Jim Graham Posted February 19, 2012 Author Share Posted February 19, 2012 still cant answer my questions can you ?you say your not interested in the tories yet argue about everything labour has done wrong (your opinion). you sound like a tory to me again ill await your answers to my questions Where is the evidence the public services are worse under the current government? That's just your uninformed opinion. Could they get any worse? Labour let off more corporate tax payers and made them pay less tax. Between 2007 & 2009 HMRC let companies avoid about £25bn of tax while scrapping the 10p tax rate for lower earners. Every public sector employee who loses his job saves the country money. Every private sector employee who loses his job costs the country money. It's basic economics but I don't expect you to understand it. So basically, your reason for supporting Labour is: "If I ignore all the facts Labour look better than the Tories". OK I'll bear that argument in mind when I'm next at the ballot box. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bill557 Posted February 19, 2012 Share Posted February 19, 2012 Not done owt for me mate! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Labour threw hundreds of borrowed billions at the public sector to little effect. All they did was borrow money, put up taxes and spend the proceeds on vanity projects. I can vouch for that with schools. I made several complaints about the amount of waste and overcharging for school IT equipment but government departments and ministers didn't want to know. It was the same when Labour were knocking out those PCs for disadvantaged families. I've no gripe with helping people out, but the value of the PCs was a third of what Labour were paying. When it was clear Labour were done for, Conservative equivalents promised to look into it. And lo and behold, BSF was put on hold. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister M Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 I am not interested in the Tories. I am looking for a reason to support Labour. Tell me what Labour would do differently. It's all very well complaining and blaming someone else. That's easy. Convince me Labour have a better plan. Judging by your replies, you've obviously got a problem with the Labour Party in general so why would anyone take time to convince you otherwise? Perhaps you would have been better starting a thread extoling the virtues of some other party instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 I can vouch for that with schools. I made several complaints about the amount of waste and overcharging for school IT equipment but government departments and ministers didn't want to know. It was the same when Labour were knocking out those PCs for disadvantaged families. I've no gripe with helping people out, but the value of the PCs was a third of what Labour were paying. When it was clear Labour were done for, Conservative equivalents promised to look into it. And lo and behold, BSF was put on hold. That's been a problem for large public sector IT contracts for many years. The trouble is, the time between concept/tender and payment/delivery can be years, so a price is agreed for a certain specification, and by the time it's provided that spec is hugely devalued. Add to that the through life service support costs which the contractors add, and they make a fortune. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 The last straw for me was when a BSF consultant said "We're going to give every student and teacher an iPad". He couldn't answer how it would improve T&L, nor the extra costings for installation, repairs, damage, theft, loss, appropriate use (for years we've had the HSE on our backs about proper posture when using a computer), nor would comment on the costs a nearby school had been burdened with when they introduced Netbooks for their Y7 pupils. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Graham Posted February 20, 2012 Author Share Posted February 20, 2012 That's been a problem for large public sector IT contracts for many years. The trouble is, the time between concept/tender and payment/delivery can be years, so a price is agreed for a certain specification, and by the time it's provided that spec is hugely devalued. Add to that the through life service support costs which the contractors add, and they make a fortune. I've worked on MoD IT projects and the waste is staggering. The contractors automatically add on a premium for doing government work because they know they will be beggared about by departments that haven't a clue what they want. Departments get money from the Treasury by claiming IT projects will save money in the long run. Generally, the department starts off wanting a Rolls Royce all singing and dancing solution. After the first bill they realise it's going to cost a lot more than they thought. So they go to plan B and try and cut the cost. The contractors stick them with contract variation charges. The department constantly changes the spec so the contractor gets more contract variation charges. Then the Treasury funds run out before the job is finished so the scope is scaled back. In the end they get half a KIA Picanto solution but still end up paying for a full Rolls Royce. The thing is they do it time after time. They never seem to learn. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jim Graham Posted February 20, 2012 Author Share Posted February 20, 2012 Judging by your replies, you've obviously got a problem with the Labour Party in general so why would anyone take time to convince you otherwise? Perhaps you would have been better starting a thread extoling the virtues of some other party instead. Most of the folks on here would vote Labour if they were marching Jews to the gas chamber. Nothing on earth, especially facts, is going to make them change. I have seen some good arguments for their social programmes and there is no doubt they try, and fail, to help those on the margins of society but as someone else said John Major brought in good social change as well. Labour's best work seem to be behind them. So far nobody has suggested the economy is better in Labour hands and it seems to me that Labour's downfall is always the economy. It's certainly why I left them. None of these folks seem to get the connection between having a successful economy and having the money to pay for social programmes. It seems to me that if Labour could ditch the snarling, class war veterans, anti wealth creation, lefty loons they might have a programme that really would work. Unfortunately it's those people who fund the party so they seem doomed by a large part of their own supporters. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 I've worked on MoD IT projects and the waste is staggering. The contractors automatically add on a premium for doing government work because they know they will be beggared about by departments that haven't a clue what they want. Departments get money from the Treasury by claiming IT projects will save money in the long run. Generally, the department starts off wanting a Rolls Royce all singing and dancing solution. After the first bill they realise it's going to cost a lot more than they thought. So they go to plan B and try and cut the cost. The contractors stick them with contract variation charges. The department constantly changes the spec so the contractor gets more contract variation charges. Then the Treasury funds run out before the job is finished so the scope is scaled back. In the end they get half a KIA Picanto solution but still end up paying for a full Rolls Royce. The thing is they do it time after time. They never seem to learn. Sounds all too familiar (I did some time in military procurement). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGuy Posted February 20, 2012 Share Posted February 20, 2012 Why do you tell so many lies? The reason we are in debt was because we bailed out the Conservatives friends, the bankers, which the Cons would have done too. Infact, your selective memory has probably overlooked the fact that the Cons said, right upto the Credit Crunch, that they would, match Labours' public spending plans. In your rant about the improving conditions for the working man, didn't the Cons oppose Labours introduction of the minimum wage? You have become a ridiculous parody of yourself with the utter crap you come out with to defend the indefensible guilty Labour party. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.