Cameron: "Cuts will change our way of life"

[Jairzinho]

Such a load of inconsequential, deliberately misleading, patronising bullshit. None of them are living on 67k p/a now, and none will be living on 74k p/a when the increase comes in. Pay them all £150k p/a, actually make it £200k p/a, no expenses, ban all "donations", send all the fraudulent cunts to jail. Then can the media please shut up about their wages, and scrutinise what they're actually doing.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

I did laugh at it myself.

 

I also can't stop laughing at Gideon's hair.

What the fuck?

[Jairzinho]

He is Tory boy.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

'Poison pill' privatisation contracts could cost £300m-£400m to cancel

 

'Unprecedented' clauses guarantee firms 10 years of profits even if new government scraps controversial probation contracts

 

Chris Grayling visiting a prison. Questions have been raised about contracts drawn up by his department.

 

Taxpayers will face a £300m-£400m penalty if controversial probation privatisation contracts are cancelled after next May's general election under an "unprecedented" clause that guarantees bidders their expected profits over the 10-year life of the contract.

 

Labour is already committed to unpicking the justice ministry contracts to outsource probation services but will not now be able to do so without incurring the multimillion pound bill because of "poison pill" clauses written in by Chris Grayling's department.

 

The Ministry of Justice say they are only following Treasury guidance by including the clause, which raises the prospect that similar clauses are being included in other politically controversial contracts across Whitehall that are to be signed before next May's general election.

Margaret Hodge, the chairman of the Commons public accounts committee, who has secured a confirmation from Ministry of Justice officials about the clauses, said that the clause is written into the contracts to run 21 new "community rehabilitation companies". She said was appalled by the discovery.

 

She has asked the Whitehall spending watchdog, the National Audit Office, to challenge any politically contentious contracts that are signed in the dying months before the general election: "It is not value for money. It is unacceptable and must be challenged before the event."

 

The disclosure comes as the two outsourcing firms at the centre of serious fraud inquiries,, G4S and Serco, confirmed they had been granted new government work during a period when the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, had told MPs that contracts would not be awarded. The confirmation has led to claims that Grayling misled parliament.

 

The contracts will see 70% of the work of the public probation service handed over to private and voluntary sector providers as part of Grayling's "transforming rehabilitation programme".

 

The announcement of the "preferred bidders" among the 80 companies and organisations bidding to run the 21 community rehabilitation companies had been expected this week but has been delayed until December. Transfer from the public sector is now expected in the new year.

Vincent Godfrey, the MoJ's director of procurement, has confirmed to Hodge that the probation contracts include a clause under which companies are paid recompense for costs and profit if it is terminated through no fault of theirs. He said there was a "staged profit repayment clause", which would cover the loss of profits for the entire life of the contract if it was terminated at its very outset.

 

Hodge said that this was unprecedented and contrasted them with traditional "no fault" clauses, which see 12-18 months of compensation for loss profits. She said it could amount to £300m-£400m in the case of the probation contracts.

 

A justice ministry spokesman said that they did not recognise the figure.

 

The disclosure led the shadow justice secretary, Sadiq Khan, to write to Grayling reminding him of Labour's opposition to probation privatisation: "What's more, I do not believe, in the dying months of this government, contracts should be signed for a decade that will bind in two future parliaments. If you insist on proceeding, there should be a sensible option for a change of government to walk away from the contracts without lumbering taxpayers with a penalty running into hundreds of millions of pounds."

 

The separate accusation that Grayling misled MPs over the ban on G4S and Serco winning new government contracts followed emails to the public accounts committee from both companies detailing their negotiations with the Ministry of Justice. These showed that they signed new contracts and extended existing ones between July 2013 and January 2014.

 

Grayling told the House of Commons last year that the government would not award or negotiate with G4S or Serco until they had been given a clean bill of health by auditors.

 

It first emerged in July 2013 that both firms were involved in overbilling for the tagging of prisoners. Since then the Serious Fraud Office and City of London police have launched inquiries into five separate government contracts with the two firms worth more than £200m. The government's auditors cleared both firms to work on government contracts in January this year as the police inquiries continued.

