good stuff the tories will do?

[stethoscope]

There's only the ID cards thing IMO (if they can be trusted on that ) otherwise, they can still fuck right off.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

I've been trying to work out what sort of idiot you are for a few weeks.

That says more about you than it does about me.

 

[butchersapron]

Well, we're both fucked then.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

Probably.

 

[ericjarvis]

Well, we're both fucked then.

That's politics. We're almost all fucked. The only questions are who by, for how long, and will it involve rubber.

 

[Alright]

For example, might they give us marginally more autonomy? Be less patronising? Let us get on with it a bit more? Less health regulations?

I'm clutching at straws TBH.

With a bit of luck they'll reduce the national debt by cutting waste in public spending, cutting thousands of non-jobs as advertised in the Guardian, cut all the medding crap like diversity control departments and 5-a-day outreach workers, and get the unemployed doing many of the jobs that are going begging.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

crap like diversity control departments

Discrimination mechanisms, more like. Fucking double-speak.

 

[ymu]

there are a some things Labour have done that the Tories will ditch when they get the chance.. tax credits, minimun wage, 40% tax on big earners..maybe not in the first four years but dead certs if they gain a second Parliment... the richer contributing more than the poor has never been on any tory agenda.. they simply do not believe in it.

Not sure they'll ditch tax credits, will they?

1. It's a massive tax-payer subsidy to low-paying employers
2. It doesn't show up on the benefits bill
3. So many people (sorry, "hard-working families") are on them, it'd be politically very difficult to remove them

 

[_angel_]

Not sure they'll ditch tax credits, will they?

1. It's a massive tax-payer subsidy to low-paying employers
2. It doesn't show up on the benefits bill
3. So many people (sorry, "hard-working families") are on them, it'd be politically very difficult to remove them

I don't see how they can ditch them fullstop - tinker about and make them less generous certainly. I would have thought a lot of big businesses would be against any outright removal of them - they might have to pay staff more then!

 

[mentalchik]

Not sure they'll ditch tax credits, will they?

1. It's a massive tax-payer subsidy to low-paying employers
2. It doesn't show up on the benefits bill
3. So many people (sorry, "hard-working families") are on them, it'd be politically very difficult to remove them

Nah far too politically difficult...................i wouldn't manage without them for instance.........

 

[Stoat Boy]

Cut public spending. Sack civil servants. Simplify the tax system and remove lots of paper work that NL have imposed on business.

 

[Maurice Picarda]

thousands of non-jobs as advertised in the Guardian, .

You right-wingers, what do you mean when you say this?

Let's look at today's

http://jobs.guardian.co.uk/jobs/government/

in order, shall we, and work out which is a "non job"?

Project Surveyor

• <LI class=first>OYSTER PARTNERSHIP |
• London |
• £34000 - £41000 per annum +...

Okay, presumably this is someone going around looking at the gates in railway stations, and perhaps retail outlets, to check how the Oyster card can be used outside of LU. This makes it easier for people to buy joined-up tickets and perhpas reduces the need for cash handling operations. A good thing, surely? Socially useful? Either you have public transport or you don't. If you have it, it might as well be efficient, yes?

Unit Coordinator

• <LI class=first>LONDON BOROUGH OF HACKNEY |
• £25,515 - £27,009

Presumably this is someone who works in some sort of adult care or children's services function. I can see why you might not like the idea of your taxes being used to support the feeble or incompetent or their children, but again, if these units exist they need to have someone to tun them. Why is that a "non-job"?


Caseworker - Part Time

• <LI class=first>POLICESKILLS.CO.UK |
• London |
• £12.99 - £15.59ph

This is a private enterprise that makes it easier and more efficient for interim coppers to be supplied. Surely you're a fan of outsourcing non-core functions like search and selection? Surely you're a fan of reducing the overall law enforcement payroll and scaling up only when needed? Then we need caseworkers at policeskills, don't we?


Identification Procedures Assistant – East Anglia

• <LI class=first>POLICESKILLS.CO.UK |
• Norfolk |
• £8/9ph

As above.

Security Guard - Kent

• <LI class=first>POLICESKILLS.CO.UK |
• Kent |
• £8 - 9.50ph

And so on.

DIRECTOR OF CORPORATE RESOURCES & FINANCE

• <LI class=first>SUSTAINABLE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION |
• £57,936 - £68,990

Now, presumably you'd agree that organisations need finance directors, so your beef will be with the existence of a sustainable development commission. And yes, we could probably survice without one. But the NDPB exists because there's a job that DEFRA needs to do, and that job is there because of legislation on sustainable development. So whine about the legislation, not the job holder, but bear in mind that Cameron is just as in thrall to the sustainability lobby as Labour. The legislation that keeps this person in office is unlikely to change.

