Newport MP tells passport bosses: We want jobs not apologies

Protesters march through Newport during a demonstration against cuts to Newport passport jobs

Newport West MP Paul Flynn on the Home Affairs Select Committee, asking questions on the Passport crisis (7255630)

The head of the Passport Office, Paul Pugh gives evidence to Commons Home Affairs Committee

PCS's Mike Jones

Newport West MP Paul Flynn at a demonstration against cuts to Newport Passport Office jobs

Paul Pugh, chief executive of HM Passport Office and Registrar General for England and Wales answering questions on the Passport crisis in front of Home Affairs Select Committee

SWA CT 16.10.10 PROTESTERS MARCH THROUGH NEWPORT AGAINST THE THREATENED CLOSURE OF THE CITY'S PASSPORT OFFICE (7227500)

First published in Gwent news
Last updated

AN APOLOGY offered yesterday by the head of the passport office for the backlog chaos is not good enough - and we need to bring passport jobs back to Newport, a local MP says.

Newport East MP Jessica Morden spoke after the Home Affairs Select Committee at the House of Commons in which the head of the service, Paul Pugh, told MPs he would like to “apologise dearly” for the backlog of applications and said he “absolutely recognised and sympathised” with those who have suffered.

The Passport Office has been accused of presiding over a shambles, and last week interviews for first-time applicants for passports were suspended in London as staff struggle to deal with the volume of applications.

But Mr Pugh, under intense scrutiny from members of the committee, did not readily accept that around 480,000 of uncompleted passport applications was a backlog, but were counted as “work in progress”.

Ms Morden and fellow city MP Paul Flynn, who sits on the committee, were at the forefront of a campaign backed by the Argus against the cuts to Newport's passport office in 2011 which slashed half the jobs and reduced the service available.

Then, passport bosses were warned by politicians and the Public and Commercial Services (PCS) Union that the cuts could affect the service.

Ms Morden told the Argus yesterday: “It’s a belated half apology. The debate is another chance to push for them to get some of the jobs we lost in Newport, back in the office.

“We warned them and warned them. Back in 2010, the unions and the staff highlighted there was a history of cutting staff.

“The IPS has a history of cutting staff and not seeing increase in demand. We did have the biggest cut in the passport office at that time. When they are looking long term, they ought to be putting the jobs back with us.”

In October 2010, more than 1,000 people marched against the planned closure of Newport's passport office. And 20,000 Argus readers signed a petition at the time, calling for home secretary Theresa May to stop the proposed closure of the office.

Although it was saved thanks to the campaign, around 150 jobs were lost as it moved to a smaller office in Lower Dock Street in April of last year.

Newport West MP Paul Flynn, who sat on the committee, questioned Mr Pugh for not deploying more workers to Wales and suggested his resignation might bring “satisfaction” to angry customers.

In the House of Commons last week, Mr Flynn, the MP for Newport West, questioned Mrs May and Leader of the House of Commons Andrew Lansley about the potential for bringing jobs back to Newport.

He asked: "When the Government get around the restoring the Passport Office from its present emaciated and failing state to the efficient service it had been for the previous century, may we have a debate on the need to ensure that those areas that suffered the savage cuts two years ago, such as Newport, have the first call on new jobs?"

Mr Lansley replied: "The Hon Gentleman had a chance to ask the Home Secretary a question about that earlier. I fear that his characterisation of the Passport Office is not helpful, not least for his constituents and others. As he will have heard from the Home Secretary, the Passport Office is continuing to provide substantially the service intended. Where problems have occurred, new staff are being deployed, both in call centres and in case handling, and the Home Secretary has just announced other measures that will enable constituents to get the service they are looking for."

Today, Ms Morden and Mr Flynn will be debating the issue further in the House of Commons.

Mr Pugh, who admitted he considered resigning from his position as chief executive of the Passport Office, said: “The forecasting model we’ve used, which has been reliable for years, has not at all accurately reflected the pattern of demand for this year. There has been a significant shift in the seasonality of customers’ behaviour.”

He added an independent review of the forecasting model would now take place, but warned any potential industrial action by staff would be “extremely damaging to our customers and our public”.

Mike Jones, head of the PCS, told the committee that shortage of staff was the reason for the recent “crisis”, and would not rule out going on strike unless the Passport Office would enter negotiations with its workers.

Comments (39)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:45am Wed 18 Jun 14

paddyparry says...

What would be the point of industrial action by the PCS? Surely that would just increase the pressure. Just shows that the unions are as short sighted as the management.
What would be the point of industrial action by the PCS? Surely that would just increase the pressure. Just shows that the unions are as short sighted as the management. paddyparry
  • Score: -9

9:00am Wed 18 Jun 14

displayed says...

"did not readily accept that around 480,000 of uncompleted passport applications was a backlog,"

Of corse not, he wants to ang on to his job, don't he"

He's gonna try an sweat it out"
But eventually (as Jim Reeves used to sing) "he'll have to go" ....................
.....
"did not readily accept that around 480,000 of uncompleted passport applications was a backlog," Of corse not, he wants to ang on to his job, don't he" He's gonna try an sweat it out" But eventually (as Jim Reeves used to sing) "he'll have to go" .................... ..... displayed
  • Score: 12

9:08am Wed 18 Jun 14

Ultimate Worrier says...

Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately.

Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant.

There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it. Ultimate Worrier
  • Score: -17

9:12am Wed 18 Jun 14

helper7 says...

What a shambles.
Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications.
I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers.
Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one.

The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg

THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen.

P/T cheep soldiers
P/T Fire-fighters
Rise of 0 hours contracts
Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding.

Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army,
5,000 Navy,
5,000 RAF,
60,000 NHS,
16,000 Police,
730,000 Public Sector,
1,700 Remploy,
2 Bankers

Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!


The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid

And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!!

Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it.



Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT
And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito
What a shambles. Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications. I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers. Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one. The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen. P/T cheep soldiers P/T Fire-fighters Rise of 0 hours contracts Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding. Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army, 5,000 Navy, 5,000 RAF, 60,000 NHS, 16,000 Police, 730,000 Public Sector, 1,700 Remploy, 2 Bankers Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!! Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it. Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito helper7
  • Score: 59

9:23am Wed 18 Jun 14

BobEvams2014 says...

Ultimate Worrier wrote:
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
Quite right, this is all the fault of the lazy workers. When half the workforce is sacked the remainder must work twice as hard, this is just common sense, why aren't these lazy types working unlimited unpaid overtime to clear this mess.

