Page 1 of 1

Why pay for others mistakes?

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 12:10 am
by philbell
I am new to this and this started off as a recent subject but i went off the point a bit as a local issue hit home. Sorry, but I guess its the same the country over.

Keep it in the family

I did originally try to post this a few days ago.

Surely if an MP needs to employ people in his office and the appointment is to be paid for by public funds, the post should be advertised and the best person given the job. In fact any public post should be open to everybody shouldn’t it?

This takes us back to the old adage ‘It’s not what you know but who you know’. OK so if I have my own business and need some assistance with something and my kids could probably assist do the job, then fair enough I would employ them and pay for the help they give. The thing here is that I would be spending my money on their wages, hence I would want them to do a fair days work for the wages they receive. Recent events have shown us that MPs can spend the taxpayers’ money on wages for their family. These are often people who aren’t exactly the most qualified (if qualified at all) to hold the post and sometimes do not even do the job at all.

I think that any post that is required by anybody in public office, should be advertised and an independent recruitment team should be responsible for the hiring in any of these positions. By all means let the family of the MP apply, but any post funded from public funds should be available to anybody, after all this is supposed to be a democracy so the MPs should act democratically.

The thing that worries me about all this is that although this week a Tory MP has lost the whip over this, you can be pretty sure that there are many many more cases similar to this which are probably costing us the taxpayer Millions.

(Off on a tangent lol)

It really makes me think that there should be a way of claiming tax back on stupid stuff that happens!! Making the people who waste our money accountable!! In my County the council has been having a public discussion since November over restructuring the local schools. They have spent hundreds of thousands on nice shiny brochures going to every home, some have received several. Although the final decision on the consultation is not due until February, I have known since October what the outcome is going to be!!! I feel sorry for the campaigners who are against the changes that WILL be announced (in fact the vast majority of those who have expressed an opinion are against the result that is to be announced) as they had no chance to change the decision from the start. That is not democracy is it? At the same time it was a huge waste of money just for being seen to go through the motions democratically. Why the hell should I bother to pay for my council tax when this is what they waste it on.

Will stop waffling now, but if anybody thinks I have just made that last bit up, get in touch before the 5th of Feb which is the announcement date and I will pre-empt the result. Am not sure if this the final result is going to be announced or if they are going to go down to two options for a further vote. I guarantee that I have the result of the final vote though.

The thing is how many times do farces like this repeat themselves up and down the country each year? Wasting us Millions in taxes that could have been spent on much worthier causes.

Don’t get me wrong, I understand the reasons that the council is doing this, they are tens of millions in the red, and the final outcome will claw a chunk of that money back by selling lucrative land. Again the debt is not the taxpayers fault, and the people responsible for the debt should be accountable, but the way the system works they are able to force schemes on the public to cover their own backs but in ‘a democratic way’. It stinks. The corruption is there from the top to the bottom.

RE: Why pay for others mistakes?

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 3:35 pm
by Lad
I don't think there is anything wrong with employing his son at all. The problem is when it isn't disclosed and the son is overpaid for the amount of work that he does. In this case as far as I am aware the son was doing very little work and was grossly overpaid. It was simply cheating the public. His admission of guilt and public apolagy as well as being suspended for 10 days from the commons has destroyed his career and he is not standing for the next election.

RE: Why pay for others mistakes?

Posted: Thu Jan 31, 2008 10:44 pm
by philbell
I think the point i was trying to make, but totally missed :sign0002: , was the fact that they don't have to disclose who is employed by them, the job they are supposed to do and what they receive for it and is just open to abuse.

By your reply, you must see that the system is being abused and it is taxpayers money that is being wasted. I'm sure he's gutted that he's been suspended for 10 days over an £80k mistake, maybe he has screwed his career but only has himself to blame. If these jobs were legitimate posts, then why not employ the best candidate for the job, when public money is being used to fund it, it should be open. Like I said, if it was his company and he pays the wages then he can employ who he wants.

RE: Why pay for others mistakes?

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 12:01 am
by Tony
I have an argument for this.
You said why not employ the best person for the job but i used to be a manager somewhere and had to hire and fire people. Whilst hiring people i also got 1 of my friends to come for an interview this was someone i knew could do the job and had a lot of trust and faith in. However i also interviewed 3 other people 2 of which according to their CV were more qualified and if i didnt know my friend i would have employd one of those 2.

However you never know from an interview if someone has a lot of time off sick, if theyre slackers or if theyre reliable - so in the end i employed my friend who i knew i could trust. Which is possibly a similar situation to the 1 in the opening thread.

This is a slightly different situation in that they got paid for doing very little which is obviously abusing their position, my argument was as to why he employed his relative instead of a randomer.

RE: Why pay for others mistakes?

Posted: Fri Feb 01, 2008 2:11 pm
by Lad
Oh, no I didn't see that! Sorry. Yes, disclosure may be good, but if you worked for Tony Blair and helped him prepare files, you may be a terror target? Imagine what sort of nut cases would like to shoot or blow up those that assist "the world's 2nd worst man" as many in the miliant Islamic world view him.

I'm with Tony (above) on his point. Considering this position you may be worried about confidentiality issues, breach of trust etc. I don't have a problem with it and think it isn't unreasonable of him to employ his son.

RE: Why pay for others mistakes?

Posted: Sat Feb 02, 2008 12:17 am
by philbell
Points taken.

If there is a confidential/security issue etc then obviously you don't want the world knowing who is doing what where.

Also I have taken on peolple I know and would do in the future if I know for a fact that they are more than capable of doing the job as opposed to the unknown quantity. Often the ones that look good on paper and are able to give a good interview are the worst actual employees. Have been through that plenty of times. Even the 'most qualified' are often the least qualified in the real world.

It is just the amount of corruption that goes on that winds me up and although the majority don't take advantage there needs to be something put in place to prevent these things happening.

RE: Why pay for others mistakes?

Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2008 12:50 pm
by Lad

David Cameron has taken a lead on the issue. I guess other parties will follow too. Probably after all relevant people have sacked any relatives etc working for them!