a title he was finally allowed to renounce in 1963. I remember the furor at the time he was re-elected in 1961, yet couldn't take his seat in Parliament.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by local
You might want to look into Aurelius working links parent and realise that opening government contracts to our European friends has its downsides as Jeremy Corbyn has discovered which is amongst the reasons why he is a super hiding Euro-Sceptic.
Tony Benn (Viscount Stansgate) who inspired Jeremy, made a rather prophetic speech some years ago saying Britain must leave the EU to restore democracy the old sage clearly thought a bit harder than many labour politicians today.
You simply cannot have your socialist nationalised industry model and remain an EU member.
Read this on the proposals for an EU wide railway network;
The 4th railway package aims to remove the remaining barriers to the creation of a single European rail area. The proposed legislation would reform the EU's rail sector by encouraging competition and innovation in domestic passenger markets.
https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/p...ilway-package/
Which perfectly explains why Labour face three ways to try and appease everyone but ultimately failing them all.
The fence is proving very uncomfortable for them and explains their terrible performance in the local elections with the EU elections looking to go the same way despite the lamentable performance of the Conservatives.
More anti-EU propaganda, nowhere does EU legislation prevent nationalized business, industry or services, you mention rail services, most of our rail service is in public/government ownership or control, unfortunately it isn't UK public/government, instead it's the nationalised rail companies of France, Germany and even China.
The 4th rail package is looking for services to be competitive, not total privatisation, the new proposals do not call for the end of nationalisation in any, in fact it permits governments to compete with any operator or work in partnership with a private operator.
EU countries can and do take into state ownership any business or industry when it is felt to be in the public or country's best interests.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
it has recently been announced that the privatised portion of the probation service is being returned to the public sector.
Your bill for Chris Grayling:
• Euro-tunnel lawsuit £33m
• Brexit ferries £0.8m
• Virgin trains bailout £2bn
• Gatwick drone scare £60m
• Train timetable **** up £38m
• Compensation charges £32m
• Investment in failed GPS tech £23m
• Failed criminal tagging system £60m
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by Graham
Your bill for Chris Grayling:
• Euro-tunnel lawsuit £33m
• Brexit ferries £0.8m
• Virgin trains bailout £2bn
• Gatwick drone scare £60m
• Train timetable **** up £38m
• Compensation charges £32m
• Investment in failed GPS tech £23m
• Failed criminal tagging system £60m
Brexiteers say the EU is expensive, all of this is just write off cash with no returns, no benefits only a sour taste in the mouth.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
-
Originally Posted by silver fox
More anti-EU propaganda, nowhere does EU legislation prevent nationalized business, industry or services, you mention rail services, most of our rail service is in public/government ownership or control, unfortunately it isn't UK public/government, instead it's the nationalised rail companies of France, Germany and even China.
The 4th rail package is looking for services to be competitive, not total privatisation, the new proposals do not call for the end of nationalisation in any, in fact it permits governments to compete with any operator or work in partnership with a private operator.
EU countries can and do take into state ownership any business or industry when it is felt to be in the public or country's best interests.
Sorry but the link in my post is from the EU its not anti-EU propaganda;
The proposed legislation would reform the EU's rail sector by encouraging competition and innovation in domestic passenger markets.
How are you going to encourage competition if its nationalised ?
make it easier for new operators to enter the market.
How are you going to encourage new operators if its nationalised ?
[I]The 4th railway package includes the proposal to open up domestic passenger railways to new entrants and services from December 2019. Companies would be able either to offer competing services, such as a new train service on a particular route, or to bid for public service rail contracts through tendering. The proposed changes would make competitive tendering mandatory for public service rail contracts in the EU.
How are you going to encourage Companies if its nationalised ?
How do you make competitive tendering mandatory if Jeremies running it ?
I suppose he could say Dianne is competing with him she could do the timetables.
-
Member Post Likes / Dislikes - 0 Likes, 0 Dislikes
|
Search Qlocal (powered by google)
Privacy & Cookie Policy
Check Todays Deals On Amazon.co.uk
Check Todays Deals on Ebay.co.uk
Booking.com
Supporting Local Business
Be Seen - Advertise on Qlocal
UK, Local Online News Community, Forums, Chats, For Sale, Classified, Offers, Vouchers, Events, Motors Sale, Property For Sale Rent, Jobs, Hotels, Taxi, Restaurants, Pubs, Clubs, Pictures, Sports, Charities, Lost Found
UK,
UK News,
|