UKIP will sack them all !
[quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.[/p][/quote]Quite right, this is all the fault of the lazy workers. When half the workforce is sacked the remainder must work twice as hard, this is just common sense, why aren't these lazy types working unlimited unpaid overtime to clear this mess. UKIP will sack them all ! BobEvams2014
  • Score: 13

9:51am Wed 18 Jun 14

Dai Rear says...

i's not about "cuts "Untold billions are being spent on buying Mercedes for dictators ("overseas aid"), paying megabucks to innumerable layers of "management" in the NHS, that greatest White Elephant of the lot-HS2
Billions are still borrowed, billions still printed (QE)
It's about competence.
And no Helper, and Bob Evans, it'll make no difference at all whether Miliband or Cameron or indeed Francois Hollande get in in 2015. The same civil service clerks (Permanent Secretaries, "Grade 1's") will still be in office running their "business" in the way which most benefits their staff.
i's not about "cuts "Untold billions are being spent on buying Mercedes for dictators ("overseas aid"), paying megabucks to innumerable layers of "management" in the NHS, that greatest White Elephant of the lot-HS2 Billions are still borrowed, billions still printed (QE) It's about competence. And no Helper, and Bob Evans, it'll make no difference at all whether Miliband or Cameron or indeed Francois Hollande get in in 2015. The same civil service clerks (Permanent Secretaries, "Grade 1's") will still be in office running their "business" in the way which most benefits their staff. Dai Rear
  • Score: -23

9:53am Wed 18 Jun 14

Ollie254 says...

We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess. Ollie254
  • Score: -13

10:06am Wed 18 Jun 14

Severn40 says...

Need to comment on a factual error on one of the previous postings - that all new jobs are part-time. If you look at the employment statistics - published by own our Tredegar Park - full time employment growth in both Newport East and West has outstripped part time since 2010. In fact, part-time numbers are actually less. The proportions in full-time employment have been at their highest for sometime with the growth in the private sector. Obviously this evidence does not fit tidily the narrative of many here which forever want to paint a gloomy picture.
Need to comment on a factual error on one of the previous postings - that all new jobs are part-time. If you look at the employment statistics - published by own our Tredegar Park - full time employment growth in both Newport East and West has outstripped part time since 2010. In fact, part-time numbers are actually less. The proportions in full-time employment have been at their highest for sometime with the growth in the private sector. Obviously this evidence does not fit tidily the narrative of many here which forever want to paint a gloomy picture. Severn40
  • Score: 4

10:30am Wed 18 Jun 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Ultimate Worrier wrote:
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately.

Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant.

There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom.

Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings.
[quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.[/p][/quote]I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom. Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings. The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 21

10:34am Wed 18 Jun 14

Ollie254 says...

The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ultimate Worrier wrote:
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately.

Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant.

There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom.

Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings.
Ultimate warrior knows best.
[quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.[/p][/quote]I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom. Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings.[/p][/quote]Ultimate warrior knows best. Ollie254
  • Score: -9

10:35am Wed 18 Jun 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Ollie254 wrote:
We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too.

2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff.

2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
[quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?) The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 10

10:43am Wed 18 Jun 14

b3talover says...

Ultimate Worrier wrote:
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately.

Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant.

There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
And a culture of right-wing "holier than thou" internet keyboard warriors... What gives you the right to take the moral high ground anyway? A sense of entitlement perhaps?
[quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.[/p][/quote]And a culture of right-wing "holier than thou" internet keyboard warriors... What gives you the right to take the moral high ground anyway? A sense of entitlement perhaps? b3talover
  • Score: 4

12:19pm Wed 18 Jun 14

mkaibear1 says...

>Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!

Unpopular though the top-rate tax cut may be, it's resulted in more money being paid in tax by the top 1% of taxpayers than *ever* before - under any previous government. (even including Labour's old 98% tax rate...) The top 1% now pay 28% of all income tax collected.

It's the same tactic as dropping your prices in a shop to sell more things - if you price it too high less people buy it, if you price it too low you don't make enough profit - Labour thought that a 50% tax rate was the best rate to go for, the Tories said it was too high - and the Tories have been proved dramatically right.

>more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Oh dear you're about 3 years too late with that slogan. The economy is growing, driven by manufacturing (yes that industry that the Tories "killed") and exporting goods. It always takes time for it to work its way down to the real world of you and I - but it's getting there.

Austerity has hurt but it has worked. By the election in 2015 we will have had 18 months of sustained economic good news and you'll see Labour desperately trying to hide from the fact that the Coalition has pulled the economy out of the tailspin that Brown left it in and is properly on the road to recovery.
>Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! Unpopular though the top-rate tax cut may be, it's resulted in more money being paid in tax by the top 1% of taxpayers than *ever* before - under any previous government. (even including Labour's old 98% tax rate...) The top 1% now pay 28% of all income tax collected. It's the same tactic as dropping your prices in a shop to sell more things - if you price it too high less people buy it, if you price it too low you don't make enough profit - Labour thought that a 50% tax rate was the best rate to go for, the Tories said it was too high - and the Tories have been proved dramatically right. >more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Oh dear you're about 3 years too late with that slogan. The economy is growing, driven by manufacturing (yes that industry that the Tories "killed") and exporting goods. It always takes time for it to work its way down to the real world of you and I - but it's getting there. Austerity has hurt but it has worked. By the election in 2015 we will have had 18 months of sustained economic good news and you'll see Labour desperately trying to hide from the fact that the Coalition has pulled the economy out of the tailspin that Brown left it in and is properly on the road to recovery. mkaibear1
  • Score: -8

12:53pm Wed 18 Jun 14

-trigg- says...

The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.
[quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income. -trigg-
  • Score: -26

1:02pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Crazydad says...

This isn't all the fault of the passport office or its staff. The people who require a passport also need to take their share of the blame. They are quite happy to book the holiday months in advance and yet fail to apply for a passport in enough time. Example - the woman who appeared in the news recently who booked her holiday 12 months previsouly and did not have a passport and applied 4 weeks before she was due to fly.
This isn't all the fault of the passport office or its staff. The people who require a passport also need to take their share of the blame. They are quite happy to book the holiday months in advance and yet fail to apply for a passport in enough time. Example - the woman who appeared in the news recently who booked her holiday 12 months previsouly and did not have a passport and applied 4 weeks before she was due to fly. Crazydad
  • Score: 4

1:04pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Ollie254 says...

The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote:
We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too.

2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff.

2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
1 Private sector workers don't have fat pensions to be paid for by the taxpayer for the rest of their lives

2 The requisite number number of MP,s should be reduced because we have a further tier of governance since devolution with work duplicated. We don't need them all.

3 you can get rid of private sector workers who don't perform with greater ease than in the public sector. Ask those who have worked in HR Depts of both.

( You really don't understand the finer points of constitutional democracy, do you. Smell the coffee)
[quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]1 Private sector workers don't have fat pensions to be paid for by the taxpayer for the rest of their lives 2 The requisite number number of MP,s should be reduced because we have a further tier of governance since devolution with work duplicated. We don't need them all. 3 you can get rid of private sector workers who don't perform with greater ease than in the public sector. Ask those who have worked in HR Depts of both. ( You really don't understand the finer points of constitutional democracy, do you. Smell the coffee) Ollie254
  • Score: -12

1:06pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Llanmartinangel says...

