Huguenot

X-Post methinks ;-)

EDITED Sorry katie1997, it was UDT who was talking RBS. He listed RBS share price and general problems with business banking as reasons why Hester shouldn't get his bonus. The first was undoubtedly part of his targets (but don't leap to any conclusions about what that target was, if he was under instructions to downsize the business the share price target may not have been higher). The second as a general cause would not have been part of his target, although I understand there was an RBS specific target related to this, and that he achieved it. There were also targets about shedding staff and cutting costs which he achieved. It may be that the public don't agree with these targets, but then that's why the public aren't running the bank.

It's a bit like Cameron slamming down his hand and announcing a tax on the UK production of Camembert and Bordeaux.

Check you're not in a conservation area where the choice of windows may be limited!

Katie you've just done what everyone else has done and laid the general problems of the financial industry at the feet of one man - effectively 'he can't be paid because I don't like banks'. That's not good enough. Individuals must receive performance targets for extraordinary achievements that are specific, measurable, attainable, relevant and time-bound. Upon their completion they should recieve whatever reward was agreed at the start of the process. A breach in agreements of this kind means the end of effective internal motivation and organisation and usually a failed business. You may well have an issue with the original performance targets and reward set by the board, but that's nothing to do with Hester, and he must not be singled out and attacked for completing his objectives. Incidentally, if you had set an original target for Hester of solving the world financial crisis I don't think he'd have take the job, do you? So that would have been fucked up too. It's notable that the bonus demand for the tube station workers fails the first part of the test for a bonus - in that they're for extraordinary achievement - something for which simply turning up at work during the Olympics and doing their mandated job doesn't count. "Let's be honest, you think it's right to reward boardroom failure, don't you? What you want is huge rewards for the elites while the rest of us struggle to make ends meet." Yeah sure I do. Perhaps I should make some sweeping statements about what you think, start putting words in your mouth and see how you respond? Not that good huh?

I don't have an aversion to public sector UDT. You may be confused my aversion to people who claim early retirement and inflated pensions paid for by people who have neither, with some problem with public sector workers. It's not. Neither do I have a grudge against LU workers - I simply have a disagreement with people who hold the city to ransom for being asked to do their job. I used to be employed by the BBC. Incidentally, you may be confusing public service with public sector. The public sector are those products and services provided by government. The BBC is not public sector. It is not provided by nor controlled by government. The BBC charter usually exceeds electoral terms and remains unchanged regardless of the political intent of the government. The BBC has a public service responsibility linked to the fact that it derives revenue through the License fee. It is also subject to a government regulator to ensure it delivers on these commitments. The regulator cannot dictate editorial policy or reportage. The only service with a BBC 'name' that is provided by government is the BBC World Service. As such it is significantly affected by foregin policy - in the sense that its funding in particular areas was affected by government diktat - effectively ensuring they called the shots. The government funding for World Service has been removed from 2014.

Not sure what you're saying there, UDT? What was that regarding?

Ah well, having lived overseas for the last 7 years, I know that in the majority of the rest of the world, the BBC is valued because of the independence of its world coverage. So perhaps your view on whether it's covering 'government foreign policy' or not depends simply upon whether its reporting to you what you want to hear?

:))

Do they need to be on radio - or will internet radio stations do? UDT, New Nexus, Lady Deliah and HAL9000 will know a few that tell you the real truth about what goes on in the world ;-) Monica might know one that cures listeners of an instability in their auras.

It's not the first time. When I lived on Crawthew Grove there was much debate about cars that often turned up in the demarcated area in front of the electrical shop next to the EDD (Dulwich Hifi Station??). I don't know if it's still there anymore? If I remember rightly there was some discussion about the fact that although they could park cars there, they didn't actually have the right to drive them into place. There was also a question of whether they could legally use that as a sales forecourt. In the end it was just a discussion about balancing the needs and justfiable expectations of pedestrians and the local community, compared with the rights of the shopkeeper.

This discussion seems to have taken on some sort of class war positioning, with the great unwashed supporting the right of fast food merchants to turn the pavement into a parking lot against the perceived snobbery of the new middle class. It doesn't seem to be very fair. In particular it seems to be most obtuse to claim that parking mopeds on the pavement has equivalence to an outdoor cafe area. It clearly doesn't. It doesn't seem to me to be 'extreme' to protest about pavement clutter, and need not be seen as snobbery. I'm sure that the vehicles parked outside the other shops are just as unedifying.

Except it wasn't a vote fazer71 - there was no %turnout before councillors make the decision because it wasn't a vote. The councillors are there to make the decision, that's what they were elected for. We don't make decisions by referendum, we're a representative democracy. We elect representatives. It was an opinion seeking exercise. As such it was money well spent - it established the criteria for a CPZ, initiated discussions for and against, stimulated research into the effectiveness of these initiatives, opened up the community to larger questions about responsibilities for our immediate environment and concerns for others. I'd say it was an absolute ROARING success! :))

?lectricit? de France

"Approximately 70% of your posts are total bullsh!t." Excellent, I'm most grateful for your exceptional statistical analysis. I shall add this to your list of accolades. Come on UDT, you just came onto this thread looking for a fight as an excuse to throw insults at me didn't you? You haven't added anything intelligent. It's impractical and foolish to attempt to run a business on the basis of public opinion applied in hindsight - particularly since the public (excepting your own extraordinary banking skills of course) is not qualified nor experienced enough to make those calls. If HMG had not wanted to pay large performance bonuses they had the option to decide that at the time the contract was created and before Hester was employed. Had they not done so it's possible that a smaller salary would not have attracted the appropriate staff and the business could have failed. If that had been the case, the 'public' would have lost 45bn rather than paid out a 1m performance bonus (in shares not cash) and I have no doubt that the public would be yelling for blood on that basis. So you see, your blah blah blah about bankers and bonuses is just hot air. It's uninspired and uninsightful. It's a knee jerk reaction that betrays no evidence of careful consideration at all. In short - it's boringly half witted. Next?

