Cameron's radical plan to reform jobs cut red tape

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

tbf, that member's idea of "radical reform" involved violence, armed insurrection, and proposing murder, so not quite in the same league....

No the numbers will differ, if we end up anything like Greece Alans number of envisaged dead will be lower than what the government achieves

[nomadking]

Oops wrong thread.

[mertle]

Originally Posted by Ignitionnet

The report has no basis in evidence whatsoever and should be completely disregarded which probably means Cameron et al will want it implemented to the letter. Corporatist 'Conservatives'.

problem is he deaf as door bell he not listening to sensible advice. He so far up murdocks and big coporates he dont see the damage caused.

So engulfed listening to crackpots like this, tax aliance, steve hilton(although even cameron ignored some his idiotic policies) and others.

Cameron digging hole is completely looking right idiot.

He in america saying wont waver on this he will has too. laughingly thinks he governing similar to thatcher in his leadershp. Sorry cameron she went mad you gone early sonny.

I think he losing it bigtime think he mad as hatter.

I dont think he fit for office needs removing before real damage done. He declared war everyone except the real culprits the banks and hedge funds/corporates.

[Hugh]

Thank you for your rant, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing, mertle - much appreciated.

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

No the numbers will differ, if we end up anything like Greece Alans number of envisaged dead will be lower than what the government achieves

Strange, I don't remember the streets being lined with victims of the recessions during the 70s and 80s......

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Does this not apply to small businesses only. I think people are under the impression that small busienss owners tend to get rid of staff for the sake of ot. Most small business owners (and I have ran a couple) do everything to retain staff that are good for the business. The only time they would look to sack staff is if they are a) incompetant or b) they simply cannot afford to pay them.

I have yet to meet any boss who has sacked an employee for the sake of it.

Also legislation like this would encourage more small businesses to take on people, if they knew that if things did not work out, there would be less red tape to rectify teh situation.

If I as a small business owner risk my own capital, my own home, to start a business, surely it should be my perogative who I hire and fire.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Thank you for your rant, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing, mertle - much appreciated.

Strange, I don't remember the streets being lined with victims of the recessions during the 70s and 80s......

The suicide rate in Greece is through the roof but if you had looked in the eighties you would have found thousands of care in the community victims dead in the streets and the sad thing is it's still happening frequently, a colleague was sent to a flat only last week where the resident had died of malnutrition, still who gives a toss as long as long as it's only the very weakest and most disadvantaged among us that it's happening to.

[Hugh]

"in the 80s thousands dead in the streets" - is Mr Hyperbole visiting?

Actually, I think your comment re "who gives a toss as long as long as it's only the very weakest and most disadvantaged among us that it's happening to" is a cheap shot, portraying those who think we need to manage our spending appropriately don't care about anyone else - the weakest and the most disadvantaged are the ones who should be getting the support focused on them, but everyone else seems to think they themselves are a special case and they shouldn't be affected by any reduction in spending.

Perhaps if those earning over £42k and still wanting child benefit, people claiming over £450 per week in Housing Benefit, etc etc were less focused on their own needs, and thought about the weakest and most disadvantaged, and we all cared more for our neighbours (as in your example above, no one seemed to know about that poor person), there would be more to go around?

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

"in the 80s thousands dead in the streets" - is Mr Hyperbole visiting?

Actually, I think your comment re "who gives a toss as long as long as it's only the very weakest and most disadvantaged among us that it's happening to" is a cheap shot, portraying those who think we need to manage our spending appropriately don't care about anyone else - the weakest and the most disadvantaged are the ones who should be getting the support focused on them, but everyone else seems to think they themselves are a special case and they shouldn't be affected by any reduction in spending.

Perhaps if those earning over £42k and still wanting child benefit, people claiming over £450 per week in Housing Benefit, etc etc were less focused on their own needs, and thought about the weakest and most disadvantaged, and we all cared more for our neighbours (as in your example above, no one seemed to know about that poor person), there would be more to go around?

Maybe not the streets but in parks,derelict buildings and shop doorways, as if that makes a difference.

do you really think money would become.available if people weren't getting housing benefit and the like because when times were good under the last government some one in my borough had the brainwave to move half the people in needs records, social workers and day centre facilities over to different boroughs, if I was being cynical I'd say it was because our figures of them dying was so bad there was a very real danger the press may show an interest and a better question to ask imo is instead of neighbours taking notice, incidentally it was actually another user of the day centre that reported him missing, what happened to the people paid to support him, it takes Weeks to starve after all and like I said it's far from rare.

