Donate SIGN UP

Should Cable pay the £300,000?

Avatar Image
Kakurol | 20:54 Fri 18th Feb 2011 | News
9 Answers
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-12509829

Last year, Vince Cable made a remark that he had "declared war" on Rupert Murdoch and was subsequently stripped of his involvement in deciding media competition issues, the responsibility for that being handed over to the culture secretary, Jeremy Hunt.

That transfer will cost taxpayers £300,000 pounds - £280,000 for IT changes and £20,000 for moving staff and materials.

In these days of cuts, why should the taxpayer have to fork out so much money for this nincompoop's faux-pas?
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 9 of 9rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by Kakurol. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Quite so.

But the bigger question should be why does it cost £300k for such a straightforward change. No private business would incur such costs if the responsibility for a function was transferred from one department to another.
But if the Labour party had listened to him he could have prevented the crash in the banking sector saving £bns.
When the Lib Dems had no prospect of power, they had the luxury of saying what they liked, as nobody listened to them.

Vince Cable got so used to this that he's now a loose cannon. That's politics...
Question Author
rov1100, I refer you to one of my earlier questions http://www.theanswerb...s/Question989791.html - the man's reputation is unfounded.
Question Author
this is the link http://www.theanswerb...s/Question892339.html I meant to post
Can't comment about V Cable being charged but I agree with New Judge about the price of this seemingly minor shift. I have spent some time working in civil service and never cease to be amazed at the prices that are charged for elementary things. These are just paid without question.
We always have, do, and will - so what's new?
//But the bigger question should be why does it cost £300k for such a straightforward change. No private business would incur such costs if the responsibility for a function was transferred from one department to another. //

And this is the tory party who have frequently accused labour of squandering tax payers money .
When Gordon Brown sold a lot of our gold at a low price it cost this country billions as the price of gold shot up and I believe is now as high as ever.

Should the so called economic expert pay that back !

It still annoys me that the idiot did that even though experts at the time were telling him not too.

He was such an arrogant know all who was a disaster for this country,.

1 to 9 of 9rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Should Cable pay the £300,000?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.