clegane Posted July 16, 2012 Author Share Posted July 16, 2012 Corrected for accuracy:) ...... and just so's you know I don't wave the flag for any political party and firmly believe that those who do are probably not firing on all cylinders. If Theresa May isn't in charge then who is? LOCOG set them on. By blaming politicians its like blaming Cameron if Everest put your windows in wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStar Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 LOCOG set them on. By blaming politicians its like blaming Cameron if Everest put your windows in wrong. You can't blame Seb Coe and co for shortcomings in national security, that's still the home secretary's job, to shirk the blame is not being responsible - no excuses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 Ah, but there is a difference between who is in charge now and who "booked" (for want of a better word) g4s. If the answer to both is may, she should go. If it's only the former there are limits to what she can do, but if g4s knew 10 months back the wheels were falling off why didn't she ? And do we really need this many ? How many football matches are there in the capital on a Saturday ? Chuck in a concert here or there, maybe s rugby matchband the numbers have to stack up to around Olympic numbers don't they ? There's more troops, before the extra call up, faffing around with the Olympics than Afghanistan. Madness. The G4S Olympic contract was signed in March 2011. http://careers.g4s.com/2011/03/g4s-wins-olympic-contract/ May was in charge then, and somehow still is. She is the minister responsible for our internal security. She can't guarantee it. She should go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Posted July 16, 2012 Share Posted July 16, 2012 To be fair to May (and I'm not her biggest fan), if I needed to employ 10,000 security guards, G4S would probably be the first company I'd turn to. They are a long established, massive firm who apart from occasionally losing prisoners don't seem to be that bad at what they do. Yes there should have been closer monitoring but the selection of them for the job seems sensible to me. Where it has gone wrong is that they should have been required to submit weekly reports showing their progress against an agreed recruitment plan. This should have set alarm bells ringing weeks or even months ago so action could have been taken. It sounds like even their own managers were not monitoring the situation, and for that heads should roll. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clegane Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 You can't blame Seb Coe and co for shortcomings in national security, that's still the home secretary's job, to shirk the blame is not being responsible - no excuses. LOCOG are the organisers and pay for security, inluding the Police and army bill, They are responsible . You are trying to score political points. The Home Secretary is not responsible for the failurs of Locog or its contactors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clegane Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 To be fair to May (and I'm not her biggest fan), if I needed to employ 10,000 security guards, G4S would probably be the first company I'd turn to. They are a long established, massive firm who apart from occasionally losing prisoners don't seem to be that bad at what they do. Yes there should have been closer monitoring but the selection of them for the job seems sensible to me. Where it has gone wrong is that they should have been required to submit weekly reports showing their progress against an agreed recruitment plan. This should have set alarm bells ringing weeks or even months ago so action could have been taken. It sounds like even their own managers were not monitoring the situation, and for that heads should roll. They let the 9/11 terrorists on the planes with stanley knives.They daily breach the Security Industry Act. The security industry reps offered to set up a new joint venture company in 2007 where all resources would be pooled. LOCOG turned them down preferring to go with these clowns. This is a bad company and our local football teams should not use them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernStar Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 LOCOG are the organisers and pay for security, inluding the Police and army bill, They are responsible . You are trying to score political points. The Home Secretary is not responsible for the failurs of Locog or its contactors. I've told you, I have no political axe to grind I think they are all scumbags regardless of where they sit, but hey I get it now! I see the pattern here! Bob Diamond wasn't responsible for anything that goes off at Barclays, the Murdoch's can't possibly be responsible for anything their companies do, I even read on this very forum that rapists are not responsible for the crimes they commit either - doesn't anyone accept responsibility for anything these days. The world has gone stark ravin'! Do you really think Sebastian Coe and his mates should be responsible for the security of the Olympics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uptowngirl Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 I think the problem was the requirement that the guards were able to speak English. How would you go about finding 10,000 people in London who can speak English? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted July 17, 2012 Share Posted July 17, 2012 Regardless of the history the 'blame the other lot' argument is more than wearing thin, the home secretary has been in control of this for more than two years. There is no excuse, the responsibility is hers and nobody else's. I wasn't blaming anyone...unlike you ... it was a genuine question... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clegane Posted July 17, 2012 Author Share Posted July 17, 2012 I've told you, I have no political axe to grind I think they are all scumbags regardless of where they sit, but hey I get it now! I see the pattern here! Bob Diamond wasn't responsible for anything that goes off at Barclays, the Murdoch's can't possibly be responsible for anything their companies do, I even read on this very forum that rapists are not responsible for the crimes they commit either - doesn't anyone accept responsibility for anything these days. The world has gone stark ravin'! Do you really think Sebastian Coe and his mates should be responsible for the security of the Olympics? Mr Diamond was responsible for what happened at Barclays, Murdoch is equally responsible for what happens at his companies. Mr Buckles and the rest of his gang is responsible for what happens at G4S. Because you are a Barclays customer doesnt mean you have to "resign" or if you buy a Murdoch paper be punished in some way. Neither should any Home Secretary have to resign because of incompetent or criminal behaviour elsewhere. If you wish to extend the blame beyond G4S then LOCOG hired them against the advice of the majority within the security industry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.