Dodgy Bob Posted 6 July 2016 Posted 6 July 2016 You don't have any employment rights when you are out of work. I think that is the crux of what her point is. People with no/little skills have to jump through the government's barriers to get a job (min wage, NI, pension etc) Why would an employer set on people with low skills or even disabilities if they are going to cost them more money than they bring in due to these 'protections'? There are lots of incentives the government can and do offer to help businesses. The main benefit of those incentives is that they help businesses provide good quality jobs. That's why a lot of bog standard wage slaves like me are happy to vote for pro-business governments, because I know that what's good for business is generally going to be good for me. But if the incentive on offer is the ability for businesses to lower the quality of the jobs they offer then for me that's a false economy, because although business might thrive it would not be offering any good quality jobs. If we had an excessively high minimum wage (we don't) and there were no other ways for businesses to hire casual/flexible staff (there are) and we had excessively high unemployment (we don't) and barriers to entry for small businesses were prohibitively high (they're not), then her idea might seem a bit more reasonable. Until then deregulation of employment shouldn't be anywhere near the priority list.
reynard Posted 6 July 2016 Posted 6 July 2016 I Thought this was apt.And funny. Brilliant and so so apt! Is there one for the other rag the express?
Danno Posted 6 July 2016 Posted 6 July 2016 There are lots of incentives the government can and do offer to help businesses. The main benefit of those incentives is that they help businesses provide good quality jobs. That's why a lot of bog standard wage slaves like me are happy to vote for pro-business governments, because I know that what's good for business is generally going to be good for me. But if the incentive on offer is the ability for businesses to lower the quality of the jobs they offer then for me that's a false economy, because although business might thrive it would not be offering any good quality jobs. If we had an excessively high minimum wage (we don't) and there were no other ways for businesses to hire casual/flexible staff (there are) and we had excessively high unemployment (we don't) and barriers to entry for small businesses were prohibitively high (they're not), then her idea might seem a bit more reasonable. Until then deregulation of employment shouldn't be anywhere near the priority list. Love how you revert more back to the posting style of Moosebreath every day
reynard Posted 6 July 2016 Posted 6 July 2016 Leadsom admits ‘misleading’ claims on CV for top job Extract from today's Times. Make of it what you want. Robert Stephens, a former colleague, told the news website Reaction that throughout her time at Invesco Perpetual “she did not manage any teams, large or small, and she certainly did not manage any funds”. Mr Stephens, who retired from Invesco Perpetual in 2014, said that Mrs Leadsom had allowed the impression to arise that “she has finance management skills and experience which qualify her for senior posts in government”. He said that her actual job was to work on, sometimes part-time, “ ‘special projects’, mostly for the chief investment officer. These included for example negotiating pay terms for senior fund managers. Towards the end of her time, she advised on a couple of governance issues. As I understand it she had no one reporting to her in either role.” The energy minister talked of her “30 years of financial experience” when suggesting before the referendum that in the event of a Leave vote “there will not be an economic impact”. Another former colleague of Mrs Leadsom admitted to doubts in the past about some of her financial credentials. “It didn’t really seem like she had been working on the front line of an investment bank,” said one Conservative MP. She also faced criticism over views aired in a blog written for her website since she was selected as a candidate for South Northamptonshire in 2006. In a post in 2009 she criticised gay adoption, referring to a story about two children being turned down for adoption by their grandparents, saying that two strangers had been selected. “And as if that weren’t enough, the strangers are a gay couple.” In another blog post she wrote she did not want her daughter "to be taught by a woman with a veil covering her face." I'm sure there's good stuff in there as well.
Mike Oxlong Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Hate these meaningless political so unites such as "I believe in fairness" Latest from Leadsom "Let's banish pessimists" Coming soon "We are committed to making shit not smelly"
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Leadsom is awful - she is not a leader. I can see why some might have been attracted to her initially, but can anyone seriously see her as a long term choice to lead this country?
Webbo Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Leadsom is awful - she is not a leader. I can see why some might have been attracted to her initially, but can anyone seriously see her as a long term choice to lead this country? I don't know enough about her to judge, I'd never heard of her until a month ago. That doesn't mean she's bound to be bad.
Guest MattP Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 It's a serious risk to promotw someone from Junior Minister to Prime Minister. We've seen the absolute shambles the opposition have turned into when appointing a leader from the backbenches with no serious experience of holding a position or office of some serious responsibility. My heart says Leadsom as shes closer to my politics but the head has to say Theresa May.