[Hugh]

Originally Posted by mertle

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/poli...-red-tape.html

Posh eton boy is class prize idiot so he aint got clue how to create jobs but got fantastic way cause more fear and uncertainty.

So Mr Beercroft bought his policy afterall proves who bed they lie in and cameron lied that party funds was not buying policies. When crudas getting done why there no proper investigation to this criminal party affairs. Bunch crooks the lot off them.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/j...-shake-up.html

Within all this as the plan makes easier to sack why would people make long term plans. Infact you will see many employees just save even more not spend in the economy fearing there job security.

The government got one track mind to destroy our economy further.

Aniother how does propose to protect borders with less staff we seen what happening heathrow do to cuts.

I think cameron needs sectioned before he does anymore harm.

Love they way employers liieing to get there own way only thing stiffling job creation is them themselves. If you want create jobs then get off your fat money create it. stop paying yourselves way over odds wages put money into your business. This not slant ALL employers but those scum who blaming employment laws lieing through teeth.

How many those employers wanting this have actually outsourced there work to china, korea, indea, thailand etc.

Theyre ways to fire those not working its disipline if they think making position redundant so they can employ someone else which suspect real reason to this despicable move.

What about rights employees from scum companies who want to flog there workers by cutting corners taking dangerous risks.

How far will he go with his revelution to hurt employees

Will we go back to bad old days

Where industrial injuries causing or worse deaths was more common will H&S be cut.

Then in the next breath cameron bemoaning of the new wave disibilty goes up down to those said increase accidents.

If he wants this dangerous road then maybe we should have it easier to sack pillocks like him and puppets like osbourne clegg.

Oooops, mertle - looks like you got hold of the wrong end of the stick (again)......

Times

David Cameron faces a Conservative revolt after signalling that he is ready to ignore proposals for employers to sack staff at will.

Downing Street gave the idea of no-fault dismissals a cool reception when it was published yesterday after being kept under wraps by ministers for seven months.....

.....The proposals were drawn up by Adrian Beecroft, a venture capitalist, for Downing Street last autumn. They were rejected at the time as lacking an evidence base.

I am sure that won't stop you ranting your inverted snobbery polemic in the future, though......

[mertle]

ok why did they get involved with him in first place then.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18170333

Seems he going of his trolly attacking cable.

The man with low morals should Known his past what he was about before asking him to do the report.

It shows bad incredible judgement on cameron behalf. He must known the hewould come up with nutcake extreme ideas.

He not first idiot they aproached on to shape ideas.

To me they would not got to extremist individuals unless they felt it would get favour.

They backtracking due to the cool response its been given in media/public. Like welfare there extremist propeganda actually got favour by people so it went ahead. How many reports been deliberatly leaked to find if its got some milage. If its bad ho its only draft we did not intend using this fruitcakes ideas. Gets favour with media pushing it with examples to justify change. Great it comes out as policy.

I see how there policy building worked since took power.

[Hugh]

Ah, the old "they only changed their mind because of the backlash" argument, even though the evidence shows that Cameron was never keen on it.

Nice try....

[TheDaddy]

Just read an interesting article on beecroft and his companies and just how much government cash they trouser, seems as though he's quite in favour of government interference in business and red tape regulation after all. Is there no one in politics or advising on it that isn't a.self serving, odious, two faced little creep.

[Hugh]

Quite a few - unfortunately, the odious minority get all the publicity...

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Quite a few - unfortunately, the odious minority get all the publicity...

You can't just dismiss people like this by saying they're in a minority, the expenses abuse saw to that, nearly all of them were at it even if they were within the rules, rules they created lets not forget and the public isn't fooled, the abysmal turnout at recent elections proves that and it's up to them to turn peope back to politics not the other way round and they won't until honesty and integrity are valued by them again.

[Hugh]

But only the odious minority get reported - as the old saying goes, bad news is reported widely, good news hardly ever gets reported.

Honesty and integrity won't get reported, as it isn't news/doesn't reinforce stereotypes.