Labour stretches lead over Tories
Discussion
Elroy Blue said:
What claims?
I've posted facts about the damage done to the Emergency services under this Gov, while they splash money over things that might buy them votes (and lets not forget hundreds of millions through incompetence). I don't need to justify them, they're happening and real.
Sorry, it was Derek's claims - my mistake!I've posted facts about the damage done to the Emergency services under this Gov, while they splash money over things that might buy them votes (and lets not forget hundreds of millions through incompetence). I don't need to justify them, they're happening and real.
Not sure your response was appropriate though..
sidicks said:
Please provide a link to this 'independent' review....
https://www.google.co.uk/Look up Edmund Davies et sec
Elroy Blue said:
Why. Does the truth hurt if you're a Cameron fanboy.
I'm not.But this is the response of a spoilt, petulant child, not someone who wants a sensible discussion:
Elroy Blue said:
I'm sure there is a separate thread detailing how all Public sector workers are parasites who dare to live beyond retirement. If you'd like to post your views on there and keep this thread on track, it might make more sense.
sidicks said:
Elroy Blue said:
Why. Does the truth hurt if you're a Cameron fanboy.
I'm not.But this is the response of a spoilt, petulant child, not someone who wants a sensible discussion:
Elroy Blue said:
I'm sure there is a separate thread detailing how all Public sector workers are parasites who dare to live beyond retirement. If you'd like to post your views on there and keep this thread on track, it might make more sense.
Elroy Blue said:
No, it's the response of someone who wants to discuss Labour/Conservative policies (as per the thread title). If you want to discuss public sector pensions, do it in the relevant thread.
Contrary to the expectations of some, policies are limited by the money available (which is linked to costs including public sector pensions)...!Jasandjules said:
There really isn't much to choose from the self serving scum these days. A pity we can't shoot a few of them to see if the rest improve their game.
Farage is sort of doing that, but Thatcher had bigger b
ks than this lot. Lack conviction & too much short termism. Children of 24/7 media as alluded by Cameron on newsnight yesterday.anonymous said:
[redacted]
The police had, historically, been conservative in outlook and voting. The tories used support for the police as part of their manifesto. The left generally criticised the police for their actions. This came to a head during the Miners' Strike where the police were called Thatcher's Boot Boys by the more supportive left.Cameron, however, in an earlier incarnation, was instrumental in putting forward a package of 'reform' which was little more than an attempt to cut back on the pay of police in this country At that time the police were amongst the poorest paid in Europe, although comparisons were difficult due to different set ups. In some countries there were already a sort of PCSO cadre, normally very local police with very limited powers, and this tended to confuse the costs but even then, the police came out cheaply.
A police rugby tour of Germany included a tour around a local nick where the area commander allowed one of their police helicopters to take a few of the lads for a flight around his force area. At that time my force had only just negotiated for half of one.
The negotiating board put forward a pay rise of some 3%, which many officers felt was very low given changes the government had forced on the board. The then labour government - I think it was Brown - just refused to pay it. No discussion, no reasons, just a refusal, despite it being a lower agreement than the E-D report wanted.
The idea of the tories being the party of law and order is dead in a ditch. This has now been taken over by the UKIP.
The odd thing is that some of the tory faithful on here bemoan the tories moving away from their core vote but then suggest that the slashing of the police budget - a reduction in manpower approaching 30% is not unusual and there are more cuts to come - is a good thing. So perhaps the tories abandoning their core voters is a good thing given that their core voters seem to have abandoned their long held belief in law and order.
The irritating thing is that there are many other ways of cutting the cost of policing in this country. All it needs is an intent to cut out the pointless tasks and the worthless procedures forced on forces by the government. But that takes effort and thought.
Wanted: a party to tought Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime. That'll get a few votes.
Elroy Blue said:
What claims?
I've posted facts about the damage done to the Emergency services under this Gov, while they splash money over things that might buy them votes (and lets not forget hundreds of millions through incompetence). I don't need to justify them, they're happening and real.
looking 2003 to 2014 (March to March is the data I've got). I've posted facts about the damage done to the Emergency services under this Gov, while they splash money over things that might buy them votes (and lets not forget hundreds of millions through incompetence). I don't need to justify them, they're happening and real.
