b3ta.com board
You are not logged in. Login or Signup
Home » Messageboard » Message 10703256 (Thread)

# In fairness
She has milked a system set up by labour, throughout the labour years. Like many others did with their seemingly endless pot of money.

Thing is, if the cash dries up, 3500 jobs will go. I know that means that Mr Taxpayer saves their salaries, but that's still a lot more people on the dole. Ironic...
(, Sun 26 Feb 2012, 20:53, archived)
# Eh?
Because a set of crooks defrauded a system that happened to be set up by a Labour government, it's Labour's fault?

I suppose if you were mugged in the street, you'd think "Serves me right for going for a walk"...?
(, Sun 26 Feb 2012, 22:11, archived)
# In fairness
"...She has milked a system set up by labour, throughout the labour years. Like many others did with their seemingly endless pot of money."

---------------------------------------------------------

Funny that her 'earnings' accelerated under Call Me Dave, though: £8.6million in the last year (the Coalition's been in power nearly two years).

And even the Daily Mail - no friends or defenders of New Labour - say:
www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2106051/Emma-Harrison-resigns-A4e-quitting-government-role-amid-fraud-claims.html

"...the company, which started running welfare-to-work schemes under New Labour and has flourished under the Coalition."

Repeat, FLOURISHED under the Coalition.

Also, don't forget that Call Me Dave personally appointed her as his Family Tsar AFTER concerns about her company's fraudulent activities had been raised, not to mention conflicts of interest in which "...she was recommending which firms should be used in the programme [to help 120,000 'problem families' into employment] while her own company was bidding for the work."

And I wouldn't worry if her company, A4e, goes belly-up and 3,500 more people join the dole queue - after all, the Department for Work and Pensions has already "...declared ministers had ‘no emotional attachment’ to A4e, because there were so many other firms willing to bid for its Work Programme contracts," so presumably one of those other companies will help them back into work in no time. I mean, they must be awfully good if they're getting all that money from the government, mustn't they?
(, Sun 26 Feb 2012, 22:54, archived)