National pay rates may be scrapped for public workers

Originally Posted by nomadking

One thing I remember about when the Army took over fire fighting duties, is that they complained of boredom, because there was so little for them to do.

That must have been a story made up by the government who forced the press to release it by using some obscure piece of legislation designed to feed misinformation to the germans in WWII

[slowcoach]

Originally Posted by nomadking

One thing I remember about when the Army took over fire fighting duties, is that they complained of boredom, because there was so little for them to do.

That was probably because by the time they got the Green Goddess started and then ambled at 20 MPH to the fire the fire would have burned itself out, which is probably just as well .. trying to put out a fire with a stirrup pump in a bucket of water was not effective even back in the days when the Green Goddess was state of the art.

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by martyh

and you believed them , like they don't have an agenda during industrial action

Like I said, you are very nieve. The FBU doesn't have an agenda, it's members do. THey give advice to the members on whatever the members vote to do. So there was no reason not to believe them. But you really have your blinkers on if you actually believe that governments don't play dirty, and bend the rules to suit themselves.

I have very stong evidence to back up what I say....what do you have to say otherwise???

---------- Post added at 03:24 ---------- Previous post was at 03:23 ----------

Originally Posted by nomadking

One thing I remember about when the Army took over fire fighting duties, is that they complained of boredom, because there was so little for them to do.

And that's because all they did was answer fire calls. That is about 5 -10% of what firefighters do. So they would be bored.

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

But you really have your blinkers on if you actually believe that governments don't play dirty, and bend the rules to suit themselves.

I know they bend the rules to suit themselves ,funny thing is though as soon as there is a wiff of rule bending from the government the press are all over it .

I have very stong evidence to back up what I say....what do you have to say otherwise???

lets see it then

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Like I said, you are very nieve. The FBU doesn't have an agenda, it's members do. THey give advice to the members on whatever the members vote to do. So there was no reason not to believe them. But you really have your blinkers on if you actually believe that governments don't play dirty, and bend the rules to suit themselves.

I have very stong evidence to back up what I say....what do you have to say otherwise???

---------- Post added at 03:24 ---------- Previous post was at 03:23 ----------



And that's because all they did was answer fire calls. That is about 5 -10% of what firefighters do. So they would be bored.

Ahem....

From the FBU website

The Fire Brigades Union has joined a number of other trade unions in urging a No vote in the referendum on 5 May. Matt Wrack, FBU general secretary said: “While we are happy to consider genuine options for improving the democracy of the voting system, the AV proposal simply does not deliver. AV will not improve accountability or increase democratic control over elected politicians. At the current time this referendum is also a wasteful diversion from the fact that this government has embarked on wrecking our public services and the destroying the living standards of millions of people.�

[Chrysalis]

nothing to do with paranoia martyh, its just blatantly obvious instead.

The bbc themselves have told me certian stories dont get published as they not in the public interest in their own words, of course the bbc dont have to worry about paper sales so for them its nothing to do with if it sells papers or not.

The facts are senior ministers will have direct lines to journalists and probably editors, there is probably arrangements between the 2, and on top of this papers will have their own political agendas as well eg. some will be pro left wing and others pro right wing.

Its probably a #1 rule when in government to have papers and tv news on side otherwise if they go against you then the people will be against you as well as the public are suckers for believing what they told. This is an obvious downside of democracy in that you have to worry what the people think of you and in turn you have to worry what the media think of you as the media controls the public. So the naivety is on your side if you think there is no relationship between media and government with them both fully independent of each other.

Its not just papers as well, its documentaries and soaps like eastenders which are also used for propoganda.

Originally Posted by Chrysalis

nothing to do with paranoia martyh, its just blatantly obvious instead.

The bbc themselves have told me certian stories dont get published as they not in the public interest in their own words, of course the bbc dont have to worry about paper sales so for them its nothing to do with if it sells papers or not.

The facts are senior ministers will have direct lines to journalists and probably editors, there is probably arrangements between the 2, and on top of this papers will have their own political agendas as well eg. some will be pro left wing and others pro right wing.

Its probably a #1 rule when in government to have papers and tv news on side otherwise if they go against you then the people will be against you as well as the public are suckers for believing what they told. This is an obvious downside of democracy in that you have to worry what the people think of you and in turn you have to worry what the media think of you as the media controls the public. So the naivety is on your side if you think there is no relationship between media and government with them both fully independent of each other.

Its not just papers as well, its documentaries and soaps like eastenders which are also used for propoganda.

your putting words in my mouth again ,you realy must start reading properly .I was commenting on Tims ridiculous claim that a DA notice was used to supress/block a story about firemen saving a mother and son from a house fire in stevenage during the 2003 fire mans strike so please read the bloody posts before commenting in future

"propoganda (sic)" - When something is said, printed, or presented in media which disagrees with my views....