Constables were 95% , but above constables 102%
Total 97%
Inc PCSO total 105%
Police recorded crime is 69% of 2003.
So this is the massive damage done? I assume that the police forces make their own staffing decisions and decided to reduce constables but increase senior ranks. Even taking the highpoint, it's a 10% reduction in a period that has supposedly a huge drop in crime. And based on this 10% reduction your own force has taken the decision to cut by c80%.
I've worked in multi-billion$ businesses who have managed 25% reductions and maintained and then grown their businesses. What makes the internal management of the police so incompetent, in your view?
Derek Smith said:
The odd thing is that some of the tory faithful on here bemoan the tories moving away from their core vote but then suggest that the slashing of the police budget - a reduction in manpower approaching 30% is not unusual and there are more cuts to come - is a good thing. So perhaps the tories abandoning their core voters is a good thing given that their core voters seem to have abandoned their long held belief in law and order.
The irritating thing is that there are many other ways of cutting the cost of policing in this country. All it needs is an intent to cut out the pointless tasks and the worthless procedures forced on forces by the government. But that takes effort and thought.
Wanted: a party to tought Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime. That'll get a few votes.
I haven't seen anyone saying a reduction in Police manpower is a good thing?The irritating thing is that there are many other ways of cutting the cost of policing in this country. All it needs is an intent to cut out the pointless tasks and the worthless procedures forced on forces by the government. But that takes effort and thought.
Wanted: a party to tought Tough on crime, tough on the causes of crime. That'll get a few votes.
The rising costs of public pensions now the baby boomers are retired/retiring is however one possible reason why frozen funding levels can produce large cuts in some areas to compensate.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
What part of "Thatcher bad" was confusing you? It's as much an article of faith as "Cameron bad".Your facts are not wanted here. If it's not an anti-conservative rant then it's no good- as Elroy B has pointed out, there's other threads if you want to mention facts & figures & truth.
fblm said:
crankedup said:
I think the word you are struggling with is Senior Manager. Not aware of any position that offers a post called 'Senior something'.
Why would I know your daughters job title (or rather creepily go back through all your posts to try and find out)? All I know is what you have said on here previously to try and give your posts on the subject a veneer of authority. In any event I'm not convinced senior manager is any more descriptive of her area of expertise than 'senior something in pensions'. If you had said she is a senior fund manager I'd understand what she did. But we digress, with regards public sector pensions the word you seem to be forgetting is 'unfunded'; the vast majority are unfunded, ie there are no funds or fund managers (AFAIK the exceptions being the partially funded local government, universities and MP's schemes - quelle suprise on the last one)Mentioned earlier in this thread that my daughter has various teams that report to her, and she has responsibility for fund strategies. I must ask if she may spare a few precious minutes of her time to perhaps enlighten, those that have expressed an interest, exactly what it is that she is responsible for.
crankedup said:
If you don't know you only have to ask regarding my daughters title. If your not interested then do not bring her into your verbiage. Thank you. As you have shown interest perhaps this may assist.
Mentioned earlier in this thread that my daughter has various teams that report to her, and she has responsibility for fund strategies. I must ask if she may spare a few precious minutes of her time to perhaps enlighten, those that have expressed an interest, exactly what it is that she is responsible for.
Whilst I'm sure you are not deliberately misleading us - "Senior Manager" is typically a generic senior admin title - no disrespect intended and no question an important role, but in my experience anyone involved in fund strategy at a senior level would have a more specific title.Mentioned earlier in this thread that my daughter has various teams that report to her, and she has responsibility for fund strategies. I must ask if she may spare a few precious minutes of her time to perhaps enlighten, those that have expressed an interest, exactly what it is that she is responsible for.
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
Do not fret Ladies and Gentlemen, you can still enjoy Pistonheads from any corner of the globe that you care to depart to.The only hope is that Lib-Dems continue in coalition Government and moderate the worst excesses of Labour.