Thracian Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 I think if they only employ one or two it is likely to be a family run business. But where does it stop? In a years time they could change it to under ten employees. Whether it is right regarding under three the right should still be there or else we are going backwards as a society. Do you base this opinion on ever having run a business?
Thracian Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Leadsom is awful - she is not a leader. I can see why some might have been attracted to her initially, but can anyone seriously see her as a long term choice to lead this country? Why not. Because there's an orchestrated internal campaign against her by people who'd love to fudge the Brexit vote out of existence by any means possible? Or because she's overstated her credentials like uncountable others? Get real. The Conservative establishment want Theresa May for their own ends. Yet this is a woman who, without a moment's dialogue with Putin, has just said called for a vote on modifying trident out of concern for the changing threat, including possibly Russia. This at a time when Merkel makes her own move: http://af.reuters.com/article/worldNews/idAFKCN0ZN0W3l And This after Putin has "hoped he can have a new relationship with the UK". Who would Putin sooner deal with after this? May claims to be tough but appears to have the strategy of a dazzled rabbit. Her call reflects just the sort of Thatcherite philosophy that can have its place at times but ls far more than likely to backfire if you make he wrong threats to the wrong people. Apart from reassuring the many Scots who work on trident - who could have been reassured with a much more diplomatic statement, what's the point of making such a comment in such an assumptious way in a completely new situation? http://mundinews.com/britains-likely-next-pm-theresa-may-wants-urgent-vote-on-trident-renewal/ I'm even more inclined towards Leadsom now.
Thracian Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 It's a serious risk to promotw someone from Junior Minister to Prime Minister. We've seen the absolute shambles the opposition have turned into when appointing a leader from the backbenches with no serious experience of holding a position or office of some serious responsibility. My heart says Leadsom as shes closer to my politics but the head has to say Theresa May. I'm surprised. Vardy did alright on his promotion from "junior" footballer! And your political emotions have always seemed pretty sound to me. Leadsom seems to have a genuine concern for the wellbeing of the less fortunate and therefore perhaps reflects the chance of bringing together other people who feel that way, because something needs to be done to heal all the fractures. There's also her seeming belief in Britain's ability to shape it's future as an independent nation once more. And listening to what she says, doesn't suggest that she'd start by having an entirely unnecessary yet provocative go at Russia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_level_of_military_equipment
DJ Barry Hammond Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 @@Thracian Because lots of things I've seen from her tell me she's weak - weak in terms of maintaining her own policy positions over time, weak in policy detail behind her ideas, weak in terms of experience, weak in terms of comanding leadership. She wouldn't lead the party and country if she got the job - she'd just end up being steamrollered by those wishing to operate the strings behind her.
Guest Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 From the very little I've seen of Leadsom I'd prefer her as leader rather than May. Not being a tory voter that should probably stand against her.
Webbo Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 I called it for May months ago (not getting the credit I deserve here ) but I can't say I'd be overly worried about A.L. getting the job.
Guest MattP Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Gove out. Second female Prime Minister confirmed as members decide on Gove or Leadsom.
Guest Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Gove out. Second female Prime Minister confirmed as members decide on Gove or Leadsom. Has to be leadsom then.
foxy boxing Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Glad to see that back stabber gove out of the leadership race now it's down to experience May or a fresh broom ledsom not too many people will know about her were getting a female pm folks yippee
lifted*fox Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Thank **** that rubbery little pob-faced cvnt Gove didn't get it.
Alf Bentley Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 This could get all shades of ugly now! Looks as if it has already started, DJ: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3679199/UK-PM-candidate-Leadsoms-City-credentials-scrutiny.html Senior former colleagues of Leadsom are alleging that she has massively exaggerated, if not fabricated, the seniority of the positions she held in her former career in the City.... "Andrea Leadsom, a candidate to be Britain's next prime minister, is facing fresh allegations that she exaggerated her role working in financial services after putting that experience at the centre of her campaign to be the next leader. [...] Leadsom has often referred to her 25 years of experience in finance, recounting how she spent the weekend helping Eddie George, the late governor of the Bank of England, calming the fears of bankers after the merchant bank Barings collapsed. However, Peter Norris, the chief executive of Barings at the time, said he could not remember her playing a role in the failed attempt to rescue the bank, one of the biggest financial crises in modern British history. [...] Reuters spoke to five former Invesco colleagues, including four in senior management positions, who said Leadsom did not have a prominent role or manage client money. [...] Leadsom said on her CV published by her spokesman after critics questioned her credentials she worked at Invesco Perpetual between 1999 and 2009, and was Senior Investment Officer and Head of Corporate Governance. Invesco declined to say what these roles involved. Typically in the UK financial industry, a senior investment officer manages client money. The five former Invesco employees said she did not manage a large team or look after client money".
