Both from Telegraph Letters...
'If Mr Darling did his own tax return he might appreciate what a shambolic system he presides over'
'When the bin tax is introduced will MPs be able to claim it on expenses, too?'
I am pretty sure the more our 'leadership' exempt themselves from the consequences of their actions, especially financially at a personal level, the further the divide between what they impose upon 'us' will be viewed even more dimly as the out of touch actions of a 'them'.
Showing posts with label ACCOUNTABILITY. Show all posts
Showing posts with label ACCOUNTABILITY. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 26, 2009
Tuesday, April 22, 2008
Olympics costs - to infinity and beyond!
Back in February, the DCMS admitted that the cost of staging the London Olympics 'could' (yes, that horrid little word again) quadruple to the staggering sum of some £9 Billion.
We mentioned on this very blog the lack of accountability and the astounding cost estimate spiral for the Olympics swimming pool complex which had been awarded to a sole bidder.
And earlier this morning I heard Tessa Jowell on Radio 5 attempting to defend the fact that the overall estimate has now reached £9.3 Billion! Not that she actually answered any of the questions directly, it was an absolute masterclass in prevarication and the avoidance of real answers.
Well, here's a piece from Sky News reporting on the fact that the Commons Public Accounts Committee is taking the view that "the British public have been "grossly misled" and the original estimate for the Olympic Games was "totally unrealistic","
Difficult to argue with that conclusion, isn't it?
"There was no initial contingency fund set aside. In other words, no allowance was made for the possibility of overspending."
An original estimate without any contingency built-in, a failure to account for VAT, and a minimal security and policing allowance (Hell's teeth! The torch relay through London cost almost £750,000 alone!).
Anybody in the real business world responsible for putting forward such an original estimate would have been sacked long ago by now. But this is our Gov, and accountability, at least at that particular level, doesn't really seem to matter anymore, does it?
We mentioned on this very blog the lack of accountability and the astounding cost estimate spiral for the Olympics swimming pool complex which had been awarded to a sole bidder.
And earlier this morning I heard Tessa Jowell on Radio 5 attempting to defend the fact that the overall estimate has now reached £9.3 Billion! Not that she actually answered any of the questions directly, it was an absolute masterclass in prevarication and the avoidance of real answers.
Well, here's a piece from Sky News reporting on the fact that the Commons Public Accounts Committee is taking the view that "the British public have been "grossly misled" and the original estimate for the Olympic Games was "totally unrealistic","
Difficult to argue with that conclusion, isn't it?
"There was no initial contingency fund set aside. In other words, no allowance was made for the possibility of overspending."
An original estimate without any contingency built-in, a failure to account for VAT, and a minimal security and policing allowance (Hell's teeth! The torch relay through London cost almost £750,000 alone!).
Anybody in the real business world responsible for putting forward such an original estimate would have been sacked long ago by now. But this is our Gov, and accountability, at least at that particular level, doesn't really seem to matter anymore, does it?
Sunday, March 30, 2008
Olympics coverage? Or a new type 'big brother'?
When I saw the number of staff that the BBC were sending to Beijing this summer, to cover the 'Orympic Games', of course, that was my initial silly thought. According to this from the Daily Mail, they are sending 100+ more staff (437!!) than Great Britain is sending competitors!
Now, why so many staff? That's what; perhaps a full camera crew for every five competitors? Are they going to be filming the entire squad 24/7 while they eat, sleep, do their ablutions and train - a la 'big brother' style?
Or just maybe it just happens that it's time for the four yearly jolly, for as many as possible of the Beeb's great and good (and bad?), to the planet's largest sporting event?
Seems to be an awful lot of staff for what will probably be the usual crappy coverage ("sorry, the local director cut the shot just as the finalists were approaching the finishing line - we'll find out what happened for you later").
I just want to know who the hell will be left here in the UK? Imagine the possibilities:-
- Breakfast News with Katie the tea lady?
- The Evening News presented by Sonya the night cleaning lady?
- Cricket highlights presented by the BBC Centre Security Doorman (2nd cousin twice removed of Michael Vaughan)?
Well, I suppose our license fee has to be put to some good use! And, of course, there will be a full explanation of the cost breakdown, and full accountability, after the event, won't there?
What a waste!
Now, why so many staff? That's what; perhaps a full camera crew for every five competitors? Are they going to be filming the entire squad 24/7 while they eat, sleep, do their ablutions and train - a la 'big brother' style?
Or just maybe it just happens that it's time for the four yearly jolly, for as many as possible of the Beeb's great and good (and bad?), to the planet's largest sporting event?
Seems to be an awful lot of staff for what will probably be the usual crappy coverage ("sorry, the local director cut the shot just as the finalists were approaching the finishing line - we'll find out what happened for you later").
I just want to know who the hell will be left here in the UK? Imagine the possibilities:-
- Breakfast News with Katie the tea lady?
- The Evening News presented by Sonya the night cleaning lady?
- Cricket highlights presented by the BBC Centre Security Doorman (2nd cousin twice removed of Michael Vaughan)?
Well, I suppose our license fee has to be put to some good use! And, of course, there will be a full explanation of the cost breakdown, and full accountability, after the event, won't there?
What a waste!
Tuesday, January 08, 2008
A very costly decision
Back in 1999, our then chancellor, Ol' Golden Brown, no less, took the unprecedented decision to unload a large proportion of the UK's gold reserves at a time when the price of gold was at the bottom of the market. Dealers still term that price as the "Brown Bottom". (Full story in The Times).
At the time, there was much concern, and many forecasts that it would cost the UK dear. "The 17 auctions achieved prices for the gold of between $256 and $296 an ounce, with an average of $275." The total loss, back in April this year was estimated at some £2 Billion. (It would have been considerably more had not the Euros purchased with much of the proceeds not appreciated in value.)
Well, the price of gold now stands at a record $872.10 per ounce. That means that our PM is directly responsible for a loss to the UK of some £3 Billion+.
Now if I (or anyone else for that matter) had taken such an appalling decision and lost such an immense amount in business I'd have been sacked on the spot. It just goes to prove that there is no such thing as accountability in politics nowadays.
ADDENDUM - Brown's big hitter - When in the mire, don't whatever happens try and sort it out. Hire a better person to explain why it isn't.
ADDENDUM 2 - Unhappy new year to you all!
At the time, there was much concern, and many forecasts that it would cost the UK dear. "The 17 auctions achieved prices for the gold of between $256 and $296 an ounce, with an average of $275." The total loss, back in April this year was estimated at some £2 Billion. (It would have been considerably more had not the Euros purchased with much of the proceeds not appreciated in value.)
Well, the price of gold now stands at a record $872.10 per ounce. That means that our PM is directly responsible for a loss to the UK of some £3 Billion+.
Now if I (or anyone else for that matter) had taken such an appalling decision and lost such an immense amount in business I'd have been sacked on the spot. It just goes to prove that there is no such thing as accountability in politics nowadays.
ADDENDUM - Brown's big hitter - When in the mire, don't whatever happens try and sort it out. Hire a better person to explain why it isn't.
ADDENDUM 2 - Unhappy new year to you all!
Wednesday, November 21, 2007
Running on empty
I get a lot of things from BBC Breakfast News, but seldom epiphanies.
It happened during a morning catalogue of failures, but three in short order struck me.
1. The HM Customs & Revenue cock up.
2. A story on failures in the NHS, with a couple seeking/getting compo for their kid's poor, ultimately fatal, treatment. They get money for their loss (not quite sure how this benefits them, or indeed susbsequent families, but there we go. I'd want justice, not cash). Where from? And how are those responsible for the mess prevented from repeating them?
3. The summit on 'binge drinking' whereby the government (indeed Mr. 'key issues' Brown) is requiring the drinks industry to 'deal' with the issue. They may be complicit through woeful ethics and morals, but it's all still legal, the rules of which are set by whom?
It is now clear to me that we are in a situation where everyone is responsible, with all the benefits such positions confer, but no one is accountable. This is as true of much in the private sector as public, but in the latter it has become truly endemic. Government. Local Authority. Health Service. Quango. BBC.
And those outside the system are cursed to continually pick up the tab for those within it. Why do I pay for the fine for a failure that has impacted upon me?
From Northern Rock to hospital cock-ups to Treasury melt-downs to you name it, the one thing that has gone stratospheric, is the amount of money institutions (and their failed managements) shell out to 'deal' with the failings of individuals within them.
So it's not just the screw-ups, it's the screw-ups who oversee them too.
We need to ask why. And who. And hold all of them to account.
Speaking of which, I think I now see the reasons behind the various urgencies for various stellar government operatives to move into a new slot. I have a vision of a Looney Tunes cartoon with fizzing packages marked 'my last 10 years' being handed from Blair to Brown and Brown to Darling (and...)
ADDENDUM:
Actually, I was wondering if any of the techno-whizzes out there could do a quick Google/cache/whatever so we could have a list of just how many times a government munchkin has gone on air or in print over the last few months to say 'we must learn from these mistakes', with the rictus grin of one with no intention of doing so.
Better yet, with a wee tally besides to show just how many they patently haven't 'learned from', and the consequences (or not) to those who have suffered from this double-speak, compared (career/£/pension-wise) with those who still gain by getting away with it.