If there is a conspiracy by Government and 'Big Business' to have the media on the Government's side, they are not very good at it, considering all the critical items in the media about the Government (current and previous)....

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Ahem....

From the FBU website

And your point is???

Any union represents it's members. It can advise it's members, but it can't force them to do anything.

---------- Post added at 11:26 ---------- Previous post was at 11:15 ----------

Originally Posted by martyh

your putting words in my mouth again ,you realy must start reading properly .I was commenting on Tims ridiculous claim that a DA notice was used to supress/block a story about firemen saving a mother and son from a house fire in stevenage during the 2003 fire mans strike so please read the bloody posts before commenting in future

What Chrysalis says is spot on. But for some reason you think that you know better.

I don't know for sure, and neither do you if a D-Notice was actually used officially, or if pressure was just put on the press. The fact is that as a D-Notice is a voulantary agreement, it wouldn't make any difference if it was used officially or not. The result was still the same, and will be with any dispute that the government have an interest in putting out negative propoganda.

In 2003 a friend of mine phoned up the Sun to ask why they were printing deliberate lies about firefighters. The response was that they knew what they were printing was lies, but they will print it anyway because they don't agree with the dispute.....Obviously on their usual form, they didn't want the truth to get in the way of a good story

---------- Post added at 11:33 ---------- Previous post was at 11:26 ----------

Originally Posted by Hugh

"propoganda (sic)" - When something is said, printed, or presented in media which disagrees with my views....

If there is a conspiracy by Government and 'Big Business' to have the media on the Government's side, they are not very good at it, considering all the critical items in the media about the Government (current and previous)....

Sorry Hugh, but you really need to understand the underhand ways that governments and the press operate. We are starting to see more about how the press operate at the moment.

I was only using the firefighters dispute as one example. But if we continue to use this one. So the scenario is that a senior minister asks lets say the Sun editor not to print any story that puts firefighters in a good light, and in return they will feed the paper with a few exclusive stories.

Well this is a no brainer for the Sun. All they have to do is not print a couple of local stories, that would have only been fillers anyway. And in return they get a couple of nationally important exclusives.

Getting the picture??

Getting a picture....

[img]Download Failed (1)[/img]

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by Hugh

Getting a picture....

And what is that supposed to mean??? I presume you are being insulting, which as a moderator you should know is against forum rules.

Healthy debate is good, but when it turns into people being abusive, then it has gone too far.

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

And what is that supposed to mean??? I presume you are being insulting, which as a moderator you should know is against forum rules.

Healthy debate is good, but when it turns into people being abusive, then it has gone too far.

You have stated that the government blocked a story using a DA notice .You have failed to provide any evidence of this aside from it not being reported in a local rag and your union rep told .You refuse to accept that any attempt by the government to block stories by the government just so they look good would make a bigger scandal than anything the government have had to deal with in recent years ,in all honesty Tim you are making yourself look crazy

[Tim Deegan]

Originally Posted by martyh

You have stated that the government blocked a story using a DA notice .You have failed to provide any evidence of this aside from it not being reported in a local rag and your union rep told .You refuse to accept that any attempt by the government to block stories by the government just so they look good would make a bigger scandal than anything the government have had to deal with in recent years ,in all honesty Tim you are making yourself look crazy

Maybe I should have worded it differently: The government stopped (by whatever means), the stories being reported. The D-Notice is one method that they may have used.

Why would it cause a scandal? They would be blocking a local story, not a national one with huge public interest.

My step father used to be the press officer for one of the major political parties (not saying which one). And you wouldn't believe some of the underhand tactics that he told me about that goes on between the government and the press.

Originally Posted by Tim Deegan

Maybe I should have worded it differently: The government stopped (by whatever means), the stories being reported. The D-Notice is one method that they may have used.
.

Or maybe you could accept that the local didn't get the story untill after the print deadline or they just didn't think it was newsworthy or they just didn't know about it instead of jumping to conclusions that the government are blocking the free press

Why would it cause a scandal? They would be blocking a local story, not a national one with huge public interest.

seriously??? you have no idea why the government using exceptional powers for such a trivial story ,or any story other than ones involving national security would cause a scandal

[Chrysalis]

Originally Posted by martyh

your putting words in my mouth again ,you realy must start reading properly .I was commenting on Tims ridiculous claim that a DA notice was used to supress/block a story about firemen saving a mother and son from a house fire in stevenage during the 2003 fire mans strike so please read the bloody posts before commenting in future

Well I got no idea if DA notices were issued or not i have never said that.