Thracian Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 I'm delighted the May blossoms haven't talked their colleagues into warping the outcome with tactical voting - it was the kind of underhand trick that cost Remain their momentum and I just hope the Leadsom character assassination falls flat as well. May seems allied to the kind of chums who'd probably mock their own mums to get their own way. But the chance is there now for the Conservative membership to fight the May poll with the help of two resilient Churchillian fingers. It'll still be a fierce fight Leadsom's always been the only committed Brexit candidate. Her (reported) views would appear sympathetic to at least some concerns of the many Labour voters who sided with Brexit;;.potentially a uniting factor in itself. She didn't score an own goal to match May's Trident comment. And she didn't offend the spirit of British fair play in the leadership battle and that matter's just as much as Junck Male's threats over the referendum vote. There'll doubtless be more mud thrown by irate May Day promoters, perhaps to emphasise that some of the top Tories simply never learn to fight the fight with nothing but sound argument instead of backstabs, nods and winks In the words of the song "Perhaps they'll listen now"....although I wouldn't bet on it. Cos, if Leadsom wins, she'll need sound advice in choosing her team, wisdom in abundance, unfliching courage and skin as thick as Nehemiah's walls around Jerusalem.
Thracian Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Looks as if it has already started, DJ: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3679199/UK-PM-candidate-Leadsoms-City-credentials-scrutiny.html Senior former colleagues of Leadsom are alleging that she has massively exaggerated, if not fabricated, the seniority of the positions she held in her former career in the City.... "Andrea Leadsom, a candidate to be Britain's next prime minister, is facing fresh allegations that she exaggerated her role working in financial services after putting that experience at the centre of her campaign to be the next leader. [...] Leadsom has often referred to her 25 years of experience in finance, recounting how she spent the weekend helping Eddie George, the late governor of the Bank of England, calming the fears of bankers after the merchant bank Barings collapsed. However, Peter Norris, the chief executive of Barings at the time, said he could not remember her playing a role in the failed attempt to rescue the bank, one of the biggest financial crises in modern British history. [...] Reuters spoke to five former Invesco colleagues, including four in senior management positions, who said Leadsom did not have a prominent role or manage client money. [...] Leadsom said on her CV published by her spokesman after critics questioned her credentials she worked at Invesco Perpetual between 1999 and 2009, and was Senior Investment Officer and Head of Corporate Governance. Invesco declined to say what these roles involved. Typically in the UK financial industry, a senior investment officer manages client money. The five former Invesco employees said she did not manage a large team or look after client money". Wonder why they've not said any of this before!
The Guvnor Posted 7 July 2016 Posted 7 July 2016 Looks as if it has already started, DJ: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/wires/reuters/article-3679199/UK-PM-candidate-Leadsoms-City-credentials-scrutiny.html Senior former colleagues of Leadsom are alleging that she has massively exaggerated, if not fabricated, the seniority of the positions she held in her former career in the City.... "Andrea Leadsom, a candidate to be Britain's next prime minister, is facing fresh allegations that she exaggerated her role working in financial services after putting that experience at the centre of her campaign to be the next leader. [...] Leadsom has often referred to her 25 years of experience in finance, recounting how she spent the weekend helping Eddie George, the late governor of the Bank of England, calming the fears of bankers after the merchant bank Barings collapsed. However, Peter Norris, the chief executive of Barings at the time, said he could not remember her playing a role in the failed attempt to rescue the bank, one of the biggest financial crises in modern British history. [...] Reuters spoke to five former Invesco colleagues, including four in senior management positions, who said Leadsom did not have a prominent role or manage client money. [...] Leadsom said on her CV published by her spokesman after critics questioned her credentials she worked at Invesco Perpetual between 1999 and 2009, and was Senior Investment Officer and Head of Corporate Governance. Invesco declined to say what these roles involved. Typically in the UK financial industry, a senior investment officer manages client money. The five former Invesco employees said she did not manage a large team or look after client money". The Theresa affiliated Tories are running scared as they think middle England will vote Andrea in, I can believe anything about the other rag tailed Corbyn obsessed gang but these are the Torys for goodness sake.
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.