-trigg- wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.
That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent.
[quote][p][bold]-trigg-[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.[/p][/quote]That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent. Llanmartinangel
  • Score: -30

1:07pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Jonnytrouble says...

Did I hear right ? according to the national press the problem is all the foreigners are exchanging there's for British ones ! around 280,000/ yr and increasing ?
So once again do they come first before British born citizens ?
No wonder we are in a mess, cut backs here and interest focused on foreign affairs with OUR money going away from this Country !
No wonder people are protesting and voting UKIP
Did I hear right ? according to the national press the problem is all the foreigners are exchanging there's for British ones ! around 280,000/ yr and increasing ? So once again do they come first before British born citizens ? No wonder we are in a mess, cut backs here and interest focused on foreign affairs with OUR money going away from this Country ! No wonder people are protesting and voting UKIP Jonnytrouble
  • Score: -2

1:16pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Ultimate Worrier says...

The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ultimate Worrier wrote:
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately.

Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant.

There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom.

Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings.
I have worked in the public sector in the past, yes. The work ethic was unbelievably bad. When you then see these people striking because their final salary pensions are being brought into a more sensible and affordable position whilst everyone elses are plumetting in line with the stock markets, and they are striking because they can't have a 3% pay rise when everyone else is suffering from salary freezes, it does cause resentment.

These people are employed by the government, a government which cannot control its budget. If that happened in the pivate sector jobs would be lost too. Why should they get special treatment?

There is most definitely a sense of entitlement within the public sector for just continuing to do the same job without offering anything extra to the organisation. In the private sector you have to offer something more to progress. In my opinion, this is the truth.
[quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.[/p][/quote]I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom. Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings.[/p][/quote]I have worked in the public sector in the past, yes. The work ethic was unbelievably bad. When you then see these people striking because their final salary pensions are being brought into a more sensible and affordable position whilst everyone elses are plumetting in line with the stock markets, and they are striking because they can't have a 3% pay rise when everyone else is suffering from salary freezes, it does cause resentment. These people are employed by the government, a government which cannot control its budget. If that happened in the pivate sector jobs would be lost too. Why should they get special treatment? There is most definitely a sense of entitlement within the public sector for just continuing to do the same job without offering anything extra to the organisation. In the private sector you have to offer something more to progress. In my opinion, this is the truth. Ultimate Worrier
  • Score: -8

2:09pm Wed 18 Jun 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Ollie254 wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote:
We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too.

2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff.

2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
1 Private sector workers don't have fat pensions to be paid for by the taxpayer for the rest of their lives

2 The requisite number number of MP,s should be reduced because we have a further tier of governance since devolution with work duplicated. We don't need them all.

3 you can get rid of private sector workers who don't perform with greater ease than in the public sector. Ask those who have worked in HR Depts of both.

( You really don't understand the finer points of constitutional democracy, do you. Smell the coffee)
1. Why a race to the bottom? Why don't private sector employees ask why they aren't afforded the same rights and entitlements as their public sector counterparts? Why not demand a reduction in the level of dividend paid to shareholders, and the use of those savings to fund workplace pensions?

2. I agree there needs to be a reduction in the numbers of MPs, but this must be complemented by (yes, controversially) an increase in the number of AMs to effectively scrutinise legislation devolved to Wales (there simply not being, at present, sufficient numbers to perform this crucial constitutional function).

3. I agree, although that's not necessarily a good thing.

PS My point regarding constitutional democracy has nothing to do with the operation of HR departments!
[quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]1 Private sector workers don't have fat pensions to be paid for by the taxpayer for the rest of their lives 2 The requisite number number of MP,s should be reduced because we have a further tier of governance since devolution with work duplicated. We don't need them all. 3 you can get rid of private sector workers who don't perform with greater ease than in the public sector. Ask those who have worked in HR Depts of both. ( You really don't understand the finer points of constitutional democracy, do you. Smell the coffee)[/p][/quote]1. Why a race to the bottom? Why don't private sector employees ask why they aren't afforded the same rights and entitlements as their public sector counterparts? Why not demand a reduction in the level of dividend paid to shareholders, and the use of those savings to fund workplace pensions? 2. I agree there needs to be a reduction in the numbers of MPs, but this must be complemented by (yes, controversially) an increase in the number of AMs to effectively scrutinise legislation devolved to Wales (there simply not being, at present, sufficient numbers to perform this crucial constitutional function). 3. I agree, although that's not necessarily a good thing. PS My point regarding constitutional democracy has nothing to do with the operation of HR departments! The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 11

2:15pm Wed 18 Jun 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

-trigg- wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.
Yup, agreed, but if we dramatically reduce the number of public sector workers, who do you think would manage, administer, scrutinise and ensure the functioning of public services? Public sector workers - and I am aware they are idle ones - do perform a function; its not a safety net for the lazy you know.
[quote][p][bold]-trigg-[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.[/p][/quote]Yup, agreed, but if we dramatically reduce the number of public sector workers, who do you think would manage, administer, scrutinise and ensure the functioning of public services? Public sector workers - and I am aware they are idle ones - do perform a function; its not a safety net for the lazy you know. The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: -1

2:16pm Wed 18 Jun 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Llanmartinangel wrote:
-trigg- wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.
That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent.
Any chance of you citing your sources re the ratio / relationship of tax contributions and the numbers of Welsh Government employees?
[quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]-trigg-[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.[/p][/quote]That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent.[/p][/quote]Any chance of you citing your sources re the ratio / relationship of tax contributions and the numbers of Welsh Government employees? The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 2

2:21pm Wed 18 Jun 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Ultimate Worrier wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ultimate Worrier wrote:
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately.

Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant.

There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom.

Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings.
I have worked in the public sector in the past, yes. The work ethic was unbelievably bad. When you then see these people striking because their final salary pensions are being brought into a more sensible and affordable position whilst everyone elses are plumetting in line with the stock markets, and they are striking because they can't have a 3% pay rise when everyone else is suffering from salary freezes, it does cause resentment.

These people are employed by the government, a government which cannot control its budget. If that happened in the pivate sector jobs would be lost too. Why should they get special treatment?

There is most definitely a sense of entitlement within the public sector for just continuing to do the same job without offering anything extra to the organisation. In the private sector you have to offer something more to progress. In my opinion, this is the truth.
I'm public sector, and I agree wholeheartedly with the point you make about pension contributions, but why this never-ending race to the bottom? As for a sense of entitlement, the idle exist in all industries, as does a sense of entitlement. I've worked in retail, banking / financial services and it was as endemic there too.