If the Solio Bolt lives upto its promise it must be pretty effective.

The lights are on but no-one's home. Still, we're honoured to have your company despite the pressures of your premiership football career, exceptional hifi appraisal business, and the attentions of the paparazzi due to your much celebrated gardening expertise. All you've done is reiterate claims I've already dismembered. Either you didn't read what I wrote or you didn't understand it. Incidentally, Hester did not create the problems at RBS. he was employed afterwards to clear the mess up. Whatever people's thoughts on bankers, Hester took up a contract in good faith, delivered against performance goals, and does not deserve to be singled out and maltreated as a scapegoat for public disgust with bankers.

Here's a blackbird from my home town...

I imagine the unions are obsessed about the size of Hester's bonus I'm saying the unions don't care about the taxpayer, the British public, or the importance of keeping the British banking system functioning. As we saw in the 1970s, the unions are quite prepared to fuck everything up to indulge their stupid greed and power crazes. Nor (for some reason) do they care about Hester's contractual expectation of performance related pay. If he was one of their own members they'd have the entire workforce out on strike. The board of RBS identified an individual ro fulfil a critical role and created a package likely to attract him. Within that were performance related elements to save both RBS and the taxpayers 45 billion quid. This bonus is a payment attached to the achievement of that objective. Whatever the unions view on executive salaries, Hester as an individual and his bonus are none of their business.

Eh what Loz? "Gerrymandering is a practice that attempts to establish a political advantage for a particular party or group by manipulating geographic boundaries to create partisan, incumbent-protected districts." What on earth does that have to do with the CPZ???? "If you view it as a vote.." It wasn't a vote. If it was a vote it would have been called a 'vote'. It wasn't. At no point did anyone suggest it was a vote apart from those complaining about it not being a vote. It was a consultation on the opinions of local residents on a CPZ. I frequently ask people their opinion. It doesn't mean I agree with it or that I do as they say.

Interesting. According to the RSPB most nocturnal warblers (like nightingales) are migratory birds, so they wouldn't be around at this time of year. Reed and sedge warblers do stick around, but they're unlikely to be found in cities. Apparently the most likely candidate is a robin. It's the streelights that mess them up.

No, my problem is that they appear to be demanding a bonus because they have to work harder. You're trying to deflect from this point by claiming this is a grudge against LU staff - a typical union negotiating approach when their position is pathetic. If they are being asked to work longer that's a different issue, and a fixed fee bonus for hitting a particular number of hours overtime is a sensible approach to hitting company objectives. If the money comes out of LU and goes to the employees IT IS an additional net cost to the taxpayer, either in a less reduced subsidy or an increased subsidy. It cannot be anything else. Money doesn't grow on trees. Regarding Hester my understanding is that this was a performance based bonus for cutting 0.5 trillion quid off the banks exposure. Whether you think this is appropriate or not is completely irrelevant. Hester was brought in after the crash to save the bank. He was offered a performance based contract to achieve this and has. There are questions over whether bonuses of this size are effective, and whether they influence performance - but that is fuck all to do with Hester, and is irrelevant to his payment now. The board were correct to threaten to resign en masse if this was arrangement was overturned, as the bank would lose all credibility, most of the senior staff and its value would collapse. As a result the taxpayers would risk losing the ?45bn they have so far invested in keeping it afloat. My guess is the unions wouldn't give a shit about this, because they don't care about the taxpayer, and sticking one on the management would be much more important than fucking up the nation.

If the taxpayer is subsidising the tube, then it means that the tube's expenses do not cover it's outgoings. Therefore ANY additional expenditure comes from the taxpayer - either in the form of subsidy that is not being reduced or subsidy that has to be increased. That's it Chippy. It's maths. The claim that it does not come from the taxpayer is a typical union con. That it would 'come from the additional journeys' is also a con. If the payment did not have to be made then the money from the additional journeys would go into LU running funds, and the subsidy would not need to be as high, or subsidy increases would not need to be so large. Now I suspect you know that's the truth - as do the unions. The unions don't want to admit it because they secretly know that they're a parasite on the most needy people in society. Sucking money from hardworking people's pockets to put it in their own. Whatever way you look at it this money is coming from the taxpayer. End of story.

Really RUBBISH. Makes me so angry. (6)

I really hope you get her. A lot of the Smart Cars in S London used to come from the Surrey Smart Car Centre in Purley. I'm guessing that if it was proper smashed up she'd have needed to take it to a specialist rather than a panel beater, so they might be a good place to start? There's only 7 centres that could do a major service in South London: smart Croydon smart Stratford (Aftersales only) smart Brentford smart Epsom (Aftersales only) smart Dartford (Aftersales only) smart Colindale smart Loughton A totalled car coming in over the Christmas holiday with probably a few major parts to order would be hard to forget? One of the managers might get a bit jobsworth about telling you, but I'm guessing a family man mechanic might be more forthcoming if you approached him casually first and explained your predicament? The maximum penalty for failing to stop after an accident is 5 ? 10 penalty points, a fine of up to ?5000 and a driving ban at the discretion of the court. You'd also get damages. You can make her really regret this ;-)