 

At a committee meeting on Wednesday to discuss outsourcing contracts, Hodge told MPs that she had received a letter from Serco showing that between July 2013 and January 2014, it had extended its existing contract of work in HMP Thameside and been given seven new MoD contracts.

 

G4S was given more business in an MoJ prison contract extension in August 2013, Hodge said, and three days after the suspension was lifted, a G4S contract to work with HMRC was announced. "It does appear that Chris Grayling has misled the house," she said.

 

Hodge told the committee: "There was one [serco contract] in Justice which gave them more money and more business. It was the expansion of an existing contract for HMP Thameside. But it was growing their business at a time when ... they shouldn't have done so.

 

"You then look at the MoD, there were seven contracts awarded to Serco during that period when Chris Grayling had clearly told the house that we would not be awarding them any new contracts.

 

"At G4S, there was an increase in business to work HMP Parc phase II operations. Three days after the suspension was lifted, there was a major contract for HMRC facilities management.

 

"Now either people were doing things they shouldn't have been doing in the civil service or members of parliament were misled by what Chris Grayling said to the house."

 

In October, Grayling was asked by Labour's Nick Smith to explain the MoJ's position. "We will not be awarding the companies any new contracts unless or until those audits are completed to our satisfaction," Grayling replied.

 

Civil servants appearing before the committee reassured Hodge that parliament had not been misled and said they would provide the committee with a chronology of events that would explain Grayling's statement.

 

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/sep/11/poison-pill-probation-contracts-moj-serco-g4s

 

 

[Scooby Dudek]

They don't even have the good grace to pretend any more. They are screwing us over and don't give a fuck.

 

The disclosure comes as the two outsourcing firms at the centre of serious fraud inquiries,, G4S and Serco, confirmed they had been granted new government work during a period when the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, had told MPs that contracts would not be awarded. The confirmation has led to claims that Grayling misled parliament.

 

 

Fraud?  Don't worry you will still get a contract and no matter what happens we guarantee your profits, from the taxpayer, for 10 years. 

[Skidfingers McGonical]

"You were shit at that stuff, but here is some other stuff you can be shit at and get peaid loads of money. And if it doesn't pan out, you will still get whatever profits for up to 10 years"

[Stu Monty]

It's basically just theft of the wealth of a nation. I would genuinely lock the cunts up for it, post revolution.

 

Every time a minister appears on tv there should be a bubble with all of their conflicting interests that appears above their heads, the utterly bent cunts.

[lifetime fan]

Such a load of inconsequential, deliberately misleading, patronising bullshit. None of them are living on 67k p/a now, and none will be living on 74k p/a when the increase comes in. Pay them all £150k p/a, actually make it £200k p/a, no expenses, ban all "donations", send all the fraudulent cunts to jail. Then can the media please shut up about their wages, and scrutinise what they're actually doing.

 

 

The taxpayer-funded bill for MPs' expenses and costs is now higher than it was before the 2009 scandal.

 

Total claims rose by £5m to £103m last year, figures show, compared with the £102m paid out in 2008-9.

 

Almost four pounds in every five was spent on staff salaries, with a quarter of MPs employing a family member.

 

The Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (IPSA) said the system of regulation put in place since 2009 had reduced overall costs by £58m.

 

It also said figures for the most recent year would not be higher than in 2008-2009 if inflation was taken into account.

 

Revelations about fraudulent expenses' claims by several MPs led to Parliament being stripped of its responsibility for paying claims in 2010.

 

Annual figures published by IPSA show that the total cost of MPs' expenses and costs rose by £5m from £98m to £103m in 2013-4.

 

Staff salaries and other remuneration accounted for 78% of all costs incurred by MPs, totalling more than £80m.

 

The figures show that 168 MPs employed family members or business associates last year - up from 155 the year before.

 

In addition, 30 MPs gave staff what is known as a "reward and recognition payment." The total cost of these bonuses amounted to just under £20,000.

 

The cost of renting a constituency office accounted for 11% of total outlay, while accommodation and travel accounted for 7% and 4% respectively.