The one point that never gets addressed is that Sales does not get enough cash - in terms of its block allocation - from the Treasury. Wales has greater health, education and transport challenges than most parts of England due to the the legacy of deindustrialisation and yet the funding allocated to Wales is calculated on a per capita basis.
[quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.[/p][/quote]I take it - given your apparently intimate knowledge of the complexion and failings of staff - you work within that particular public service? Or maybe you're just another wide-eyed spectator driven by the same bile powers the Mail and its right-wing readership, obsessed with, labour relations wise, a race to the bottom. Incidentally, and prepare yourself now, the private sector doesn't always necessarily perform without criticism or failings.[/p][/quote]I have worked in the public sector in the past, yes. The work ethic was unbelievably bad. When you then see these people striking because their final salary pensions are being brought into a more sensible and affordable position whilst everyone elses are plumetting in line with the stock markets, and they are striking because they can't have a 3% pay rise when everyone else is suffering from salary freezes, it does cause resentment. These people are employed by the government, a government which cannot control its budget. If that happened in the pivate sector jobs would be lost too. Why should they get special treatment? There is most definitely a sense of entitlement within the public sector for just continuing to do the same job without offering anything extra to the organisation. In the private sector you have to offer something more to progress. In my opinion, this is the truth.[/p][/quote]I'm public sector, and I agree wholeheartedly with the point you make about pension contributions, but why this never-ending race to the bottom? As for a sense of entitlement, the idle exist in all industries, as does a sense of entitlement. I've worked in retail, banking / financial services and it was as endemic there too. The one point that never gets addressed is that Sales does not get enough cash - in terms of its block allocation - from the Treasury. Wales has greater health, education and transport challenges than most parts of England due to the the legacy of deindustrialisation and yet the funding allocated to Wales is calculated on a per capita basis. The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 0

2:46pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Llanmartinangel says...

The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
-trigg- wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.
That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent.
Any chance of you citing your sources re the ratio / relationship of tax contributions and the numbers of Welsh Government employees?
Sure:
http://m.bbc.com/new
s/uk-wales-politics-
25849068. Gives the number of WAG employees as 5777.

The ONS quotes the average take take per worker as c £4k. Given that you cannot employ anyone on public sector terms for less than £20k (salary plus accom/HR/pension etc). 5 times 4k equals 20k.

Yet these people are so loose with our money that they think nothing of employing Meri Hughes, salary alone £104k to police Welsh policy. With her office and personal staff costs you are looking at a whole posse of wealth creators to finance he 'nothing' job.
[quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]-trigg-[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.[/p][/quote]That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent.[/p][/quote]Any chance of you citing your sources re the ratio / relationship of tax contributions and the numbers of Welsh Government employees?[/p][/quote]Sure: http://m.bbc.com/new s/uk-wales-politics- 25849068. Gives the number of WAG employees as 5777. The ONS quotes the average take take per worker as c £4k. Given that you cannot employ anyone on public sector terms for less than £20k (salary plus accom/HR/pension etc). 5 times 4k equals 20k. Yet these people are so loose with our money that they think nothing of employing Meri Hughes, salary alone £104k to police Welsh policy. With her office and personal staff costs you are looking at a whole posse of wealth creators to finance he 'nothing' job. Llanmartinangel
  • Score: -18

2:53pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Risca1 says...

Awful place to work - I was one of the lucky ones to take the redundancy.
Awful place to work - I was one of the lucky ones to take the redundancy. Risca1
  • Score: 5

2:55pm Wed 18 Jun 14

newporteast says...

There must be an election coming up thats twice i have seen our Mp in the last couple of months.
The people of newport are still daft enough to vote for labour thats why nothing will change
There must be an election coming up thats twice i have seen our Mp in the last couple of months. The people of newport are still daft enough to vote for labour thats why nothing will change newporteast
  • Score: -1

3:09pm Wed 18 Jun 14

BobEvams2014 says...

newporteast wrote:
There must be an election coming up thats twice i have seen our Mp in the last couple of months. The people of newport are still daft enough to vote for labour thats why nothing will change
QUite right ! Well said that man. On the morning after UKIP win the next General Election, all public sector workers will be sacked, everyone will have a job and passports will be available in 10 minutes.
[quote][p][bold]newporteast[/bold] wrote: There must be an election coming up thats twice i have seen our Mp in the last couple of months. The people of newport are still daft enough to vote for labour thats why nothing will change[/p][/quote]QUite right ! Well said that man. On the morning after UKIP win the next General Election, all public sector workers will be sacked, everyone will have a job and passports will be available in 10 minutes. BobEvams2014
  • Score: 8

4:03pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Llanmartinangel says...

helper7 wrote:
What a shambles.
Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications.
I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers.
Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one.

The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg

THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen.

P/T cheep soldiers
P/T Fire-fighters
Rise of 0 hours contracts
Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding.

Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army,
5,000 Navy,
5,000 RAF,
60,000 NHS,
16,000 Police,
730,000 Public Sector,
1,700 Remploy,
2 Bankers

Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!


The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid

And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!!

Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it.



Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT
And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito
I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers:
HSBC 4800; July 2011
Lloyds 4000; July 2011
RBS 6000; July 2011
Barclays 2000; July 2011
RSA 400; July 2011
Aviva 1200; 2013
Axa 2000; 2013
Co-op Group 900; 2013
Diligenta 470; 2013
Direct line 2000; 2013
UK total 30,000; 2011-2013
Source: Uni Finance
[quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: What a shambles. Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications. I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers. Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one. The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen. P/T cheep soldiers P/T Fire-fighters Rise of 0 hours contracts Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding. Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army, 5,000 Navy, 5,000 RAF, 60,000 NHS, 16,000 Police, 730,000 Public Sector, 1,700 Remploy, 2 Bankers Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!! Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it. Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito[/p][/quote]I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers: HSBC 4800; July 2011 Lloyds 4000; July 2011 RBS 6000; July 2011 Barclays 2000; July 2011 RSA 400; July 2011 Aviva 1200; 2013 Axa 2000; 2013 Co-op Group 900; 2013 Diligenta 470; 2013 Direct line 2000; 2013 UK total 30,000; 2011-2013 Source: Uni Finance Llanmartinangel
  • Score: -8

4:25pm Wed 18 Jun 14

Sing up for the amber boys says...

