Cameron announces audit of crazy Labour spending

#1
Smart move that man.

Unleash the skeletons!


"David Cameron has announced an audit of the government's books after finding examples of "crazy" spending decisions in Labour's last year in power.
The prime minister told BBC One's Andrew Marr show the review would be launched on Monday by the new Office of Budget Responsibility."






http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8685125.stm
 

Grownup_Rafbrat

LE
Book Reviewer
#2
Hmm. One part of me thinks 'great idea, there must be a lot of money to be saved / timebombs left behind by the outgoing Government'.

The other part thinks 'oh, another quango!'
 
#3
Grownup_Rafbrat said:
Hmm. One part of me thinks 'great idea, there must be a lot of money to be saved / timebombs left behind by the outgoing Government'.

The other part thinks 'oh, another quango!'
Not meaning to be disrespectful but I'm guessing thats because you don't know government before new labour. Before they came along quangos were pretty much irrelevant.
 
#4
Ord_Sgt said:
Grownup_Rafbrat said:
Hmm. One part of me thinks 'great idea, there must be a lot of money to be saved / timebombs left behind by the outgoing Government'.

The other part thinks 'oh, another quango!'
Not meaning to be disrespectful but I'm guessing thats because you don't know government before new labour. Before they came along quangos were pretty much irrelevant.
Strange. I remember quite a few pointless government organisations that came with all sorts of labels back in the 70s. No doubt the'd been around much longer than that.
 
#5
whitecity said:
Ord_Sgt said:
Grownup_Rafbrat said:
Hmm. One part of me thinks 'great idea, there must be a lot of money to be saved / timebombs left behind by the outgoing Government'.

The other part thinks 'oh, another quango!'
Not meaning to be disrespectful but I'm guessing thats because you don't know government before new labour. Before they came along quangos were pretty much irrelevant.
Strange. I remember quite a few pointless government organisations that came with all sorts of labels back in the 70s. No doubt the'd been around much longer than that.
OK.
 
#6
Ord_Sgt is correct in his sentiment that something rather odd happened with Quangos under the last government, though - having labelled their costs as being so disgraceful and scandlous that he'd take vigorous and startling action over Quangos when he became Chancellor, Gordon lived up to his word.

So we now have at least 100 more, with a budget which (depending upon which set of figures you use) is now between four and seven times larger than it was in 1997 (with adjustments for inflation, etc taken into account).
 
#7
Financially this country is in the sh#t

CMD has got to hugely reduce gunmint spending (biiiig time painful, given the 13 yr expansion in non-profit-making public sector employment under LieBore), while at the same time not scaring the horses (where external investment in UK plc is concerned)

He better be brave, and smart(er than either Churchill or Clement Attlee).

Otherwise we're f#cked
 
#8
Quango - it's a civil service term isn't it? Usually invented when retired civil servants need a part time job with mega bucks, also suitable for donators to the present government political party looking for a knighthood.

They've been around for years - Conservatives and Labour have both enjoyed the use of.
 
#9
Stonker said:
Financially this country is in the sh#t

CMD has got to hugely reduce gunmint spending (biiiig time painful, given the 13 yr expansion in non-profit-making public sector employment under LieBore), while at the same time not scaring the horses (where external investment in UK plc is concerned)

He better be brave, and smart(er than either Churchill or Clement Attlee).

Otherwise we're f#cked
Nah you're****ed anyway, the payback is ****ing huge.

Attlee was a gayer and even Churchill, or whitecity, isn't big enough to make this one easier. It's going to fcuking HURT.

Serves you right for letting the ******* do it to you in the first place.
 
#10
Ord_Sgt said:
Stonker said:
Financially this country is in the sh#t

CMD has got to hugely reduce gunmint spending (biiiig time painful, given the 13 yr expansion in non-profit-making public sector employment under LieBore), while at the same time not scaring the horses (where external investment in UK plc is concerned)

He better be brave, and smart(er than either Churchill or Clement Attlee).

Otherwise we're f#cked
Nah you're****ed anyway, the payback is * huge.

Attlee was a gayer and even Churchill, or whitecity, isn't big enough to make this one easier. It's going to fcuking HURT.

Serves you right for letting the ******* do it to you in the first place.
VDon't disagree.

Am intrigued though:
Whre the f#ck do you live that you feel so cocky.

I'd like a visa.

O - and a work permit

Immigrants work harder - well, based on UK society under LieBore they do . . .
 
#11
I am no economist and like most others the information which is generally relied upon to form an opinion of any sort comes through the extremely distorted lense of the media. I have noticed however, that when the economic bubble burst, consumer advertising offering 'homeowner loans' and other forms of credit, fuelling a debt-based economy 'dried up' somewhat as bank lending became more problematic and the lack of money supply forced businesses to close.

Now is it just me or has anyone else noticed that such advertising is back again? See the range or advertising on Sky TV for example.

I also notice that there appears to be rather fewer people queueing outside of job centres. I see fewer commercial bankrupty notices in the London Evening Gazette.

Perhaps a more reliable and objective indicator of the economic recovery or lack of it is to be found in the type of commercial and consumer advertising and the 'situations vacant' columns of the broadsheets rather than the politically partisan editorials in which subjective assetion seeks to triumph over objective reality.

I do not think that government borrowing has been channeled into the private sector but it seems to me that there is a lot more money sloshing around the economy than manipulative journalists and shyster politicans would like you to believe. People are spending money - lots of it. So if the economy has imploded as we are all being told it has, then where is this money coming from?
 
#12
Let us hope he includes that most ludicrous of Tory policies - Private Finance Initiatives. I see the press are hanging that one on Labour. Short memories. One is as bad as the other.
 
#13
I just hope he puts an immediate stop to the printing presses that are printing new money , or is that quantative easing?
 
#14
bakersfield said:
Let us hope he includes that most ludicrous of Tory policies - Private Finance Initiatives. I see the press are hanging that one on Labour. Short memories. One is as bad as the other.

Care to name a Tory PFI that is/was as scandelous as the Tanker PFI?
 
#15
Semper,

Would you class the sale of MOD housing to Annington Homes a PFI?

Shiny.
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#16
Iolis said:
I am no economist and like most others the information which is generally relied upon to form an opinion of any sort comes through the extremely distorted lense of the media. I have noticed however, that when the economic bubble burst, consumer advertising offering 'homeowner loans' and other forms of credit, fuelling a debt-based economy 'dried up' somewhat as bank lending became more problematic and the lack of money supply forced businesses to close.

Now is it just me or has anyone else noticed that such advertising is back again? See the range or advertising on Sky TV for example.

I also notice that there appears to be rather fewer people queueing outside of job centres. I see fewer commercial bankrupty notices in the London Evening Gazette.

Perhaps a more reliable and objective indicator of the economic recovery or lack of it is to be found in the type of commercial and consumer advertising and the 'situations vacant' columns of the broadsheets rather than the politically partisan editorials in which subjective assetion seeks to triumph over objective reality.

I do not think that government borrowing has been channeled into the private sector but it seems to me that there is a lot more money sloshing around the economy than manipulative journalists and shyster politicans would like you to believe. People are spending money - lots of it. So if the economy has imploded as we are all being told it has, then where is this money coming from?
They are two different things.

The economy is not in such a terrible state - despite the jobless totals being rather high, property sales being rather low, personal bankruptcies being at an all-time high quite a large number of small and medium businesses going to the wall.

The banks are starting to lend again because the gobment bailed them out on the never-never. They borrowed the money against us, and we've yet to pay it back. They are starting to advertise again because now that WE have bailed them out, they are flush with our cash. They want to lend it back to us so they can make more money out of our money, hence the advertising splurge. They also know that we are stupid enough to borrow the money again, and may actually have to when the taxes go up.

The issue here is just how much of OUR money the government has spunked up the wall, that WE are going to have to pay back. The issue is more about the disgusting state of public finances, not the economy as a whole. The public finances are so bad that in sorting them out, we may yet hit a deeper recession as the pockets of everyone on the street is squeezed by extra taxes to pay off the government's credit card.

It's good to know that the banks are all rapidly getting back to a state of rude health with our money, and are thus prepared to lend it back to us at interest rates that will do them very well. It's also good to know that the government may actually turn a profit on the bail-out when it sells the bank shares, and gets its loans repaid by the banks, on the profits they make from lending us our own money back.
My head hurts.
 
#18
RearWords said:
Quango - it's a civil service term isn't it? Usually invented when retired civil servants need a part time job with mega bucks, also suitable for donators to the present government political party looking for a knighthood.

They've been around for years - Conservatives and Labour have both enjoyed the use of.
I believe it stands for Quasi automonous none governmental organisation.

Covers up all sorts of crime scenes and no dabs to pin blame afterwards.
 

Alsacien

MIA
Moderator
#19
Semper_Flexibilis said:
Smart move that man.

Unleash the skeletons!


"David Cameron has announced an audit of the government's books after finding examples of "crazy" spending decisions in Labour's last year in power.
The prime minister told BBC One's Andrew Marr show the review would be launched on Monday by the new Office of Budget Responsibility."






http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8685125.stm
Last time I looked a couple of years back, UK Gov had over 500 major accounts active - and only 13 had been audited.....

CMD has no choice even if this costs a lot, he needs figures, targets and KPI's to keep the momentum through the pain to come.
 
#20
Ord_Sgt said:
Serves you right for letting the ******* do it to you in the first place.
Yep. Every few years a socialist government stands up and spouts blatant lies at us, and every few years we're so taken in that we welcome them into office with open arms. Only to hand it back, battered and broken, to the 'evil' Tories to put back together. At which point, a socialist government stands up...
 

Similar threads

Latest Threads

Top