 

Ipsa chair Sir Ian Kennedy said the figures allowed "constituents to see exactly what their MP spent in carrying out their Parliamentary duties".

 

"The information we're publishing shows that about 90% of the costs go on staffing and running an office." he added. "That is unsurprising given that MPs operate the equivalent of 650 small businesses through which they work for their constituents and in Parliament."

[Bobby Hundreds]

They need clobbering.

[Anubis]

We're currently judicially reviewing (under the umbrella of the CLSA) Grayling's decision on the duty solicitor rota tendering and recent cuts. The hearing started last week.

 

Nice to see him getting it in the neck from elsewhere. The rehabilitation of offenders in the hands of G4S worries me greatly, as does the roll-out of G4S running custody suites when it happens. Apparently they've been very poor where the outsourcing has currently happened. Yeah, I was shocked too.

[Jairzinho]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YssVxTpAJDo

[Bobby Hundreds]

We seriously do need revolution, its taking the piss now. These elite pricks are destroying everything. I say we sweeney Todd them and feed them to the poor.

[Jairzinho]

I'm fine with skipping the consciousness awakening part now, lets just start breaking things.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

[Section_31]

I would.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

I would.

My thoughts exactly.

[Ranxerox]

My thoughts exactly.

 

 

Everyone that posts in here is instantly corrupted. 

[stringvest]

Iranian women are magnificent.  

 

Even Shappi:

 

[Skidfingers McGonical]

Everyone that posts in here is instantly corrupted. 

 

My corruption began way before April 2005 Scott.

[Skidfingers McGonical]

Iranian women are magnificent.  

 

Even Shappi:

 

 

Yes, as long ash she desn't try any of her stand up routine and she allwos me to help her work on her 'delivery'

[Jairzinho]

China has fined UK pharmaceuticals firm GlaxoSmithKline $490m (£297m) after a court found it guilty of bribery.

 

The record penalty follows allegations the drug giant paid out bribes to doctors and hospitals in order to have their products promoted.

 

The court gave GSK's former head of Chinese operations, Mark Reilly, a suspended three-year prison sentence and he is set to be deported.

Other GSK executives have also been given suspended jail sentences.

 

The guilty verdict was delivered after a one-day trial at a court in Changsha, according to the Xinhua news agency.

 

Chinese authorities first announced they were investigating GSK in July last year, in what has become the biggest corruption scandal to hit a foreign firm in years. The company was accused of having made an estimated $150m in illegal profits

 

GSK said it had "published a statement of apology to the Chinese government and its people".

 

"Reaching a conclusion in the investigation of our Chinese business is important, but this has been a deeply disappointing matter for GSK," said chief executive Sir Andrew Witty in a statement.

 

"We have and will continue to learn from this. GSK has been in China for close to a hundred years and we remain fully committed to the country and its people," he said.

 

"We will also continue to invest directly in the country to support the government's health care reform agenda and long-term plans for economic growth."

 

Mick Cooper, analyst at Edison Investment Research in London, said: "GlaxoSmithKline will hope that this will draw a line under events in China, but it will take time for its Chinese commercial operations to recover."

 

Analysis: Carrie Gracie, BBC China editor

 

This is a humiliating outcome for one of Britain's biggest companies: pleading guilty to systematic bribery, facing the biggest fine in Chinese history and making an abject apology to the Chinese government and people.

 

But after a case lasting more than a year, there was no easy way out for GSK, and at least now, it can start to rebuild its battered brand in China.

 

Today GSK said it had learned its lessons, and one of those is clearly that foreign companies need to keep a close eye on China's fast changing political and regulatory weather if they are to prosper, or even survive, in this promising but perilous market.

[stringvest]

Perhaps the authorities in this country might be arsed to look at the same practice that happens here.  Er, actually, scratch that, they won't.  I wonder why?  Hmmm...

[Jairzinho]

Working with our NHS. Ace.

[Bobby Hundreds]

Big pharma. I just imagine sat round the shareholders table a collection of various tv and film villains.

[Stu Monty]

Ouch, I bet they are worried about a lot of their contracts drying up after being found to be a criminal company.

 

 

Haha! I know, I fucking kill me too!