Severn40 wrote:
Need to comment on a factual error on one of the previous postings - that all new jobs are part-time. If you look at the employment statistics - published by own our Tredegar Park - full time employment growth in both Newport East and West has outstripped part time since 2010. In fact, part-time numbers are actually less. The proportions in full-time employment have been at their highest for sometime with the growth in the private sector. Obviously this evidence does not fit tidily the narrative of many here which forever want to paint a gloomy picture.
What you are neglecting to mention there is that since the Tories came to power, wages have lagged behind inflation for the past four years meaning that ordinary people are struggling to keep up with the cost of living. Still, that doesn't affect the billionaires who have received tax cuts does it. Or the celebrities and multi national companies avoiding tax. Or the MP's that have given themselves an 11% pay rise and have increased their holidays. All too easy to make scape goats out of ordinary working civil servants. I am staggered by the amount of Daily Mail propoganda and bile being regurgitated above
[quote][p][bold]Severn40[/bold] wrote: Need to comment on a factual error on one of the previous postings - that all new jobs are part-time. If you look at the employment statistics - published by own our Tredegar Park - full time employment growth in both Newport East and West has outstripped part time since 2010. In fact, part-time numbers are actually less. The proportions in full-time employment have been at their highest for sometime with the growth in the private sector. Obviously this evidence does not fit tidily the narrative of many here which forever want to paint a gloomy picture.[/p][/quote]What you are neglecting to mention there is that since the Tories came to power, wages have lagged behind inflation for the past four years meaning that ordinary people are struggling to keep up with the cost of living. Still, that doesn't affect the billionaires who have received tax cuts does it. Or the celebrities and multi national companies avoiding tax. Or the MP's that have given themselves an 11% pay rise and have increased their holidays. All too easy to make scape goats out of ordinary working civil servants. I am staggered by the amount of Daily Mail propoganda and bile being regurgitated above Sing up for the amber boys
  • Score: 9

4:50pm Wed 18 Jun 14

BassalegCountyFan says...

The tory ineptocracy rolls on..still no coherent response from Theresa May or Andrew Lansley and not even an acknowledgement of the impact of job losses in Newport from either.

Well done to Jessica Morden and Paul Flynn, who are doing the right thing for the people of Newport and South Wales in carrying this issue forward.

It's time for this rag-tag-and-bobtail condem government to wake up and smell the coffee.
The tory ineptocracy rolls on..still no coherent response from Theresa May or Andrew Lansley and not even an acknowledgement of the impact of job losses in Newport from either. Well done to Jessica Morden and Paul Flynn, who are doing the right thing for the people of Newport and South Wales in carrying this issue forward. It's time for this rag-tag-and-bobtail condem government to wake up and smell the coffee. BassalegCountyFan
  • Score: 24

4:59pm Wed 18 Jun 14

helper7 says...

Llanmartinangel wrote:
helper7 wrote:
What a shambles.
Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications.
I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers.
Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one.

The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg

THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen.

P/T cheep soldiers
P/T Fire-fighters
Rise of 0 hours contracts
Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding.

Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army,
5,000 Navy,
5,000 RAF,
60,000 NHS,
16,000 Police,
730,000 Public Sector,
1,700 Remploy,
2 Bankers

Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!


The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid

And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!!

Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it.



Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT
And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito
I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers:
HSBC 4800; July 2011
Lloyds 4000; July 2011
RBS 6000; July 2011
Barclays 2000; July 2011
RSA 400; July 2011
Aviva 1200; 2013
Axa 2000; 2013
Co-op Group 900; 2013
Diligenta 470; 2013
Direct line 2000; 2013
UK total 30,000; 2011-2013
Source: Uni Finance
“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)”

Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party.
[quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: What a shambles. Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications. I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers. Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one. The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen. P/T cheep soldiers P/T Fire-fighters Rise of 0 hours contracts Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding. Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army, 5,000 Navy, 5,000 RAF, 60,000 NHS, 16,000 Police, 730,000 Public Sector, 1,700 Remploy, 2 Bankers Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!! Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it. Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito[/p][/quote]I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers: HSBC 4800; July 2011 Lloyds 4000; July 2011 RBS 6000; July 2011 Barclays 2000; July 2011 RSA 400; July 2011 Aviva 1200; 2013 Axa 2000; 2013 Co-op Group 900; 2013 Diligenta 470; 2013 Direct line 2000; 2013 UK total 30,000; 2011-2013 Source: Uni Finance[/p][/quote]“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)” Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party. helper7
  • Score: 6

5:25pm Wed 18 Jun 14

cymruamblyth says...

b3talover wrote:
Ultimate Worrier wrote:
Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately.

Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant.

There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.
And a culture of right-wing "holier than thou" internet keyboard warriors... What gives you the right to take the moral high ground anyway? A sense of entitlement perhaps?
Well there's a subject, now we just need a verb to make a sentence.
[quote][p][bold]b3talover[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ultimate Worrier[/bold] wrote: Who is actually surprised? This part of the public sector (i.e. the office based stuff) has long been a walk in the park for employees. Clearly when the staff numbers went down, the effort from the remaining staff did not go up proportionately. Time to split the public sector and separate the essential services (i.e. police, ambulance, fire, etc) from the office staff. Put an end to flexi-time, priveleged pension arrangements, and all the other perks that come along with being a cicil servant. There is a culture of 'half-arsedness' and a feeling of entitlement to more without actually having to work for it.[/p][/quote]And a culture of right-wing "holier than thou" internet keyboard warriors... What gives you the right to take the moral high ground anyway? A sense of entitlement perhaps?[/p][/quote]Well there's a subject, now we just need a verb to make a sentence. cymruamblyth
  • Score: 0

5:58pm Wed 18 Jun 14

helper7 says...

helper7 wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
helper7 wrote:
What a shambles.
Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications.
I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers.
Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one.

The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg

THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen.

P/T cheep soldiers
P/T Fire-fighters
Rise of 0 hours contracts
Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding.

Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army,
5,000 Navy,
5,000 RAF,
60,000 NHS,
16,000 Police,
730,000 Public Sector,
1,700 Remploy,
2 Bankers

Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!


The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid

And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!!

Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it.



Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT
And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito
I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers:
HSBC 4800; July 2011
Lloyds 4000; July 2011
RBS 6000; July 2011
Barclays 2000; July 2011
RSA 400; July 2011
Aviva 1200; 2013
Axa 2000; 2013
Co-op Group 900; 2013
Diligenta 470; 2013
Direct line 2000; 2013
UK total 30,000; 2011-2013
Source: Uni Finance
“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)”

Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party.
Bankers with a capitoal W
Not banking job losses
[quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: What a shambles. Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications. I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers. Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one. The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen. P/T cheep soldiers P/T Fire-fighters Rise of 0 hours contracts Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding. Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army, 5,000 Navy, 5,000 RAF, 60,000 NHS, 16,000 Police, 730,000 Public Sector, 1,700 Remploy, 2 Bankers Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!! Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it. Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito[/p][/quote]I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers: HSBC 4800; July 2011 Lloyds 4000; July 2011 RBS 6000; July 2011 Barclays 2000; July 2011 RSA 400; July 2011 Aviva 1200; 2013 Axa 2000; 2013 Co-op Group 900; 2013 Diligenta 470; 2013 Direct line 2000; 2013 UK total 30,000; 2011-2013 Source: Uni Finance[/p][/quote]“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)” Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party.[/p][/quote]Bankers with a capitoal W Not banking job losses helper7
  • Score: 10

6:00pm Wed 18 Jun 14

helper7 says...

helper7 wrote:
helper7 wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
helper7 wrote:
What a shambles.
Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications.
I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers.
Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one.

The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg

THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen.

P/T cheep soldiers
P/T Fire-fighters
Rise of 0 hours contracts
Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding.

Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army,
5,000 Navy,
5,000 RAF,
60,000 NHS,
16,000 Police,
730,000 Public Sector,
1,700 Remploy,
2 Bankers

Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!


The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid

And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!!

Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it.



Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT
And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito
I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers:
HSBC 4800; July 2011
Lloyds 4000; July 2011
RBS 6000; July 2011
Barclays 2000; July 2011
RSA 400; July 2011
Aviva 1200; 2013
Axa 2000; 2013
Co-op Group 900; 2013
Diligenta 470; 2013
Direct line 2000; 2013
UK total 30,000; 2011-2013
Source: Uni Finance
“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)”

Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party.
Bankers with a capitoal W
Not banking job losses
Type error: capital

Bankers with a capitall W
Not banking job losses
[quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: What a shambles. Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications. I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers. Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one. The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen. P/T cheep soldiers P/T Fire-fighters Rise of 0 hours contracts Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding. Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army, 5,000 Navy, 5,000 RAF, 60,000 NHS, 16,000 Police, 730,000 Public Sector, 1,700 Remploy, 2 Bankers Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!! Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it. Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito[/p][/quote]I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers: HSBC 4800; July 2011 Lloyds 4000; July 2011 RBS 6000; July 2011 Barclays 2000; July 2011 RSA 400; July 2011 Aviva 1200; 2013 Axa 2000; 2013 Co-op Group 900; 2013 Diligenta 470; 2013 Direct line 2000; 2013 UK total 30,000; 2011-2013 Source: Uni Finance[/p][/quote]“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)” Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party.[/p][/quote]Bankers with a capitoal W Not banking job losses[/p][/quote]Type error: capital Bankers with a capitall W Not banking job losses helper7
  • Score: 5

7:08pm Wed 18 Jun 14

helper7 says...

helper7 wrote:
helper7 wrote:
helper7 wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
helper7 wrote:
What a shambles.
Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications.
I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers.
Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one.

The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg

THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen.

P/T cheep soldiers
P/T Fire-fighters
Rise of 0 hours contracts
Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding.

Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army,
5,000 Navy,
5,000 RAF,
60,000 NHS,
16,000 Police,
730,000 Public Sector,
1,700 Remploy,
2 Bankers

Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!


The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid

And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!!

Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it.



Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT
And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito
I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers:
HSBC 4800; July 2011
Lloyds 4000; July 2011
RBS 6000; July 2011
Barclays 2000; July 2011
RSA 400; July 2011
Aviva 1200; 2013
Axa 2000; 2013
Co-op Group 900; 2013
Diligenta 470; 2013
Direct line 2000; 2013
UK total 30,000; 2011-2013
Source: Uni Finance
“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)”

Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party.
Bankers with a capitoal W
Not banking job losses
Type error: capital

Bankers with a capitall W
Not banking job losses
I must put my reading glasses on before hitting that post button, I have to admit my spelling is bad.
I’m clearly not smart enough to manipulate the voting numbers! But I did
Study Mic Taking and Tory Satire at Oxford, gaining a first class honours degree. I am also very lucky to have never needed a passport, in my life.

BBC Health News ........Wearing a tight Bra, can double your risk of developing heart disease and type 2 diabetes

Also in the News ........Voting tory can double your risk of proving you are heartless and a type 2 greedy, selfish, elitist, ignorant, arrogant fool.



Pull Out of The EU where’s the fun in that:
An elderly gentleman of 83 arrived in Paris by plane. At the French customs desk, the man took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry bag. "You have been to France before, monsieur?" the customs officer asked, sarcastically. The elderly gentleman admitted he had been to France previously. "Then you should know enough to have your passport ready." The old man said, "The last time I was here, I didn’t have to show it." "Impossible. You Brits always have to show your passports on arrival in France!" The old man gave the Frenchman a long hard look. Then he quietly explained, "Well, when I came ashore at Gold Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn`t find any Frenchmen to show it to."
.
[quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: What a shambles. Thousands of people seeing their holiday plans put in jeopardy because of a backlog of applications. I doubt the many who had the vision to see this coming in the first place will get any credit from hell bent Tory die hards, Libdem tag-a-longs or stiring kippers. Its another mess that’s costing more than if they had left it alone and more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Its the same story with the environment agency cuts that led to widespread flooding in Somerset last year. In a report on inquiry into the Government’s flood policy, the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee said funding for maintenance funding ‘remains at a bare minimum and in a desperate attempt to back peddle on the situation the government are only now listening to local knowledge. This damaging approach is costing people their jobs and they will do it again and again and again trying to save money at the cost of decent wages and good service, U turn after U turn, then realising they were wrong on many of their cuts all along they will back peddle to where we were originally and then have the gall to claim they have fixed the problems! A huge cost to get back to square one. The Uk is ending up a part time low paid society thanks to Cameron and Clegg THE RNLI are warning water users to stay safe following the end of lifeguard cover for most of Cornwall’s beaches, another tragedy waiting to happen. P/T cheep soldiers P/T Fire-fighters Rise of 0 hours contracts Big mess in Somerset due to cuts in maintenance of rivers causing widespread flooding. Tory cuts so far, 20,000 Army, 5,000 Navy, 5,000 RAF, 60,000 NHS, 16,000 Police, 730,000 Public Sector, 1,700 Remploy, 2 Bankers Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! The UK is the only G7 Country where the Red Cross is providing Emergency Food Aid And people are moaning that things aint like they used to be!! Something the Tories will never say, they left a massive £29.2 bn structural deficit in 1997, I don’t recall Labour making a drama of it. Roll on 2015 when we kick these jokers OUT And we wont be fooled by the very real possibility of the Tories getting in again through the back door by the Ukip Tories-incognito[/p][/quote]I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies) to make your own views look disproportionately popular. How very sad. Mind you, if my grasp of current affairs were as weak as yours, I too may be tempted. For example, you quote banking job losses as '2'. Yet the FT has these numbers: HSBC 4800; July 2011 Lloyds 4000; July 2011 RBS 6000; July 2011 Barclays 2000; July 2011 RSA 400; July 2011 Aviva 1200; 2013 Axa 2000; 2013 Co-op Group 900; 2013 Diligenta 470; 2013 Direct line 2000; 2013 UK total 30,000; 2011-2013 Source: Uni Finance[/p][/quote]“I see you are back to manipulating the voting numbers (by deleting cookies)” Tell me sour grapes how do I do this cookie thing? Because I have looked at your claim and tried it but darn me it just don’t work for me, rather like your brain and the Tory party.[/p][/quote]Bankers with a capitoal W Not banking job losses[/p][/quote]Type error: capital Bankers with a capitall W Not banking job losses[/p][/quote]I must put my reading glasses on before hitting that post button, I have to admit my spelling is bad. I’m clearly not smart enough to manipulate the voting numbers! But I did Study Mic Taking and Tory Satire at Oxford, gaining a first class honours degree. I am also very lucky to have never needed a passport, in my life. BBC Health News ........Wearing a tight Bra, can double your risk of developing heart disease and type 2 diabetes Also in the News ........Voting tory can double your risk of proving you are heartless and a type 2 greedy, selfish, elitist, ignorant, arrogant fool. Pull Out of The EU where’s the fun in that: An elderly gentleman of 83 arrived in Paris by plane. At the French customs desk, the man took a few minutes to locate his passport in his carry bag. "You have been to France before, monsieur?" the customs officer asked, sarcastically. The elderly gentleman admitted he had been to France previously. "Then you should know enough to have your passport ready." The old man said, "The last time I was here, I didn’t have to show it." "Impossible. You Brits always have to show your passports on arrival in France!" The old man gave the Frenchman a long hard look. Then he quietly explained, "Well, when I came ashore at Gold Beach on D-Day in 1944 to help liberate this country, I couldn`t find any Frenchmen to show it to." . helper7
  • Score: 23

8:43pm Wed 18 Jun 14

grandmammamia says...

