Category: Uk Parliament

UK Coalition farcical Olympic management

17/07/2012

The London 2012 Olympics kicks off next week but security issues looks set to dog the Coalition Government. Last week it was revealed that G4S the firm contracted to supply the bulk of security personnel for the games would be unable to do so. Announced at such a late hour it seemed that someone had let the country down and accountability was requried.

Home Secretary Theresa May squirmed once more but has tried her best to wriggle out of any blame. Ms May has been at the centre of so many shambolic events in the UK that her political survival is often on a wing and a prayer.

G4S has seen its value on the stock market tumble as the extent of the fiasco was revealed. The company is also set to lose big time on the huge contract. All in all hardly the face that the UK want to show the rest of the world. During any Olympics the eyes of the world are on the host country, when all is said and done.

Still at least as usual the UK is airing its dirty laundry in public rather than hiding away the extent of the chaos. There could of course be more to come and you can argue that some would have preferred all of this not to become public but at least we know what we are facing.

The UK military have been used to plug the huge gaps in Olympic security but now it has been announced that so will the police force. One has to wonder just how many staff G4S will actually be providing? Even retired police officers have been asked to volunteer though how many have signed up is not known.

So whilst all of these security personnel are busy portecting London and The Olympic Village just who will be protecting the rest of the UK?

It is common knowledge that the UK Police and Army have experienced job cuts and are running under staffed. Today July 17, 2012, it has been reported that the UK Border Agency does not have enough staff either. When the agency asked for voluntary redundancies following the swing of the Coalition Axe more personnel than anticipated took the opportunity to move on. Instead of limiting the numbers the Border Agency let more staff go and now they are in a pickle.

So how are they going to fill the gaps?. Well they are employing temporary staff. If this is like the NHS has to do it will involve maybe employing those who took redundancy or more likely agency staff at a higher cost. What a joke.

It seems that G4S is not alone in mismanageing its business. The UK Coalition is mismanaging the country, its resources and its public sector workers. They were so keen on axing public sector posts, not as it was economic sense but as it was the Tory Party mission, that they have left essential services at a low ebb.

So we hate to be party poopers but just who is going to ensure that any place away from London does not suffer an attack, be it terroist or homeland, during the Olympics? Ideas on a postcard to 10 Downing Steret asap

Tags: 2012 London Olympics, UK politics, Theresa May, UK coalition government, UK Coalition axe, UK Border agency job cuts, G4S

2 Comments

UK Parliament, who is an idiot

23/05/2012

0 Comments

"Slapped wrists" for PM Cameron

UK Parliamentary business at times is reminiscent of kindergarten. Tit for tat remarks, honourable members flouncing out, tipsy politicians having enjoyed the benefits of the Commons bar then acting in a thugish manner and more. It can be entertaining to watch but often it is embarrassing. Once it was decided that cameras would be placed in the Commons it was generally though standards would improve. If they have then heaven only knows what they were like before.

Keeping order over the honourable ministers is the Speaker of the House of Commons, who school playground and that kiddies rhyme "sticks and stones may break my bones, but words will never hurt me"

In reality words can be very hurtful. They can also show a lack of respect and damage any working relationship.

Of course at times all politicians take a little poetic licence. They do have to carefully make sure however that they don't overstep the mark. When Cameron called Labour Shadow Chancellor Ed Balls an "idiot" it was deemed a step too far.

It has been noticeable that when the PM is under pressure or perhaps looks in danger of losing a political argument he becomes irritated. He then name calls, chides, talks down to and snaps. These may be common traits but they are not part of Political Standards in the UK.

The PM said idiot, referring to Ed balls and he has since had to apologise. Cameron was giving the Government a virtual pat on the back as he said they had in enterprise zones found, "innovative ways of using our hard-won credibility, which we wouldn't have if we had listened to the muttering idiot opposite me". This is not first attack pon Ed Balls. As an old Etonian Cameron should know that this is just "not cricket".

Labour responded calling the PM Flashman as an attack on his privileged background. Asked to withdraw the word "idiot" a smiling or should that be smarmy Cameron responded by saying. "I will replace it with 'the man who left us this enormous deficit and this financial crisis'."

That old chestnut. Labour had to pick the pieces up after years of mismanagement by the Tories especially those under Maggie Thatcher and so it seems that each government blames its predecessors. Perhaps in truth none of them are up for the job?

In a day for apologies Cameron said sorry to veteran Labour minister Dennis Skinner for past treatment. He could not prevent his sarcasm though saying, "he actually believed Mr Skinner was a "tremendous ornament" to Parliament."

Well Dodgy Dave you know what they say about sarcasm? It is the lowest form of wit and so presumably is not statesman like?

Tweets, condemnations and more have accompanied today's shenanigans but in reality all the British people want is these overpaid louts in Parliament do what they are paid to do. To act as responsible adults. To debate, decide and legislate. Vaudeville died many years ago but either that or the great British Farce appears alive and well preforming daily in the Houses of Parliament.

Add Comment

UK Whitehall overspending cuts cost more than they save

07/03/2012

0 Comments

Those hallowed halls of the British UK Parliament are costly. When the credit crunch began to bite the last Labour government decided to try and minimise such costs. It seems that in doing so more was spent than saved. How on earth can this be so?

Today the UK National Audit Office (NAO) has revealed the figures.The planned improvements were to include structures for pooled resources. These usually make much more sense. However it seems that the plans fell at the first hurdle. Part of the problem seems to have been in the management structure. With no clear roles defined it would seem that it was a case of every man or woman for themselves.

