We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
Debate House Prices
In order to help keep the Forum a useful, safe and friendly place for our users, discussions around non MoneySaving matters are no longer permitted. This includes wider debates about general house prices, the economy and politics. As a result, we have taken the decision to keep this board permanently closed, but it remains viewable for users who may find some useful information in it. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Olympics Security bailed out by army..
Comments
-
We seem to be entering a period of unjudicial trials by useless talentless drama queens, enjoying their 15 minutes of fame to grand stand to their constituents and the TV audiences.
How many of these MPs have every run a business or created wealth or employment. Most have fiddling their expenses as their sole business achievement.
Virtually every successful businessmen and entrepreneur will tell you that they made many mistakes in their career. Most were lucky enough to get away with it and go on an florish.
Of course it's necessary for public funds to be properly controlled and accounted for, but the personal vindictive attacts on individuals who have committed no wrong doing but have made a mistake is very bad form and totally counter productive.
In any major project stuff happens; things go wrong. In some cases they go wrong in a very public way; it that morally worse?
That's one interpretation.
The other is that the Hopalong Cassidy division of Roy Rogers Security PLC deliberately low-balled its quotation on the tacit advice of "insiders". This was in the safe knowledge and understanding that if and when it all went pear-shaped the taxpayer tap would be quietly turned on to make up the difference, and nobody would be any the wiser. Such is the way that public contracts usually work. The misjudgments made in this case were firstly that the Olympic Games are much more high profile than pretty much anything else, and secondly that the failure to meet contractual obligations was so staggeringly huge and came to light so late in the proceedings that even the best efforts of the Whitehall machine could not possibly keep the lid on it.
If nobody in the contractor or in the civil service is properly held to account then what deterrent is there to prevent a repeat of such a fiasco over something else in the future ?No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »That's one interpretation.
If nobody in the contractor or in the civil service is properly held to account then what deterrent is there to prevent a repeat of such a fiasco over something else in the future ?
There is no deterrent, fiascos will continue to happen and the private sector will continue to be bailed out, at some point, on large Governement contracts. The only differences with this one are 1.) It had a drop dead start date & 2.) High profile one off."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »There is no deterrent, fiascos will continue to happen and the private sector will continue to be bailed out, at some point, on large Governement contracts. The only differences with this one are 1.) It had a drop dead start date & 2.) High profile one off.
I'd still like to see someone eat dirt over this though. At least it would make us feel better.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »I'd still like to see someone eat dirt over this though. At least it would make us feel better.
As you point out it is a tangled web so I am sure many individuals will refrain from throwing the killer punch for fear of a rebound.
Interesting how many tangled webs seem to have come to light recently with no one wanting to plunge the knife in first. A bit like dominos in a circle, you never know if ripple will catch up."If you act like an illiterate man, your learning will never stop... Being uneducated, you have no fear of the future.".....
"big business is parasitic, like a mosquito, whereas I prefer the lighter touch, like that of a butterfly. "A butterfly can suck honey from the flower without damaging it," "Arunachalam Muruganantham0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »That's one interpretation.
The other is that the Hopalong Cassidy division of Roy Rogers Security PLC deliberately low-balled its quotation on the tacit advice of "insiders". This was in the safe knowledge and understanding that if and when it all went pear-shaped the taxpayer tap would be quietly turned on to make up the difference, and nobody would be any the wiser. Such is the way that public contracts usually work. The misjudgments made in this case were firstly that the Olympic Games are much more high profile than pretty much anything else, and secondly that the failure to meet contractual obligations was so staggeringly huge and came to light so late in the proceedings that even the best efforts of the Whitehall machine could not possibly keep the lid on it.
If nobody in the contractor or in the civil service is properly held to account then what deterrent is there to prevent a repeat of such a fiasco over something else in the future ?
yes that's true
but then that should be a proper subject for investigation of criminal law and not from a few nonentities on a parliamentary committee.
proper accountability should be by penalty clauses for failure to deliver and not by a whole lot of personal abuse.0 -
GeorgeHowell wrote: »If nobody in the contractor or in the civil service is properly held to account then what deterrent is there to prevent a repeat of such a fiasco over something else in the future ?
Why would you want to hold the civil service to account for something that was nothing to do with them? LOCOG isn't part of the Civil Service0 -
Why would you want to hold the civil service to account for something that was nothing to do with them? LOCOG isn't part of the Civil Service
My understanding is that because this was about national security the Home Office was very much involved at every stage. But if someone at LOCOG screwed up badly, let's have them to hung out to dry alsoNo-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
grizzly1911 wrote: »As you point out it is a tangled web so I am sure many individuals will refrain from throwing the killer punch for fear of a rebound.
Interesting how many tangled webs seem to have come to light recently with no one wanting to plunge the knife in first. A bit like dominos in a circle, you never know if ripple will catch up.
I think you're basically saying that the establishment always looks after its own. If so, ain't that a fact.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0 -
It seems to me you can divide people into two broad camps
those that lead, run projects, set up companies, accept responsibility, take risks, make decisions, organise things and achieve somthing in life etc
and those that are content to be led and don't acccept responsibilty, couldn't organise half a pint in a pub and are unwilling to accept the weight of command
I've found that when things go wrong the former are people who look for solutions and yes lessons to be learned to prevent repetition and are slow to blame for obvious reasons
whilst the latter, look to blame some-one and want some human sacrifices0 -
It seems to me you can divide people into two broad camps
those that lead, run projects, set up companies, accept responsibility, take risks, make decisions, organise things and achieve somthing in life etc
and those that are content to be led and don't acccept responsibilty, couldn't organise half a pint in a pub and are unwilling to accept the weight of command
I've found that when things go wrong the former are people who look for solutions and yes lessons to be learned to prevent repetition and are slow to blame for obvious reasons
whilst the latter, look to blame some-one and want some human sacrifices
There are indeed those two types, with some shades of grey in between. Both types are needed because there are not enough slots for everyone to be a thrusting entrepreneur or bold leader, and conversely those types need some willing workhorses to make their operations work.
Certainly those who take on big responsibility and take big risks deserve and require larger rewards than those who don't. But reward for failure, which we have seen far too much of, is not justified on the basis of "well they tried". If you set yourself up to be at or near the top of the tree and have a big influence on other people's lives then you have to deliver, or step, or be pushed, aside to let someone else have a go.
In the public sector success as measured by profitability does not apply and other ways have to exist by which senior persons on very large remuneration are held accountable -- again "well they tried" is just not good enough.
Many people who start businesses build them into great successes. Others fail, often at huge personal financial cost. Fair enough. But when we get into the realms of cartels, dodgy deals, dereliction of duty, criminal activity, surpression of public interest information, corrupt collusion etc that we have seen exposed in a number of arenas recently then that is a very different matter. I don't want people who indulge in such practices to be able to remain in senior positions in large and powerful organisations, whether private or public sector, just because they have apparently shown exceptional leadership and achievement compared with the average bod.No-one would remember the Good Samaritan if he'd only had good intentions. He had money as well.
The problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other people's money.
Margaret Thatcher0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.6K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.3K Spending & Discounts
- 245.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 259K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards