Heinz wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 2:58pm:


Nothing could provide us with greater and even more convincing evidence that all the previous actions and obfuscations of Ofcom in preserving and defending the retention of 084/7 numbers has been with the express blessing of the New Labour government that was principally responsible for deliberately allowing their cancerous explosion across the uk call centre industry.

If the job is Ofcom CEO then only paid up New Labour cronies need apply.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 6:11pm:


Then why do New Labour seem to believe that a big stick and a large hammer are the best way to deal with drivers committing minor breaches of the speed limit (or for that matter using mobile phones while driving without a hands free kit) that have almost nothing to do with the death rate on the roads ceasing its previous fall of many years - the real reason being New Labour's total failure to invest in developing the UK road network in proportion to the continued expansion in levels of traffic and instead tipping the money in to the NHS and the schools where it largely disappears without any obvious evidence of improvement.

And why do Labour think they need to spy on our every move on the internet and our every movement in and out of the country and around the country (via ID cards and APNR systems) as though we are all prison inmates while thinking that ruthless big businesses are all jolly decent chaps who will never try and form cartels and shaft the consumer in every possible way they can get away with?  There is only one explanation which is that their natura tendency is actually to control everything but they make an exception when it comes to their major financial benefactors in big business, many of whom have their tentacles deeply entwined in the 084/7 revenue gravy train.  Or another of them called Newscorp keeps telling everyone to vote Labour in its newspapers as long as New Labour keep making regulations (via Ofcom) that allow Sky to continue its excess dominance of the UK pay tv marketplace.

Quote:


Definitely not.  It is political support from New Labour for the NTS call centre industry that has led Ofcom to ignore large responses by the public to consultations (given that most consultations that are then listened to get far less responses) by Ofcom and ICSTIS saying that it is wholly unacceptable.  It is New Labour politics and their covert support for the NTS call centre industry that has actually kept it in business.  A Conservative government would at the very least have ensured that all revenue shares lines were prominently labelled with a different number code and clearly priced so that the consumer could then make a rational choice and the market would operate efficiently.

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 7^th, 2008 at 10:54pm:


You didn't make clear you distinction between your views on Politics with a large and a small p in your previous post.

I still think Politics with a large P also has its place in this campaign because the ability of Labour MPs to make a fuss is ultimately constrained by the fact that it is their government that set up and also always approves the final selection of the CEO of Ofcom.  Whereas MPs of other parties have no need to appear to show tacit support for the glorious Frankenstein like Ofcom creation made up of several previously far more competent and effective regulators (OFTEL excepted of course).

SilentCallsVictim wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 12:00am:


Not to mention the forum's "Supreme Members".

Whilst the briefing work you are doing is undoubtedly admirable SCV I wonder if a lack of briefing of MPs is really the problem as I believe that by now the vast majority of MPs that have an innate interest in telecoms issues are only too well aware of the government's hypocritical position on this issue.  Their problem like the rest of us is to try to force the government marionettes at Ofcom to start dancing to a different tune to the one that the government is covertly briefing them to dance to.

We also face other problem like the fact that the once serious Panorama news program has now becoming a sensationalist show chasing ratings with an increasingly tabloid viewership and thus chooses to spend most of its time briewing up wild scare stories such as there being an alleged army of middle aged paedophiles after their children on the internet, rather than covering serious stories about regulatory duplicity and double dealing by Ofcom.

kk wrote on Jan 8^th, 2008 at 8:53am:

Does the company name rhyme with - 'Jobbies'?