Comments on: Three Ministers, no answers, one defeat – another typical day in the Commons

By: Steve Hemingway

Steve Hemingway — Sun, 05 Jul 2009 17:41:18 +0000

Ordinary savers in the UK get an appalling bad deal, and every time the industry is subject to more bureaucratic regulation they get a worse one. Remember when Margaret Thatcher used to talk about turning us into a share owning democracy? Some hope when nobody gains when individuals hold shares directly other than the saver and the business requiring funds for investment.

By: Adrian Peirson

Adrian Peirson — Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:21:31 +0000

And to think, these people only actually make 20% of our laws.
the other 80% are made in Brussels, layers upon layers of beaurocrats telling us what to do.
It’s easy to see how revolutions happen, not that I’m suggesting but how long is it to bonfire night.

By: Lola

Lola — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 21:31:39 +0000

It gets worse. The FSA have just published the Retail Distribution Review. I have been reading it. It is absolute nonsense. It has four legs, as it were.

1. Adviser Status. It goes on forever about how to define different types of adviser. A classic bureaucratic analysis, and entirely flawed. Differentiation is simple. Independent Advisers are agents of the client, and all that implies. Whereas everyone else is the agent for the company that employes them. Legally the former are governed by professional responsibility and the latter product floggers by caveat emptor. Simple. Next.

2. Remuneration. For the avoidance of doubt I run and entirely fee charging FS business, and have done since 1992 ish. The FSA want to ban commission. Oh yeah. Why? Everyone is paid on commission one way or another. Traffic Wardens get a per ticket bonus. HMRC get bonuses for collecting more tax. The FSA get bonuses for ‘performance’. (Quite how that is measured defeats me). So why shouldn’t product makers pay commission for their products to be distributed?

3. Qualifications. The FSA want to arbitrarily increase threshold levels. Quite apart form the fact that the existing exam structure and delivery is the monopoly of the CI, have they never heard the phrase ‘qualified success’?

4. Price Controls. They are recommending price controlled products. This is ludicrous. It is now universally understood that price controls never ever work. They always fail in one way or another, usually by killing manufacture and distribution. Hence the death of the ‘Man from the Pru.

5. Budget. The FSA gaily say that this will cost them 1.5m and the industry 450m. No. It. Won’t. It’ll cost the public that money. Economies consist of people and things. Governemnts and Companies are just admin fictions. All money is the citizens money. My FSA fees (aka Trading Tax) are nigh on £6000 for 2009/10 and I can assure you all it is the most epically poor value.

Really all the RDR is is just a bureaucrats wet dream. If I was the Tory FS spokesman I’d make it very clear that there will be a complete review of the whole FSMA2000 and that any more rules and so forth brought in between now and the election will be subject to Parliamentary scrutiny and may well get canned. If implementing them in haste has compromised businesses and customers there would be an full enquiry where nothing and no-one was sacred. That’d stop all this crap in its tracks.

By: Jon

Jon — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 19:13:37 +0000

Stephen Byers, who took over from the disgraced Mandelson, sells Railtrack, a few years later we are nationalising operating companies. Don’t worry Mandelson is back, selling Royal Mail, oh hold on he didn’t after spending millions on the project. Prescott turns up saying its wonderfull as his train turned up on time. No Prescott, it’s not actually been nationalised just yet. Go back to Hull where you spent millions demolishing sturdy Victorian homes to replace them with new ones. Brown says 0 percent is growth but forgets about debt. Oh and then some twonk said Northern Rock may be sold in the Autumn for a large profit. How amazing, a 3.4 billion toxic debt write off by the taxpayer and we can also look forward to a huge profit.

This waiting for an election thing just doesn’t cut it. They would be sacked (and worse-ed)

Wouldn’t it be nice instead of taxes we used shares. Invest in this government if you want to, if not withhold your money and give it to someone else like happens elsewhere.

By: Matthew Reynolds

Matthew Reynolds — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:30:08 +0000

What a shower ! No wonder the PM has had to make so many Peers into ministers .If that is the best of the PLP then Heaven protect us from the worst…..

By: alan jutson

alan jutson — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 17:58:41 +0000

Lola
Agreed

Another Labour project to be killed off before it is born.

What planet do these people live on ?

Who dreams up these stupid thoughts, clearly not someone on low income or on Benefits.

By: James

James — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:42:43 +0000

I’m sure I heard on the radio that Brown is framing new laws to stop US from borrowing irresponsibly???????

By: NigelC

NigelC — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 13:03:00 +0000

Sounds similar to my local council debate on approving the annual accounts when we were promised written answers to our questions after the meeting but still asked to vote the accounts through

By: Acorn

Acorn — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 11:42:31 +0000

Yesterday in parliament was a hoot. Have you ever seen such a display of government incompetence and arrogance, unbelievable!

Is it time for me to reprise my case for separating the “executive” from the “legislature”; (see numerous previous posts)? There was a glimmer of hope on the government benches from the member for Nottingham North. His speech is worth a read (Hansard Col’s 340 – 343). Particularly col., 343.

“… but one day, when we have a self-respecting and self-confident Parliament, we will have our own parliamentary draftspeople and our own right to legal advice on going to war or whatever it may be. We will have our own capabilities to transform the legislative framework. At the moment, we have an Executive who are not directly elected by the British people taking the advice of a civil service that has no familiarity whatever with the ballot box. Members of this House are being overseen by people who have no understanding of electoral politics and our democracy, but who decide on the rights of Members.”

Perhaps he should draft a private members bill to enact his suggestions; transform the legislative framework and our democracy; and, the public purse.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200809/cmhansrd/cm090701/debtext/90701-0010.htm#09070159001899

By: pipesmoker

pipesmoker — Thu, 02 Jul 2009 10:29:00 +0000

Apart from the issue of the sovereignty of parliament, which must be the major concern, that they should propose criminal sanctions with lesser penalties for MP’s than for the same crimes committed members of the general public just about tells me all I need to know about the present government.

Crimes committed by MP’s who are found guilty and constitute an abuse of the trust placed in them by their unique position should attract higher penalties in my humble opinion?

Again some excellent input from the opposition benches which was mostly ignored.