[Existentialist]

Watching it now seeing that Charlie whatshisface trying to 'grill' the G4S bloke saying people will be 'horrified' by this 'fiasco'.

What the hell? I couldn't give too hoots if there aren't enough stewards at the Olympic games. The G4S guy gave calm and detailed answers, expressed his regret and all the 'journalist' could do was to keep banging on asking him the same questions.

It made me realise why I don't watch this excuse for a news programme.

I can't stand journalists sometimes!

[5 a day]

A 'London' story, should be kept to their regional news...

[petely]

Originally Posted by Existentialist

Watching it now seeing that Charlie whatshisface trying to 'grill' the G4S bloke saying people will be 'horrified' by this 'fiasco'.

What the hell? I couldn't give too hoots if there aren't enough stewards at the Olympic games. The G4S guy gave calm and detailed answers, expressed his regret and all the 'journalist' could do was to keep banging on asking him the same questions.

It made me realise why I don't watch this excuse for a news programme.

I can't stand journalists sometimes!

To be fair, breakfast shows don't really count as "news". Although the presenters do read out headlines, they don't exactly display any journalistic qualities. At best they're simple, easy magazine programmes - not meant to challenge viewers or provide any depth.
I do agree though, that all this London-local stuff should be confined to BBC London.

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by Existentialist

What the hell? I couldn't give too hoots if there aren't enough stewards at the Olympic games.

Perhaps you will do once you are aware that

G4S will be paid £280 million for this "service", and apparently as no penalty clause was inserted into their contract, they will receive this money even if they fall short on what is required of them.

Any shortfall in personnel will be made up with armed forces (at taxpayer expense) or the police (at taxpayer expense). And drafting in police will mean that some, if not all, will be withdrawn from other duties elsewhere.

A lack of security staff (they are not simply stewards) could mean a lack of overall security and an increased risk of disruption or increased danger to the public

[ronant]

Originally Posted by 5 a day

A 'London' story, should be kept to their regional news...

LOL you think a major story regarding the biggest event in the world should be covered on the regional news?!

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by 5 a day

A 'London' story, should be kept to their regional news...

Is it? I'm from the Midlands, and G4S have fallen short on their commitment for security at the Ricoh Arena in Coventry (used for the football), meaning that it is likely that police officers from the local force (not London) will be drafted in to backfill.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...ngham-18822258

[Existentialist]

Originally Posted by mossy2103

Perhaps you will do once you are aware that

G4S will be paid £280 million for this "service", and apparently as no penalty clause was inserted into their contract, they will receive this money even if they fall short on what is required of them.

Any shortfall in personnel will be made up with armed forces (at taxpayer expense) or the police (at taxpayer expense). And drafting in police will mean that some, if not all, will be withdrawn from other duties elsewhere.

A lack of security staff (they are not simply stewards) could mean a lack of overall security and an increased risk of disruption or increased danger to the public

Nope. I still couldn't give two hoots.

[Molly Hunt]

Originally Posted by 5 a day

A 'London' story, should be kept to their regional news...

You're joking ... aren't you?

[Tassium]

In this country the government of the day for the last 30 years just keep cooking up ever more elaborate ways to gift tax-payers money to private companies, who then often do a 2nd rate job with no consequences.

Has to be said the Conservatives are quite keen, but Labour did it too. And surely the Lib-Dems would be going mental for it if they could.


Where has all this come from? Is it the lobbying? The party political donations from wealthy donors with links to major companies?

It's surely time it was ended.

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by Existentialist

Nope. I still couldn't give two hoots.

That's fine, simply ignore the next similar report (of which there will be many, spread across the broadcasters and media), meanwhile those that do have an interest in, or concern about the current shambolic state of affairs will watch/listen/read.

Job done.

[Straker]

Originally Posted by mossy2103

Any shortfall in personnel will be made up with armed forces (at taxpayer expense) or the police (at taxpayer expense). And drafting in police will mean that some, if not all, will be withdrawn from other duties elsewhere.

That’s not correct. G4S will be covering the cost of all additional personnel that they’ve failed to supply.

G4S met the government’s/LOCOG’s original numbers requested but their failing came when agreeing to supply thousands more, late in the day, when the numbers went from 3500 (IIRC) to 10k.

G4S bloke on R4’s Today claimed that they would now be making a 30-50m loss on this contract. Sounds like horseshit to me.

[Mark F]

People will care if their is a terrorist attack...

Also the taxpayer is having to fork out for all this.

[Pedro]

Originally Posted by Existentialist

Watching it now seeing that Charlie whatshisface trying to 'grill' the G4S bloke saying people will be 'horrified' by this 'fiasco'.

What the hell? I couldn't give too hoots if there aren't enough stewards at the Olympic games. The G4S guy gave calm and detailed answers, expressed his regret and all the 'journalist' could do was to keep banging on asking him the same questions.