You haven't yet justified what worst excesses of Toryism they have moderated...Politics is subjective with no definitive answers that will satisfy all readers, I'm afraid it would be pointless preparing a list.
TB. The kid hasn't had an original thought ever since he first started quoting other bits of the internet in the original climate thread.I asked •you• what worst excesses of toryism the lib dems have moderated. CMD isn't very Tory, in fact he is probably far more orange book lib dem than Tory, which is probably why he gets on so well with Cleggers. I suspect the same is true of Gorgeous George which is why he works well with Danny Alexander. Who incidentally I rate as a very competent guy.
We have a very wet centrist govt currently, its very very dovish and whilst I am more than happy to have a govt support mortgage payers than risk averse savers, the hawks do have fair points. For the wrong reasons but fair points. The Tories should have slashed and cut much much harder than they have done, they should have been much more surgical, prexise , detailed and organised in how they approached the defecit. CMD has very little proactive balls though so hates such a thing as sticking your neck out and leading. But I'll give praise and credit for Gorgeous George and I never thought Id say that in 2010. The weak link has come out of the last 4.5 yes with the most credit.
Edited by Big Al. on Monday 29th September 18:54
As for your prognosis on George, I too am pleasantly surprised how authoritative he has grown. And Danny has been the perfect partner, never swaying from the treasury line.
Lets keep in mind, much of what is said is opinion based upon what has or has not been brought to public knowledge.
Is political theory, ideology or even history actually taught anymore or do ppl just pick it up off wiki?
The lower threshold tax thing is actually a very very traditional Tory policy according to ideology, theory and history. But hey, we aren't here to let facts get in the way of anything are we?
The Tories haven't cut deeper because that would!d require CMD A)leading on something and sticking his neck out on something requiring a spine and B) the Tories having a truely detailed plan at a strategic level. We have very much seen over the last 4-5yrs that hasn't been there. Strategically the first two yes were woeful beyond anything Gordon Brown did. Blair, the Dark Prince and Campbell would have eaten them for breakfast.
You seem proud of the idea that the lib dems might have prevented any austerity. This is absurd, there was almost no public spending austerity. There was almost no targeting, almost no planning, almost no detail, almost no precision. It was astoundingly bad politics and bad executive leadership.
What have we ended up with? Half arsed NHS reform and half arsed education reform, armed forces which are now half professional and half militia, a semi broken Union and a relationship with Europe that nobody has a clue where stand.
Piss poor leadership.
Edited by DJRC on Monday 29th September 22:15
There may have been no austerity in your world, but perhaps ask a wider field of people before making such statements
You mention that I 'seem proud' of the Lib-Dems possibly preventing any austerity. 1, They didn't 2. Lib-Dems have assisted to keep the Country afloat, and for that I am pleased with their performance overall in the round. Lib-Dem policy to reduce tax threshold to 10k, the Tories love to suggest it was them all along, some even believe that to be true. So, as you mention, don't let the facts get in the way. Yes I am well aware that the Tories have a mantra for tax cutting, evidence the higher tax band drop making the well off better off whilst simultaneously cutting the benefits of the disabled, another Tory mantra.
The NHS reform was not in any manifesto, fact is Cameron pronounced 'no top down reforms of the NHS' A pledge which the Tories instantly broke, proclaiming to the electorate that what they are undertaking is not a 'top down reform'. Clearly not, a insult to the electorate is more accurate.
I agree with you regarding the distinct lack of strategic policy planning during the first years of this Parliament. Well certainly it looked and felt that way.
Actually about the country, doing it right, what's best for the country irrespective of party politics...you just don't care.
Cromwell was right back then and he is still right today. A pox upon you all.
Do I care about the U.K. - not half as much as I used to TBH. With the recent crop of political impresario's at the helm and looking at what may be coming through I fear for the residents of the U.K. As I am retired, although starting a little business up to keep myself occupied, maybe I should follow the bankers mantra ' will leave the Country if you make it difficult for us'.