As the BBC have reported, "The changes date back to 2004, when Tony Blair's Labour government promised to set up cost-saving centres to save £159m by sharing "back-office" functions such as information technology, personnel and procurement between departments". Sounds good on paper and in theory so what has gone wrong?

Well according to NAO the initial start-up costs had been put at £900m but, by 2011, these had increased to £1.4bn. WHAT! It is worth mentioning that the current UK coalition government took up office in 2010. Obviously instead of saving money the British taxpayer was once again out of pocket.Comparisons to such proposed changes show that in those companies cost saving are made within a few short years. You can read a full report here.The report of this dreadful waste of money make this blogger think about several pertinent considerations such as:

If successive UK governments are unable to resolve their own budget inefficiencies how on earth can they be expected to solve the nation's financial woes?
Have some of the problems occurred because different political parties will not work together for a common end.
The Coalition has been in power for Two years now and so they can hardly blame today's news on the previous government.

In March 2011 the government said enough is enough. It announced tough measures for Whithall departments that continued to overspend. What has happened to that is unknown. It has not had any impact it seems. If ineffective systems have been purchased and put into place it shows bad management. That said are any of then fit to run the country? Doubtful.

Add Comment

UK NHS reform gets Parliamentary rough ride

08/02/2012

0 Comments

In the UK we tend to take our National Health Service for granted. At times we all complain about it. When we receive exceptionally good treatment few of us bother to praise the NHS. After all the best should be the norm, right? Well yes but would it hurt to occasionally take a step back, take a long hard look and consider the alternative.

That said people in the UK tend to be protective of the NHS. It is a very British care system, one that may need to be tweaked from time too time, but one that few would want to wave good bye to.

David Cameron made much in his election manifesto about how the NHS was safe in his hands but he has since proved that is far from the truth. The NHS has been under attack on all fronts. Reform looks set to put funding back in GP hands. If you work for the NHS, as this blogger does, you will find that work there long enough and you will see a circle of changes. Almost 13 years down the road the latest changes are reminiscent of a few years ago.

Much is made that over paid administrator posts will be rightly cut but in reality it is front line jobs that are going. Those at the top handle the job cuts and predictably protect themselves.

The NHS is facing too many changes at one time. In order to meet demands and targets it is disappearing in a type of twilight zone. Government fines are levied against some sections, constantly making budget targets impossible to achieve.

February 8, 2012, the NHS reform was discussed in UK Parliament. The House of Lords has again rejected the bill without more amendments. The Tories though look set to continue like a dog with a bone. Labour leader, Ed Miliband, got the upper hand against Cameron the Commons, in spite of the derision and smarm eeking out of the Coalition front bench.

David Cameron's only defence seemed to be a personal attack. He attacked Mr Milband saying that Ed's position in the Labour party was fragile. We all know that attack is the poorest form of defence which this proved. Mr Cameron had little to say that was positive about the NHS reforms, so launch a personal attack on the Labour leader instead. I ask you?

Even an oped in the Financial Times agrees that the reform plans are a mess. As it says, the plans lack the necessary skill. If Cameron chooses to belligerently stay on the same NHS path it could prove to be his political downfall. Could we be so lucky?

Add Comment

UK Prince Charles consent law will remain

31/10/2011

2 Comments

David Cameron & Prince Charles

These days the British Monarchy are often under close scrutiny. Gone are the "off with their heads" days of old when ordinary folk were prepared to tug their forelocks and let their so called betters get away with murder.

That said this ruling class still enjoy more privileges than many people are aware off.

For instance, what do you know of Prince Charles and the Consent laws?

Well if you were like this writer the answer will be little. However, as the media today has reported that Downing Street currently has no plans to amend or repeal these laws, it has highlighted an outdated and possibly costly tradition.

The current consent laws require the government to seek Prince Charles's permission to pass legislation which could affect his private interests. Clarence House, on behalf of the Prince, has said that this is a "long-standing convention" which has nothing to do with seeking his approval or personal beliefs.

Recently the Guardian has reported that the government had consulted the Prince on 12 bills since 2005. They are said to have included gambling, coroners, the Olympics, economic development and construction, marine and coastal access, housing and regeneration, wreck removals and co-operative societies, and energy and planning.

Now here is what will be the rub for many people, namely the finanical implications. The BBC has reported that neither "Downing Street nor Clarence House would say whether bills were altered as a result of objections from the heir to the throne." You can read what you will into that.

It appears that Charles has the right to be consulted on matters pertaining to the principality of Wales, the earldom of Chester and the Duchy of Cornwall, his private business and property empire.

A spokesperson for UK Priime Minister David Cameron has said that it is all a matter of the correct protocol. Apparently it is all in the parliamentary guide book. Republic, which is a UK organisation seeking for an elected head of state rather than the British Royal family has had a field day. Their spokesman said, "That such a loophole exists shows our constitution is fundamentally anti-democratic." Hear, hear I expect you are shouting.

This subject has only come to the atention of the general public following a freedom of information request to the House of Commons by a newspaper.

Opinion: Well it makes me angry and sad that this sorry state of affairs continues. Whilst the UK deplores the lack of democracy in so many countries abroad, our own form of democracy leaves so much to be dsired. You have to laugh or else you would cry.

2 Comments

Only in the UK

Yorkshire woman Eileen Kersey is the creator, editor and writer of TEK staff blogs. Creator of both TEKJournalismUK and WhereButTheUK she has finally come out of the 'writing closet'. Under the pen name of Ethel Smith she has written online, in varying degrees, for around six years.