It made me realise why I don't watch this excuse for a news programme.

I can't stand journalists sometimes!

Sebastian Coe..................is that you?

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by Straker

That’s not correct. G4S will be covering the cost of all additional personnel that they’ve failed to supply.

If that's the case, then I must admit that I had missed that update to the situation. the fact still remains that these backfill staff will still need to be drawn from elsewhere 9especially the Police), so there will still be an impact, even if it is not a financial one.

[lundavra]

Originally Posted by mossy2103

Perhaps you will do once you are aware that

G4S will be paid £280 million for this "service", and apparently as no penalty clause was inserted into their contract, they will receive this money even if they fall short on what is required of them.

Any shortfall in personnel will be made up with armed forces (at taxpayer expense) or the police (at taxpayer expense). And drafting in police will mean that some, if not all, will be withdrawn from other duties elsewhere.

A lack of security staff (they are not simply stewards) could mean a lack of overall security and an increased risk of disruption or increased danger to the public

The contract is confidential and there have been many suggestions that there are penalty clauses but someone made a statement some days ago there were none even though they seem to have no evidence of this.

It has been said many times by officials that G4S will be billed for any extra costs i.e. armed forces called in to cover for them.

I suspect the job will be done much better by the army than G4S anyway so security could be improved.

I did not see the interview on TV but I think it was the same person (head of G4S) who was interviewed on the Today programme this morning. It was one of the most uncovincing interviews I have heard for ages, he waffled so much that you began to feel sorry for the chap. But he could not hid the fact that his company has made a complete mess of this.

I wonder if G4S will still be around in a year's time? I suspect it will at least have a complete unrelated new name even if not taken over by another company.

[lundavra]

Originally Posted by Mark F

People will care if their is a terrorist attack...

Also the taxpayer is having to fork out for all this.

If there is a terrorist attack then I don't think a spotty youth from the Jobcentre in a G4S uniform will be much use in either preventing it or when it occurs.

[ftv]

Charlie Stayt is no Jeremy Paxman and never uses two words when two hundred will do.

[dermott100]

Originally Posted by Existentialist

What the hell? I couldn't give too hoots if there aren't enough stewards at the Olympic games.

Coo that is some reply. You're not, by any chance, a suicide bomber, are you?

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by lundavra

I wonder if G4S will still be around in a year's time? I suspect it will at least have a complete unrelated new name even if not taken over by another company.

G4S have been involved in a few issues previously, the one that springs to mind is this one:

Private security firm G4S has sacked two members of staff who tagged a man's false leg allowing him to remove it and break a court-imposed curfew.

The pair were fooled by Christopher Lowcock, 29, who wrapped the prosthetic limb in a bandage when G4S set up the system at his Rochdale home.

He was then able to remove the limb and break a curfew imposed for offences involving drugs, driving and a weapon.

G4S sacked the pair for committing a serious disciplinary offence, it said.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-14705328

It was also involved with the 100% lockdown for nearly a day at Birmingham Prison after a set of keys fitting every door went missing.

As Group 4, it was also the security firm transporting prisoners involved in a number of escapes.

I suspect that it will reappear with yet another new name, as the existing name might be seen as too toxic.

[petely]

Originally Posted by lundavra

If there is a terrorist attack then I don't think a spotty youth from the Jobcentre in a G4S uniform will be much use in either preventing it or when it occurs.

That's even assuming they can speak english

[Killary45]

Originally Posted by 5 a day

A 'London' story, should be kept to their regional news...

Is this the most ridiculous post ever on this forum?

We are told that security for the Olympics is just a 'London' story which should be kept on regional news?

An event costing the taxpayer over £9 billion involving 200 nations with a worldwide TV audience of billions is a local news story?

[walterwhite]

Originally Posted by 5 a day

A 'London' story, should be kept to their regional news...

The Olympics isn't just being held in London you know.

[walterwhite]

Originally Posted by lundavra

If there is a terrorist attack then I don't think a spotty youth from the Jobcentre in a G4S uniform will be much use in either preventing it or when it occurs.

They will if they are doing bag searches and manning X ray machines.

[Straker]

Originally Posted by walterwhite

The Olympics isn't just being held in London you know.

Indeed. There’s football in Cardiff with, unsurprisingly to everyone except Seb Coe, thousands of tickets still available. Having spent an interminable long weekend in Cardiff I can quite understand why tickets remain unsold.

[mossy2103]

Originally Posted by walterwhite

The Olympics isn't just being held in London you know.

Indeed, there was a report this morning from the sailing venue (Weymouth I think, well, it most certainly was not London) where they said that on a good day around 86% of the allocated G4S staff turn up, but on a bad day only around 41% turn up.