Derek Smith said:
When there was an 'independent' review of police pay back in my day they came to the evidenced conclusion that if the police paid a bit over 11% of their income towards a pension then it would be self-funding. It actually made a profit, i.e. is paid out less than was taken from serving officers, right up until the mid 90s. If one took into consideration the profits made over the years, then it ran into the 2000s.
It's no longer 1978...Contributions in > pensions out does not make a profitable scheme.
This is the same mistake that is constantly trotted out by the public sector - it ignores the cost of ongoing accrual (the biggest cost).
Even basic arithmetic would demonstrate that 11% contributions could nowhere near fund the promised pensions without massive taxpayer subsidy.
Interesting comments noted from the 2011 'independent' review of police pay and pensions:
https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...
- For example, if pay progression were to continue, a police constable with seven years’ service would cumulatively receive an additional £4,143 between September 2011 and 2013, irrespective of the pay freeze.
- Thanks to the Edmund-Davies reforms, police officers in 2011 are no longer underpaid in comparison with average private sector or public sector workers. Indeed, their pay scale rates are typically 10 to 15% higher than some other public sector workers, and, in some regions of England and Wales, police officers are paid approximately 60% more than the median local earnings.
- A regime was introduced under which police constables who have been at the top of their pay scale for at least a year, and who can demonstrate higher professional competence, can be paid an additional £1,212 per annum (an amount called the ‘Competence Related Threshold Payment’).
- As noted above, the police service’s pay bill will continue to rise despite the two-year public sector pay freeze because, under the existing regime, police officers and police staff automatically progress up their pay scales each year. In the case of constables, there are ten points on the scale, ranging from £23,259 to £36,519. Automatic annual pay progression for the police was introduced in 1919 and has not been materially disturbed since then.
- An analysis of recruitment and retention data indicates that the role of a police officer is an attractive career and, once in the police service, police officers rarely leave before they attain their full pension entitlements.
- The length of time a police officer has occupied his rank is, excluding the attainment of a higher rank, by far the most significant factor in determination of pay.
- Officers in the PPS currently pay contributions of 11% of their pensionable pay; Police Authorities pay the employer contribution of 24.2%.
- Officers in the NPPS currently pay contributions of 9.5% of their pensionable pay; Police Authorities pay the employer contribution of 24.2%
A slightly different picture than our resident policemen were trying to portray....
Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 30th September 21:21
Edited by sidicks on Tuesday 30th September 21:29
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
DJRC said:
crankedup said:
Do not fret Ladies and Gentlemen, you can still enjoy Pistonheads from any corner of the globe that you care to depart to.The only hope is that Lib-Dems continue in coalition Government and moderate the worst excesses of Labour.
You haven't yet justified what worst excesses of Toryism they have moderated...Politics is subjective with no definitive answers that will satisfy all readers, I'm afraid it would be pointless preparing a list.
TB. The kid hasn't had an original thought ever since he first started quoting other bits of the internet in the original climate thread.I asked •you• what worst excesses of toryism the lib dems have moderated. CMD isn't very Tory, in fact he is probably far more orange book lib dem than Tory, which is probably why he gets on so well with Cleggers. I suspect the same is true of Gorgeous George which is why he works well with Danny Alexander. Who incidentally I rate as a very competent guy.
We have a very wet centrist govt currently, its very very dovish and whilst I am more than happy to have a govt support mortgage payers than risk averse savers, the hawks do have fair points. For the wrong reasons but fair points. The Tories should have slashed and cut much much harder than they have done, they should have been much more surgical, prexise , detailed and organised in how they approached the defecit. CMD has very little proactive balls though so hates such a thing as sticking your neck out and leading. But I'll give praise and credit for Gorgeous George and I never thought Id say that in 2010. The weak link has come out of the last 4.5 yes with the most credit.
Edited by Big Al. on Monday 29th September 18:54
As for your prognosis on George, I too am pleasantly surprised how authoritative he has grown. And Danny has been the perfect partner, never swaying from the treasury line.
Lets keep in mind, much of what is said is opinion based upon what has or has not been brought to public knowledge.
Is political theory, ideology or even history actually taught anymore or do ppl just pick it up off wiki?