Ollie254 wrote:
We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
Do Civil Servants not pay tax then? Wow. Where do I sign up?!!
[quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]Do Civil Servants not pay tax then? Wow. Where do I sign up?!! grandmammamia
  • Score: 7

7:22am Thu 19 Jun 14

The People's Republic of Newp says...

Llanmartinangel wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Llanmartinangel wrote:
-trigg- wrote:
The People's Republic of Newp wrote:
Ollie254 wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.
1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)
Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.
That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent.
Any chance of you citing your sources re the ratio / relationship of tax contributions and the numbers of Welsh Government employees?
Sure:
http://m.bbc.com/new

s/uk-wales-politics-

25849068. Gives the number of WAG employees as 5777.

The ONS quotes the average take take per worker as c £4k. Given that you cannot employ anyone on public sector terms for less than £20k (salary plus accom/HR/pension etc). 5 times 4k equals 20k.

Yet these people are so loose with our money that they think nothing of employing Meri Hughes, salary alone £104k to police Welsh policy. With her office and personal staff costs you are looking at a whole posse of wealth creators to finance he 'nothing' job.
Fair enough, and thanks, but the article fails to fully explain the link between the type of increase and its relationship to newer powers devolved under the most recent of Government of Wales Act. First, the voluntary redundancy scheme which concluded in 2012 saw (almost, if not more) than 20% of all staff depart, a development swiftly followed by the assumption of - as the article states - new and expanded legal powers. Would you rather these new legal / planning requirements had been ineffective applied, or would you expect government to discharge its functions in an appropriate and expert manner> If its the latter you'll need the appropriate staff. Either way, the number of appointments has been dramatically eclipsed by the number of VRS departures, a fact neatly omitted in the article.

I'm not saying all is glorious and good in the public sector, but this rightist 'attack, attic' attack' agenda that has seemingly got more and more permissible worries me. And what genuinely upsets is that commentators seem unable o recognise that the majority of civil servants work hard and do a hard job, for a decent and living reward. Is that a crime? I personally believe it to be born of envy and a peculiarly twisted assessment of the body politic, one which conflates the salaried with the shameful, financially exploitative conduct of certain AMs and MPs. Every distinction should be made between the two.

Shrink the state if you want, but don't pretend you'll get anything other than societal ills comparable to those seen in the US and UK during the ascent and control of the New Right, and we all remember how much fun that was... industrial relations at an all time low, decimated communities, strikes, deindustrialisation, soaring unemployment... need I go on.
[quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Llanmartinangel[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]-trigg-[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The People's Republic of Newp[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ollie254[/bold] wrote: We don't want more public sector jobs because those that actually pay tax have to pay for them and their generous pensions. Labour politicians are the mouthpiece of these workers, they are their client group. Get the ones left earning their money.........and while we are at it we want less MP, s as well. As we now have AM,s it was quoted recently that in Wales we have 2.5 politicians doing the equivalent workload of 1 English MP. BYE BYE Jess.[/p][/quote]1. Public sector workers pay tax too. 2. Both public and private sectors have their fair share of effective and efficient, lazy and sloppy staff. 2. Without a requisite number of AMs / MPs, who will scrutinise and hold Government to account via cross-party committees? (you don't possess much understanding of the operation of constitutional democracy, do you?)[/p][/quote]Whilst its true that public sector workers pay tax, their pay in the first place comes from tax revenues and they therefore represent a cost for the nation rather than a contributor except in so far as their wages are then spent within the private sector and used to generate further income.[/p][/quote]That's true. It takes the total tax of at least five people in the private sector to pay for each public sector employee. Fair enough if they are doctors, nurses, teachers etc but when you consider that there are six thousand in WAG (one on £104k pa to enforce language policy), achieving absolutely nothing except the slow demise of Wales that isn't money well spent.[/p][/quote]Any chance of you citing your sources re the ratio / relationship of tax contributions and the numbers of Welsh Government employees?[/p][/quote]Sure: http://m.bbc.com/new s/uk-wales-politics- 25849068. Gives the number of WAG employees as 5777. The ONS quotes the average take take per worker as c £4k. Given that you cannot employ anyone on public sector terms for less than £20k (salary plus accom/HR/pension etc). 5 times 4k equals 20k. Yet these people are so loose with our money that they think nothing of employing Meri Hughes, salary alone £104k to police Welsh policy. With her office and personal staff costs you are looking at a whole posse of wealth creators to finance he 'nothing' job.[/p][/quote]Fair enough, and thanks, but the article fails to fully explain the link between the type of increase and its relationship to newer powers devolved under the most recent of Government of Wales Act. First, the voluntary redundancy scheme which concluded in 2012 saw (almost, if not more) than 20% of all staff depart, a development swiftly followed by the assumption of - as the article states - new and expanded legal powers. Would you rather these new legal / planning requirements had been ineffective applied, or would you expect government to discharge its functions in an appropriate and expert manner> If its the latter you'll need the appropriate staff. Either way, the number of appointments has been dramatically eclipsed by the number of VRS departures, a fact neatly omitted in the article. I'm not saying all is glorious and good in the public sector, but this rightist 'attack, attic' attack' agenda that has seemingly got more and more permissible worries me. And what genuinely upsets is that commentators seem unable o recognise that the majority of civil servants work hard and do a hard job, for a decent and living reward. Is that a crime? I personally believe it to be born of envy and a peculiarly twisted assessment of the body politic, one which conflates the salaried with the shameful, financially exploitative conduct of certain AMs and MPs. Every distinction should be made between the two. Shrink the state if you want, but don't pretend you'll get anything other than societal ills comparable to those seen in the US and UK during the ascent and control of the New Right, and we all remember how much fun that was... industrial relations at an all time low, decimated communities, strikes, deindustrialisation, soaring unemployment... need I go on. The People's Republic of Newp
  • Score: 1

8:20pm Tue 24 Jun 14

helper7 says...

mkaibear1 wrote:
>Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!

