Title

The PalArse of Westminster

Text

Exposing the hypocrisy, greed and incompetence of our "respected" elected political "elite".

Friday 1 November 2024

Reeves' Weasel Goes Pop - Budget Adds £2.5K Per Minimum Wage Employee

 


 

Pre election, the media and Civil Service went into hysteria when Tories claimed Labour’s plans would increase taxes by £2,000 per working household.

This will of course mean less people are employed and consumer prices will increase.

David Goldstone - Mr "Value for Money"


Ladies and gentlemen please be upstanding for the CEO of The Value for Money Department - Mr David Goldstone.

In a move that has pissed large number of people off, the government has announced the creation of the Value for Money Department, appointing David Goldstone as its CEO. Goldstone, who will work just one day a week, is set to receive an eye-watering equivalent of £250,000 per annum. This decision has sparked outrage and raised serious questions about the very concept of value for money.

The Appointment of David Goldstone

David Goldstone's appointment has been met with widespread criticism, not least because of his hefty salary for a part-time role. Goldstone will be paid £950 a day for an average commitment of one day a week. This arrangement has been described as a slap in the face to taxpayers, especially given the department's mandate to ensure efficient use of public funds.

A Troubled Career

Goldstone's career has not been without controversy. He was previously involved in the collapse of Ideoba, a high-tech company that failed to secure a £150,000 loan from the Welsh government. Goldstone, who was acting as a property adviser at the time, advised against providing the loan, a decision that led to the company's closure and the loss of up to 100 jobs. This incident raised serious questions about his judgment and the appropriateness of his advice.

Goldstone's involvement with HS2 has also been problematic. As a non-executive director, he was part of the team overseeing the high-speed railway project, which has been plagued by massive budget overruns and delays. Despite his efforts, HS2 has become a symbol of government overspending and inefficiency, casting further doubt on his ability to ensure value for money.

The Irony of the Value for Money Department

The creation of the Value for Money Department, ostensibly to ensure that public funds are used efficiently, is deeply ironic given the circumstances of Goldstone's appointment. The decision to pay him such a high salary for minimal work undermines the very principles the department is supposed to uphold. It sends a troubling message about the government's priorities and its commitment to fiscal responsibility.

Public Reaction

The public reaction to this appointment has been overwhelmingly negative. Many see it as a blatant misuse of taxpayer money and a clear example of government hypocrisy. Critics argue that the funds allocated to Goldstone's salary could be better spent on essential public services or addressing pressing social issues.

Conclusion

The appointment of David Goldstone as the CEO of the Value for Money Department is a costly irony that highlights the government's questionable decision-making. Given Goldstone's troubled career and the exorbitant salary for a part-time role, this move raises serious concerns about the government's commitment to fiscal responsibility and the efficient use of public funds. As the public and media continue to scrutinise this decision, it remains to be seen whether the Value for Money Department will live up to its name.

Thursday 31 October 2024

Reeves' Bad Budget


 As per Guido:

"Labour insiders are increasingly restive over the ‘dire’ comms plan around the Budget. Reeves’s team cancelled a scheduled TV interview at no notice with GB News and Times Radio – basic poor comms handling. Meanwhile, her major defensive line is that she wouldn’t want to repeat her own budget. Needs some work…

Elsewhere, the financial media has been neglected after a series of ‘curious’ briefing decisions – including a string of denials which subsequently proved to be true when the Budget documents were released."

A budget of around £74BN (tax rises and debt), that will achive fuck all other than depress wages, depress growth, increase unemployment and pump prime inflation.

Whatever Labour might try to claim, given that they sated they wouldn't increase debt and taxes, they do not have a mandate for this budget!

Wednesday 30 October 2024

How To Hide a Clusterfuck - Dump Two Clusterfucks Within 24 Hours of Each Other

 


Monday 28 October 2024

Vote Labour or Get Beaten Up!

 

 I'm not sure beating up undecided voters is the vote winning tactic that Labour think it is!

Friday 25 October 2024

Starmer - The Autistic Ideologue Who Poses a Clear and Present Danger To Britain


Starmer is an autistic ideologue, who spent his youth in a communist Czechoslovakian work camp:

- He's of average intelligence (contrary to what some speculate), but is on the autistic spectrum

- He lacks the empathy, which explains his abrupt, sometime cruel answers (ie about pensioners). 

- His speeches are rehearsed, but he fails in interviews. 

- He lacks in sense of humour, which explains his temper when made fun of (robotic). 

- He's very rigid in his thoughts, and once he's made his mind up he won't change his mind, unless under heavy duress (giving back freebies). 

- He lacks the ability see whole systems and how they work internally, failing to see potential cause / effect, unintended consequences. 

- He focuses heavily on certain detail and ignores the rest. He's a stickler for the rules, and imposes them with authority. Anyone breaking the rules need to be punished heavily. 

- He's unashamed about the freebies, because they are within the rules, as in legal. 

- Due to low emotional intelligence (another autistic trait), he doesn't see how the freebies could be immoral, despite being legal. Low EQ also explains the monotone voice & way of speaking. 

- He doesn't hate working class people. He doesn't like any people, especially those who don't follow the rules, who he sees as inferior.

Starmer's low EQ means, he's a poor judge of character, thus he's made bad choices appointing and selecting people in positions. Due to his rigid mind set, he most likely chooses 'yes men', who then let him make these bad choices (eg Sue Gray).

He poses a clear and present danger to this country, and needs to be removed from office ASAP!

Thursday 24 October 2024

Reeves Fucks Over The Private Sector

 


Rachel Reeves’ proposed tax raid on pensions is a blatant attack on private sector workers, sparing the public sector from any financial burden. This move not only undermines the principles of fairness and equality but also exposes the Labour government’s hypocrisy.

1. A Discriminatory Policy

Reeves’ plan to impose National Insurance (NI) on employer pension contributions exclusively targets the private sector, leaving public sector pensions untouched. This discriminatory policy is expected to raise £17 billion annually, but at what cost? Private sector workers will bear the brunt of this tax raid, while public sector employees continue to enjoy their “gold-plated” pensions without any additional burden.

2. The True Cost to Private Sector Workers

The impact on private sector workers is significant. A 30-year-old private sector worker on an average salary of £35,000 could see their pension pot reduced by £13,000 by the time they retire at 67. This is a direct attack on the retirement savings of millions of hardworking individuals who have diligently contributed to their pensions.

3. Public Sector Pension Liabilities

The public sector pension liabilities are staggering. According to the Office for National Statistics, the UK government’s pension liabilities surged to £6.4 trillion between 2015 and 2018. Unfunded public sector defined benefit scheme liabilities alone stood at £1.2 trillion, or 55% of GDP. Despite these enormous liabilities, Reeves’ proposal conveniently spares the public sector from any additional financial responsibility.

4. Undermining Trust and Confidence

This proposed tax raid undermines trust and confidence in the pension system. Private sector workers are already facing economic uncertainty, and this move adds insult to injury. It sends a clear message that the Labour government prioritises public sector employees over their private sector counterparts, further deepening the divide between the two.

5. A Call for Fairness

It is imperative that any changes to pension taxation are applied fairly across both the private and public sectors. The current proposal is not only unjust but also risks alienating a significant portion of the workforce. The Labour government must reconsider this ill-advised policy and ensure that all workers are treated equitably.

In conclusion, Rachel Reeves’ proposed tax raid on private sector pensions is a betrayal of the very people who drive the economy. It is a discriminatory policy that spares the public sector from any financial burden, despite their enormous pension liabilities. The Labour government must prioritize fairness and equality, and rethink this damaging proposal.