(Jun 24, 2017 06:15 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]Guess who is getting the bill? If you said taxpayer then congratulations. Smelling more like organized crime as investigation moves forward. Offending company(ies) soon to wave goodbye, just my guess.
who knows.
i would launch an independant home office investigation into the financial dealings to make sure none of the money went over seas and wound up in the pockets of terrorists or Slave traders for starters and then simply hand that evidence over to the high court for a behind closed doors inquiry.
once all the appropriate people had been rounded up and interviewed in secret to prevent lynching or bribery(or any suicides by people involved['HELP' prevent, obviousely you can not stop someone who is determined unles you lock them up and even then it becomes extremely expensive & few countrys support such things]) i would then release the information to a public inquiry which would innitiate legal changes to close any loop holes and ensure regulations are not only clear modern and concise but forward looking and reasonable to the same duty of care that is stipulated in the work place saftey act.
There is soo much money involved.
as far as recovering the cost... "compulsory insurance?"
Why is there no compuslory busines insurance.
There is compulsory Motor Vehicle insurance even though the injurys are covered by tax payer funded medical system.
for starters those who deliberately skirted the regulations and should have known the regulations should have their houses taken away from them so they are legally forced to live in council flats for the rest of their lives.
The essence of regulation in the UK is that it should be 'light' - the reasons for this are political and could easily be interpreted (perhaps by me) as setting up one bunch of crooks to support another bunch of crooks. On the one hand we trust (potentially) a bunch of crooks to act 'reasonably' and on the other hand we arrange that any fines or penalties will never be greater than any profit made. As far as I know anyone profiting from or laundering money through a UK regulated industry can be absolutely sure they will never end up in prison.
(Jun 25, 2017 12:39 AM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]The essence of regulation in the UK is that it should be 'light' - the reasons for this are political and could easily be interpreted (perhaps by me) as setting up one bunch of crooks to support another bunch of crooks. On the one hand we trust (potentially) a bunch of crooks to act 'reasonably' and on the other hand we arrange that any fines or penalties will never be greater than any profit made. As far as I know anyone profiting from or laundering money through a UK regulated industry can be absolutely sure they will never end up in prison.
while it may appear to be that way from the outside to some...
There is a history behind it.
Unlike a capitalist country there is a national will to seek collective betterment.
Thus society as a whole have embraced the idea that society should learn and progress from mistakes & errors.
The Litigious somewhat canabalistic approach to liabalist issues of the USA is a social reaction to having no effective safety net for the average working class person.
Different cultures, different Values.
The anarchistic reactionary culture developed in the USA against prohibition and the related extremist religious manipulation of laws & Government is something the UK does not suffer from as a negative conflict paradigm.
They have had a few centurys of war and so have learned to seek a different way.
The Question is will they be able to maintain it in the face of pressure to abandon a strong social stability and move toward privatisation & a general lack of caring for people in exchange for sall personal financial gain in the short term and massive personal financial loss in the long term.
"Some" US people want to claim they care about their fellow citizen as much if not more than British, but that is clearly not the case.
Is this an american Ganster issue of organised crime ?
or a system of Oligarcy of the rich eating the poor ?
or a laxidaisical approach to regulation by Leadership who seek to walk in the opposite direction of regulations to ensure their own political future ?
Governments do not wish to employ many trade/installation inspectors. Tradesmen here at least fall under what's called self regulation. Most times deficiencies are discovered after the fact or whenever something happens. Doesn't help victims of poor workmanship though.
(Jun 25, 2017 03:23 AM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]Governments do not wish to employ many trade/installation inspectors. Tradesmen here at least fall under what's called self regulation. Most times deficiencies are discovered after the fact or whenever something happens. Doesn't help victims of poor workmanship though.
march of the orwellian safety inspector.
i wonder why car insurance is not self regulated. instead they have a massively costly mechanism (police) enforcing this regulation.
yet there is much more money involved in the trade industry.
on one hand you have the
"stop making me safe"
and on the other
"Stop costing me money"
like the saying goes
"you can either have the job done properly, or ... you can have the job done cheaply, ... you cant have both....now pick one"
like the saying goes
"you can either have the job done properly, or ... you can have the job done cheaply, ... you cant have both....now pick one"
Once again proving the age old adage, 'You get what you pay for"
(Jun 25, 2017 01:20 PM)Zinjanthropos Wrote: [ -> ]like the saying goes
"you can either have the job done properly, or ... you can have the job done cheaply, ... you cant have both....now pick one"
Once again proving the age old adage, 'You get what you pay for"
i am wondering if the "cheap" option was equally used on government buildings.
all-building-cladding-samples-tested-failed-fire-safety
https://www.tvnz.co.nz/one-news/world/uk...ire-safety
(Jun 27, 2017 01:08 AM)confused2 Wrote: [ -> ]There's a company LABC which is interesting.
https://www.labc.co.uk/
The website looks impressive.
Companies House tells a different story..
https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/compa...ng-history
Who gets paid and for what will always be a mystery.
I'm sure this will involve people who have tea with the Queen but I haven't found one yet.
Quote:I'm sure this will involve people who have tea with the Queen but I haven't found one yet.
i do not understand your comment.
Are you refering to the Queen personally, or by Queen do you mean a symbolic statesperson appearing to wave national flags on camera but go about behind backs canabalising the country for personal profit ?