Sorry, I'm grumpy.*
*Two conversations , so far, (one with SKY, one with Halifax) that went in circles as they called me today but wanted first, for data protection reasons, to confirm my details. In light of events, I told them to tell me what they had on me and I would confirm or not. But no, they needed me to tell them. Nice one Nu-Lab! Now nothing can get done... official.
Newsnight
Daily Mash - You gotta laugh, 'else you'll cry
Guardian - The sheer gormlessness of Discgate theatens Labour's claim to power
Indy - Lost in the post: the personal details of 25 million people - a few questions.
Me, I just wonder how the whole salary/pension thing works out once the dust settles.
ADDENDUM: And this, Mr. Darling, is why it matters to me:
HSBC Security Precaution
Dear Valued Customer,
For your security, we have temporarily prevented access to your online banking.
HSBC safeguard your account when there is a possibility that someone other than you is logging on. You may be getting this message because you are logging on from a different location or device.If this is the case, your access may be restored when you revalidate your logon details.Please click on Get Started button below to continue to the verification process
Get Started
N.B (Failure to validate your logon details correctly might lead to online access suspension)
I don't have an HSBC account. It took 'em less than 24hrs to get going on the disarray this situation has created.
BBC - A yawning gap
It happened during a morning catalogue of failures, but three in short order struck me.
1. The HM Customs & Revenue cock up.
2. A story on failures in the NHS, with a couple seeking/getting compo for their kid's poor, ultimately fatal, treatment. They get money for their loss (not quite sure how this benefits them, or indeed susbsequent families, but there we go. I'd want justice, not cash). Where from? And how are those responsible for the mess prevented from repeating them?
3. The summit on 'binge drinking' whereby the government (indeed Mr. 'key issues' Brown) is requiring the drinks industry to 'deal' with the issue. They may be complicit through woeful ethics and morals, but it's all still legal, the rules of which are set by whom?
It is now clear to me that we are in a situation where everyone is responsible, with all the benefits such positions confer, but no one is accountable. This is as true of much in the private sector as public, but in the latter it has become truly endemic. Government. Local Authority. Health Service. Quango. BBC.
And those outside the system are cursed to continually pick up the tab for those within it. Why do I pay for the fine for a failure that has impacted upon me?
From Northern Rock to hospital cock-ups to Treasury melt-downs to you name it, the one thing that has gone stratospheric, is the amount of money institutions (and their failed managements) shell out to 'deal' with the failings of individuals within them.
So it's not just the screw-ups, it's the screw-ups who oversee them too.
We need to ask why. And who. And hold all of them to account.
Speaking of which, I think I now see the reasons behind the various urgencies for various stellar government operatives to move into a new slot. I have a vision of a Looney Tunes cartoon with fizzing packages marked 'my last 10 years' being handed from Blair to Brown and Brown to Darling (and...)
ADDENDUM:
Actually, I was wondering if any of the techno-whizzes out there could do a quick Google/cache/whatever so we could have a list of just how many times a government munchkin has gone on air or in print over the last few months to say 'we must learn from these mistakes', with the rictus grin of one with no intention of doing so.
Better yet, with a wee tally besides to show just how many they patently haven't 'learned from', and the consequences (or not) to those who have suffered from this double-speak, compared (career/£/pension-wise) with those who still gain by getting away with it.
Sorry, I'm grumpy.*
*Two conversations , so far, (one with SKY, one with Halifax) that went in circles as they called me today but wanted first, for data protection reasons, to confirm my details. In light of events, I told them to tell me what they had on me and I would confirm or not. But no, they needed me to tell them. Nice one Nu-Lab! Now nothing can get done... official.
Newsnight
Daily Mash - You gotta laugh, 'else you'll cry
Guardian - The sheer gormlessness of Discgate theatens Labour's claim to power
Indy - Lost in the post: the personal details of 25 million people - a few questions.
Me, I just wonder how the whole salary/pension thing works out once the dust settles.
ADDENDUM: And this, Mr. Darling, is why it matters to me:
HSBC Security Precaution
Dear Valued Customer,
For your security, we have temporarily prevented access to your online banking.
HSBC safeguard your account when there is a possibility that someone other than you is logging on. You may be getting this message because you are logging on from a different location or device.If this is the case, your access may be restored when you revalidate your logon details.Please click on Get Started button below to continue to the verification process
Get Started
N.B (Failure to validate your logon details correctly might lead to online access suspension)
I don't have an HSBC account. It took 'em less than 24hrs to get going on the disarray this situation has created.
BBC - A yawning gap
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)