Consultant Social Worker - Youth Offending Team

• <LI class=first>LONDON BOROUGH OF HACKNEY |
• £42,258 - £44,910

Either we deport young offenders from Hackney to, say, Rockall - which is an eminently defensible position - or we need social workers to keep an eye on the scrotes. Saying that these people, who aren't brilliantly paid and presumably get lots of grief from unpleasant minicrims, do "non jobs" is just absurd.

Conference and Review Officer

http://jobs.guardian.co.uk/employer/london-borough-of-barnet/

• <LI class=first>LONDON BOROUGH OF BARNET |
• £39,789 - £42,498 pa inc.

And again, do you want local government to save money? Yes? Then unfortunately you need odd-looking cross-functional roles like this to reduce siloed working.

Senior Safeguarding Officer http://jobs.guardian.co.uk/employer/london-borough-of-barnet/

• <LI class=first>LONDON BOROUGH OF BARNET |
• £42,498 - £45,153 pa inc.

Actually, no idea what these are. But whatever the postholder is safeguarding is presumably of some public value and we'd miss it should one of the young offenders from Hackney, unsupervised, come to Barnet and nick it.


And so on.


That's what irks me about the Daily Mail and the TaxPayers alliance and conservatives in general. They aren't prepared to commit to anything substantive about reducing government spend - like, say, cutting back on post-16 education, or tightening up NICE rulings on medical intervention for the elderly. They just whine about jobs that they don't understand, which exist to support legislation or outcomes they aren't prepared to challenge.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

"There is no such thing as society."

She was right.

 

[Sesquipedalian]

"There is no such thing as society."

She was right.

Imbecile.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

Why?

 

[Sesquipedalian]

Racist.

I think you need to withdraw that remark you trolling fuckwit.

Post reported.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

Yes, I am 'trolling' in a completely trite way that is intended to generate a discourse.

Take it with a pinch of salt. It's the internet FFS.

 

[Sesquipedalian]

Yes, I am 'trolling' in a completely trite way that is intended to generate a discourse.

Take it with a pinch of salt. It's the internet FFS.

I notice you have thought better of that unfounded accusation and edited your post but you are still a trolling tedious imbecile.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

It wasn't technically correct. That's all. Think about your words carefully.

 

[Sesquipedalian]

What accusation?

Post 45 which you edited but only after i quoted you.

Now fuck off you little cunt.

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

Well, I edited that post.

Are you like this IRL?

 

[stethoscope]

With a bit of luck they'll reduce the national debt by cutting waste in public spending, cutting thousands of non-jobs as advertised in the Guardian, cut all the medding crap like diversity control departments and 5-a-day outreach workers, and get the unemployed doing many of the jobs that are going begging.

Fuck off!




* waits for the usual lame 'commie tw..' remark which one has come to expect from Alright.

 

[weltweit]

Bin ID cards.

There's only the ID cards thing IMO (if they can be trusted on that ) otherwise, they can still fuck right off.

Stopping ID cards will be a significant thing.

I will be pleased if someone will stop ID Cards for good!

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

It's not like there's not wasted public [i.e state] spending, though. Trident FFS.

 

[_angel_]

Cut public spending. Sack civil servants. Simplify the tax system and remove lots of paper work that NL have imposed on business.

Nobody can, or will, "simplify" or "remove" paperwork. Stuff that pretends to that will do just that. Take for example direct payments for disabled people to employ assistants - sounds like a "simplified" tory system of doling out the money and getting people to do their own admin, except there's a background of millions of people to check it's all done correctly and if you ask me, more admin than simply providing the services directly.

Mind you, I daresay they will sack even more civil servants, making the ones remaining even more overworked and running everything even slower, just because tories have some innate hatred of public jobs (apart from their own ones as MPs of course)

 

[stethoscope]

The Tories can't be trusted when it comes to the quango debate - they say one minute they're axing one set of them, and then create another load!

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

The Tories can't be trusted when it comes to the quango debate - they say one minute they're axing one set of them, and then create another load!

They just make different ones.

 

[stethoscope]

Mind you, I daresay they will sack even more civil servants, making the ones remaining even more overworked and running everything even slower, just because tories have some innate hatred of public jobs (apart from their own ones as MPs of course)

Yeah, that's what happens. And they of course tend to cut the jobs on the front line usually which are already under pressure, whilst filling others with middle managers to look at how they can create efficiency

 

[mentalchik]

With a bit of luck they'll reduce the national debt by cutting waste in public spending, cutting thousands of non-jobs as advertised in the Guardian, cut all the medding crap like diversity control departments and 5-a-day outreach workers, and get the unemployed doing many of the jobs that are going begging.

Cut public spending. Sack civil servants. Simplify the tax system and remove lots of paper work that NL have imposed on business.

What so increase unemployment then......................like last time ?

 

[Ibn Khaldoun]

What so increase unemployment then......................like last time ?

I remember how they used the welfare system to mask unemployment. "Unemployment is decreasing!"