WeX Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 I note it's also a Dr Éoin Clarke blog rant rather than an official news story. Just Google "lying little tosspot" and you will soon find people refuting Mr Clarkes claims Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 Just Google "lying little tosspot" and you will soon find people refuting Mr Clarkes claims Superb stuff! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ricgem2002 Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 This is all down to PFIs - something Labour introduced. Even the Tories said they were poor value for money - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-14574059 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/comment/9356622/Labours-PFI-landmines-continue-to-explode-in-the-NHS.html I've seen first hand how much money has been blown on schools, and the consultants. And this is why the country's finances are in such a poor state. so why are the tories carrying on with it ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alchresearch Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 PFI was invented in the UK by the last Conservative government and is a model deployed in 40 countries around the world. It does work but it desperately needs updating, writes Mark Fox, chief executive of the BSA http://www.publicservice.co.uk/feature_story.asp?id=17931 The current PFIs are thankfully different to the ones Labour had - which were essentially a blank cheque to their construction friends. The new schools now being built are much more practical and cheaper than ones under Labour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna Glypta Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 so why are the tories carrying on with it ? Because there isn't a get out clause. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parvo Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 they are carrying on with PFIs because it seems to be a short term fix-the govt can say they have built XX new schools and XX new hospitals-omitting to say rthat they are comisiioned from private companies who will be paid to run the building at enormous profit to themselves -hence the stories of £300 to have a lightbulb changed, closed schools having lighting and heating at full blast because thats what the original contract was about. Theres a lot of misunderstanding about PFI-Liverpool is due to get the next hospital and opponents of PFI are being portrayed as anti hospital. the second reason may be vested interest-do politicians or their families stand to benefit -I don't know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 http://www.publicservice.co.uk/feature_story.asp?id=17931 The current PFIs are thankfully different to the ones Labour had - which were essentially a blank cheque to their construction friends. The new schools now being built are much more practical and cheaper than ones under Labour. Take a look at Labours biggest donors, you'll see a large number of property millionaires in that list. I wonder why Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WeX Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 so why are the tories carrying on with it ? because to breach the contract would mean even more expense to the public purse. Labour cocked up the PFI that is true, then even allowed the HMRC buildings to be sold to a company operating out of a tax haven for pete's sake! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Parvo Posted October 28, 2012 Share Posted October 28, 2012 the tories are organising yet more PFIs as we speak, several dozen in the pipeline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted October 28, 2012 Author Share Posted October 28, 2012 The OP is factually incorrect. They didn't pay money to Tory donors. They paid money to companies for the provision of services in a usual customer-supplier arrangement. If the Trust were stupid enough to pay over the odds, that's the fault of their procurement processes. Yes, these companies fleeced the system and payed a substantial amount of this to the Tories, ensuring that it is not in the ConDems interest to reform the system. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.