The lower threshold tax thing is actually a very very traditional Tory policy according to ideology, theory and history. But hey, we aren't here to let facts get in the way of anything are we?
The Tories haven't cut deeper because that would!d require CMD A)leading on something and sticking his neck out on something requiring a spine and B) the Tories having a truely detailed plan at a strategic level. We have very much seen over the last 4-5yrs that hasn't been there. Strategically the first two yes were woeful beyond anything Gordon Brown did. Blair, the Dark Prince and Campbell would have eaten them for breakfast.
You seem proud of the idea that the lib dems might have prevented any austerity. This is absurd, there was almost no public spending austerity. There was almost no targeting, almost no planning, almost no detail, almost no precision. It was astoundingly bad politics and bad executive leadership.
What have we ended up with? Half arsed NHS reform and half arsed education reform, armed forces which are now half professional and half militia, a semi broken Union and a relationship with Europe that nobody has a clue where stand.
Piss poor leadership.
Edited by DJRC on Monday 29th September 22:15
There may have been no austerity in your world, but perhaps ask a wider field of people before making such statements
You mention that I 'seem proud' of the Lib-Dems possibly preventing any austerity. 1, They didn't 2. Lib-Dems have assisted to keep the Country afloat, and for that I am pleased with their performance overall in the round. Lib-Dem policy to reduce tax threshold to 10k, the Tories love to suggest it was them all along, some even believe that to be true. So, as you mention, don't let the facts get in the way. Yes I am well aware that the Tories have a mantra for tax cutting, evidence the higher tax band drop making the well off better off whilst simultaneously cutting the benefits of the disabled, another Tory mantra.
The NHS reform was not in any manifesto, fact is Cameron pronounced 'no top down reforms of the NHS' A pledge which the Tories instantly broke, proclaiming to the electorate that what they are undertaking is not a 'top down reform'. Clearly not, a insult to the electorate is more accurate.
I agree with you regarding the distinct lack of strategic policy planning during the first years of this Parliament. Well certainly it looked and felt that way.
Actually about the country, doing it right, what's best for the country irrespective of party politics...you just don't care.
Cromwell was right back then and he is still right today. A pox upon you all.
Do I care about the U.K. - not half as much as I used to TBH. With the recent crop of political impresario's at the helm and looking at what may be coming through I fear for the residents of the U.K. As I am retired, although starting a little business up to keep myself occupied, maybe I should follow the bankers mantra ' will leave the Country if you make it difficult for us'.
Derek Smith said:
The odd thing is that some of the tory faithful on here bemoan the tories moving away from their core vote but then suggest that the slashing of the police budget - a reduction in manpower approaching 30% is not unusual and there are more cuts to come - is a good thing.
Who has said that? I've read the whole thread and haven't read that. Quote someone.crankedup said:
If you don't know you only have to ask regarding my daughters title. If your not interested then do not bring her into your verbiage. Thank you. As you have shown interest perhaps this may assist.
Mentioned earlier in this thread that my daughter has various teams that report to her, and she has responsibility for fund strategies. I must ask if she may spare a few precious minutes of her time to perhaps enlighten, those that have expressed an interest, exactly what it is that she is responsible for.
You brought her up alluding to her seniority in some vague position in the pensions business. I only mentioned her to point out that having a 'senior something' in the family hardly makes you an expert. Don't get pissy with me for bringing her up, you did. Your daughters job description is of even less interest to me than it appears it is to you but I wish her every success. You shouldn't need a fund manager in the family to know that unfunded public sector pensions schemes do not have a fund, or a fund manager, the clue is in the name. I will not mention her again.Mentioned earlier in this thread that my daughter has various teams that report to her, and she has responsibility for fund strategies. I must ask if she may spare a few precious minutes of her time to perhaps enlighten, those that have expressed an interest, exactly what it is that she is responsible for.
Edited by anonymous-user on Wednesday 1st October 03:34
sidicks said:
A slightly different picture than our resident policemen were trying to portray....
You are using figuress to counter dogma; you will not be listened to. When I tried mentioning facts I was called a few names & otherwise ignored.Let them believe their version, hope that others will listen to the truth.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff