observer Posted June 17, 2008 Report Share Posted June 17, 2008 I do believe you! Seems Gordon has "told" Ministers they can't have a rise this year; BUT, on a later news item, backbenchers are still gagging for their rise! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 P.S. It gets worse Baz: seems MPs are gagging for a rather large pay rise: this at a time of impending stagflation and possible reccession, when the Plebs are being aked to exercise pay restraint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Reminds me of the last incumbents at the Town Hall. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 Most of 'em are still there! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 P.S. It gets worse Baz: seems MPs are gagging for a rather large pay rise: this at a time of impending stagflation and possible reccession, when the Plebs are being aked to exercise pay restraint. Â as I have always said, they are all trying to get their basics increased so that their final salary pensions are all inflated ready for when they all get kicked out at the next election..... They must think we are bloody stupid! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 18, 2008 Report Share Posted June 18, 2008 We must be stupid though - we keep voting them in! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P J Posted June 22, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 Even in these cynical times, where I feel I was beginning to become increasingly numb to the self serving and vile acts perpetrated by our politicians, this latest assault on all that is decent by our lords and masters truly made me feel sick to my stomach. How the hell they expect people to accept that this is done in any form of good faith and correctness is beyond me and I wish a pox on the lot of them.  link http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/politics/article4187779.ece   I am absolutley disgusted to be in any way represented by any of the greedy swine in Parliament. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted June 22, 2008 Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 No wonder we have career politicians.... I bet the Labour members are queing up for those safe seats at the next election (not that there will be that many!!) and the Tories will be queing up for all of them. Â I agree PJ, they are a greedy bunch of low-life scum. I would rather give money to asylum seekers than this bunch of grabbers..... and that is something from me! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
P J Posted June 22, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 It seems to me Baz that this is the only area where we have complete cross party harmony, how much swill in the trough. Thoroughly disgusted by the lot of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 22, 2008 Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 Agree chaps; BUT let's look closer at the ?40,000 hike. This is said to be intended to replace the corrupt claims for new kitchens, TVs, new light bulbs etc in their second homes. Well, errm, how many times does one re-new a kitchen or a TV etc? Sure such expenditure doesn't come anywhere near ?40,000 EVERY year. SO, I think we can conclude that this is just a cynical grab for extra cash and designed to get round the new requirement for publication of their expenses. And they have the audacity to criticise benefit scroungers etc; they are truly the scum of the earth. PS: Wonder how our Bliar's babes will be voting on this?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted June 22, 2008 Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 PS: Wonder how our Bliar's babes will be voting on this?! Â They will be voting for it of course because they are part of the low life scum government! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted June 22, 2008 Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 They don't do "NO", do they? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 22, 2008 Report Share Posted June 22, 2008 Sure about that Peter? Thought "NO" means "NO"?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted June 25, 2008 Report Share Posted June 25, 2008 Notice the Balls family are at it now! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul Kennedy Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 It would seem from the following Guardian article that politicians are mere amateurs at trough feeding: Â "Southern Cross Healthcare, Britain's largest operator of care homes for the elderly, has been forced into emergency talks with its banks after yesterday failing to meet a ?46m loan repayment deadline, busting through a significant debt covenant. Â The heavily indebted group has been unable to sell a number of property assets to repay costly bridging loans used to fund a rush of care home purchases in recent months. Â The debt-fuelled acquisition programme was pursued despite turmoil in the credit and commercial property markets. Meanwhile, on December 13 members of Southern Cross management team shared personal windfalls totalling ?36.6m from share sales at 550p a share. The biggest beneficiaries were then chief executive Philip Scott and then finance director Graham Sizer, both of whom left the company weeks later. Â Yesterday the shares fell 183p, or 58%, to 130p as chief executive Bill Colvin conceded it was likely the properties would now remain within the company, possibly for about two years. "I don't want to hold these assets on my balance sheet but the current state of the market means I might have to," he said. Such a move will need approval from holders of the bridging debt, syndicated by Barclays. Â The company said Jason Lock, who replaced Sizer as finance director in January, had left "with immediate effect". His successor, Richard Midmer, a former colleague of Colvin, was last night beginning intense negotiations with the banks, which have agreed to waive the relevant loan covenant until the end of this month while all options are explored. Â Active Care, a division operating homes for those with learning difficulties, has in effect been put up for sale in the hope of raising funds to ease the debt crisis. Â Separately, Southern Cross issued a profits warning, blaming tighter local authority spending for a period of disappointing occupancy rates. High fixed costs and disappointing occupancy rates meant Active Care in particular was performing "significantly below forecasts". The company also said occupancy levels had been hit by several unexpected deaths of residents in its homes for the elderly. Â As a result, top-line operating profit for the year to September 30 is "unlikely to exceed ?80m", against previous City expectations of ?88m. Â The acquisitive group borrowed ?82m to fund a string of acquisitions between September last year and March. It planned to repay the debt - as it had done on scores of previous acquisitions - by selling and leasing back the underlying property assets. The group had net debt of ?124m at the end of March compared with ?45m 12 months earlier. Â "We have been caught by the credit market situation and the commercial property market situation," said Colvin. He insisted the group's acquisition programme had been scaled back in anticipation of difficulties, but not far enough. "Yes, I made a mistake by buying Portland [a ?42m acquisition of seven homes in the north-east of England] earlier this year." Â Colvin, who had been the group's non-executive chairman, took over the day-to-day running of Southern Cross at the start of the year after the departure of Scott and Sizer. A month earlier all three men had sold more than 4.6m shares at 550p citing imminent changes to capital gains tax. Â Scott, a qualified nurse, enjoyed a personal windfall of ?11.1m from the share sales. Sizer and Colvin made ?7.9m and ?6.6m, respectively. The latter two said they would reinvest a portion of their windfalls. At the end of January Colvin spent ?1.9m on 500,000 shares. Â Two days earlier Sizer announced he was leaving the company and did not reinvest. Scott, who left at end of the year, is now chief executive of Priory Group, the private provider of mental health care. Â Asked if he felt investors and lenders were entitled to feel frustrated at Southern Cross's appetite for bridging loans and management team's share sales against a backdrop of credit and commercial property market turmoil, Colvin said: "I agree with that ... I don't feel good about that. I didn't know back in December what I know now." The Southern Cross boss said he had "struggled" to run the company after the departure of Scott and Sizer who had been the architects of the group's aggressive acquisition strategy. He said he had not wanted the two men to leave. Asked if they had called the top of the market, he said: "I suspect, with hindsight, you are probably right."" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Instead of trivial legislation about fox hunting etc; perhaps our MPs would be better employed in making such activities illegal - oops forgot, the MPs are at it too! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 But aul, when the trough is full of public money rather than share capital, it is a different thing altogether. Â All of our "honourable" members should be brought to book in front a panel of people struggling to meet their mortgage payments or fuel bills and be made to explain their actions. Â Anyone not offering a good explanation why they thought it a good idea to pay for their Sky subscription or their food bills or whatever, out of OUR money should be stripped of all their assets and made to go and live in Wigan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bazj Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 Well OK; Sending someone to Wigan is a bit too much.... but you know what I mean! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted July 1, 2008 Report Share Posted July 1, 2008 "Sending to Wigan" does sound a tad extreme - "hung, drawn and quartered" sounds a lot better! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.