Unpopular though the top-rate tax cut may be, it's resulted in more money being paid in tax by the top 1% of taxpayers than *ever* before - under any previous government. (even including Labour's old 98% tax rate...) The top 1% now pay 28% of all income tax collected.

It's the same tactic as dropping your prices in a shop to sell more things - if you price it too high less people buy it, if you price it too low you don't make enough profit - Labour thought that a 50% tax rate was the best rate to go for, the Tories said it was too high - and the Tories have been proved dramatically right.

>more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Oh dear you're about 3 years too late with that slogan. The economy is growing, driven by manufacturing (yes that industry that the Tories "killed") and exporting goods. It always takes time for it to work its way down to the real world of you and I - but it's getting there.

Austerity has hurt but it has worked. By the election in 2015 we will have had 18 months of sustained economic good news and you'll see Labour desperately trying to hide from the fact that the Coalition has pulled the economy out of the tailspin that Brown left it in and is properly on the road to recovery.
Trickle down economics dont work. 'Flexible' labour markets have merely allowed employers to take more profit from productivity without passing the benefits on to workers in the form of wage increases. There has only ever been one way for workers to ensure that they receive a fair share of the pie and that is to organise themselves into unions to bargain for better wages and conditions.

Millions of people in poverty live in UK households where at least one person works, the Living Wage Commission has said.
It recommended that the government should pay its own workers a "living wage".
The commission is an independent body that brings together business, trade unions and civil society.

It said that "the majority of people in poverty in the UK are working".
This continues to fall on deaf ears of the coalition government that nobody voted for!

.
[quote][p][bold]mkaibear1[/bold] wrote: >Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! Unpopular though the top-rate tax cut may be, it's resulted in more money being paid in tax by the top 1% of taxpayers than *ever* before - under any previous government. (even including Labour's old 98% tax rate...) The top 1% now pay 28% of all income tax collected. It's the same tactic as dropping your prices in a shop to sell more things - if you price it too high less people buy it, if you price it too low you don't make enough profit - Labour thought that a 50% tax rate was the best rate to go for, the Tories said it was too high - and the Tories have been proved dramatically right. >more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Oh dear you're about 3 years too late with that slogan. The economy is growing, driven by manufacturing (yes that industry that the Tories "killed") and exporting goods. It always takes time for it to work its way down to the real world of you and I - but it's getting there. Austerity has hurt but it has worked. By the election in 2015 we will have had 18 months of sustained economic good news and you'll see Labour desperately trying to hide from the fact that the Coalition has pulled the economy out of the tailspin that Brown left it in and is properly on the road to recovery.[/p][/quote]Trickle down economics dont work. 'Flexible' labour markets have merely allowed employers to take more profit from productivity without passing the benefits on to workers in the form of wage increases. There has only ever been one way for workers to ensure that they receive a fair share of the pie and that is to organise themselves into unions to bargain for better wages and conditions. Millions of people in poverty live in UK households where at least one person works, the Living Wage Commission has said. It recommended that the government should pay its own workers a "living wage". The commission is an independent body that brings together business, trade unions and civil society. It said that "the majority of people in poverty in the UK are working". This continues to fall on deaf ears of the coalition government that nobody voted for! . helper7
  • Score: 11

8:50pm Tue 24 Jun 14

helper7 says...

helper7 wrote:
mkaibear1 wrote:
>Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together!

Unpopular though the top-rate tax cut may be, it's resulted in more money being paid in tax by the top 1% of taxpayers than *ever* before - under any previous government. (even including Labour's old 98% tax rate...) The top 1% now pay 28% of all income tax collected.

It's the same tactic as dropping your prices in a shop to sell more things - if you price it too high less people buy it, if you price it too low you don't make enough profit - Labour thought that a 50% tax rate was the best rate to go for, the Tories said it was too high - and the Tories have been proved dramatically right.

>more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working.

Oh dear you're about 3 years too late with that slogan. The economy is growing, driven by manufacturing (yes that industry that the Tories "killed") and exporting goods. It always takes time for it to work its way down to the real world of you and I - but it's getting there.

Austerity has hurt but it has worked. By the election in 2015 we will have had 18 months of sustained economic good news and you'll see Labour desperately trying to hide from the fact that the Coalition has pulled the economy out of the tailspin that Brown left it in and is properly on the road to recovery.
Trickle down economics dont work. 'Flexible' labour markets have merely allowed employers to take more profit from productivity without passing the benefits on to workers in the form of wage increases. There has only ever been one way for workers to ensure that they receive a fair share of the pie and that is to organise themselves into unions to bargain for better wages and conditions.

Millions of people in poverty live in UK households where at least one person works, the Living Wage Commission has said.
It recommended that the government should pay its own workers a "living wage".
The commission is an independent body that brings together business, trade unions and civil society.

It said that "the majority of people in poverty in the UK are working".
This continues to fall on deaf ears of the coalition government that nobody voted for!

.
PS

To be fair David Cameron does actually really listen to people after all he hired Andy Coulson.
[quote][p][bold]helper7[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mkaibear1[/bold] wrote: >Despite this the Tory party, that takes money from disabled people, find it very easy to give millionaires Tax Cuts …..we are all in this together! Unpopular though the top-rate tax cut may be, it's resulted in more money being paid in tax by the top 1% of taxpayers than *ever* before - under any previous government. (even including Labour's old 98% tax rate...) The top 1% now pay 28% of all income tax collected. It's the same tactic as dropping your prices in a shop to sell more things - if you price it too high less people buy it, if you price it too low you don't make enough profit - Labour thought that a 50% tax rate was the best rate to go for, the Tories said it was too high - and the Tories have been proved dramatically right. >more proof that Tory cuts are hurting but aren’t working. Oh dear you're about 3 years too late with that slogan. The economy is growing, driven by manufacturing (yes that industry that the Tories "killed") and exporting goods. It always takes time for it to work its way down to the real world of you and I - but it's getting there. Austerity has hurt but it has worked. By the election in 2015 we will have had 18 months of sustained economic good news and you'll see Labour desperately trying to hide from the fact that the Coalition has pulled the economy out of the tailspin that Brown left it in and is properly on the road to recovery.[/p][/quote]Trickle down economics dont work. 'Flexible' labour markets have merely allowed employers to take more profit from productivity without passing the benefits on to workers in the form of wage increases. There has only ever been one way for workers to ensure that they receive a fair share of the pie and that is to organise themselves into unions to bargain for better wages and conditions. Millions of people in poverty live in UK households where at least one person works, the Living Wage Commission has said. It recommended that the government should pay its own workers a "living wage". The commission is an independent body that brings together business, trade unions and civil society. It said that "the majority of people in poverty in the UK are working". This continues to fall on deaf ears of the coalition government that nobody voted for! .[/p][/quote]PS To be fair David Cameron does actually really listen to people after all he hired Andy Coulson. helper7
  • Score: 1

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree