Thought Id start this one going because its rather dead on this board at the moment and I suppose all my usual muckers are either at the Stella tennis event watching Dim Tim (lose again) or at Henly Regatta eating cucumber sandwiches (they wish,...NOT).

Anyway please feel free to just talk to yourself blast away and let it go on any company or subject you wish. Just wish Id thought of this one before.

cheers GF.

Nice work if you can get it....



Charity chief's £653,000 pay reignites row

Boss of mental healthcare organisation in the spotlight as inquiry launched into high pay


Chris Stevenson , Natasha Preskey
Sunday 20 October 2013



The row over the pay packets received by executives running Britain's charities was reignited yesterday after it was revealed that the head of one the UK's largest charities was paid more than £600,000.


Charities have faced increasing scrutiny over the past few months following disclosures in the summer over the rising number of executives with salaries exceeding £100,000 a year, with several MPs condemning pay levels at some of Britain's leading charities. The latest revelation comes just over a week after the National Council for Voluntary Organisations (NCVO) unveiled an inquiry into pay across the sector.

The pay probe will be led by the former newsreader Martyn Lewis, who is now chairman of NCVO. Mr Lewis said that the salary awarded to Professor Philip Sugarman, chief executive at St Andrew's Healthcare, which states it is the biggest mental healthcare charity in Britain, "certainly raised more than an eyebrow" and "was one of the largest in the charity sector".

Professor Sugarman was awarded £653,000 in 2012/13, an increase of more than 18 per cent on his previous year's pay of £552,000, according to the latest accounts filed. St Andrew's Healthcare employs more than 3,000 people and provides mental healthcare and support for those with psychiatric illnesses, disabilities and brain injuries, through residential and community-based care, as well as being involved in training and research at four centres across England.

Jane Appleton, director of communications at St Andrew's, said that Professor Sugarman was being rewarded for performing three roles for the charity, as medical director and chief executive, as well as his work as a clinical practitioner. Since April 2013, Professor Sugarman has been paid only approximately £325,000 for the role of chief executive.

"St Andrew's has doubled in size since being overseen by Professor Sugarman as chief executive. We believe that you have to pay a proportionate salary to get the best talent; and, at this current level, we are not out of kilter with the rest of the sector," she said.



More: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/charity-chiefs-653000-pay-reignites-row-8891812.html

"Haystack- 20 Oct 2013 02:44 - 31375 of 31377

I am about the same age as cynic. It is simple. If you have complaints about people being abusive then complain to moneysm. There is moderation on here, just complain."

That is correct Haystack, I have had an occasion when I felt it necessary to complain to Moneyam about a certain post which I took exception to and the post was removed within a day of my complaint. There is moderation on this bulletin board.

delete

aldwickk - it's just the tip pf the iceberg, it just seems to be so easy to get fake passports and get 'married' for the sake of convenience. The flood gates opened years ago and this small country is already too crowded. France is far more ruthless about immigration.

indeed, though there seems to be a huge row in the making in france about some roma teenage student who was deported along with her large and extended family ..... it seems that the girl may be allowed back in, but patently not her family ..... the girl doesn't like that idea - nor her family i dare say! - but fromage dur as far as i can determine

Excellent read.

http://www.scotsman.com/news/gerald-warner-impact-of-politically-correct-britain-1-3128346

Hays Hays Hays............

electionista‏@electionista9h
UK - YouGov/Sunday Times poll: @Conservatives 33%, @UKLabour 39%, @LibDems 10%, @UKIP 11% / 30% approve of the Govt, 56% disapprove.

AND

electionista‏@electionista19 Oct
UK - Opinium/Observer poll: CON 27%, LAB 38%, LDEM 9%, UKIP 17%

Labour lead growing.

Only 11% ahead.

I thought it would be more.


88--))

Wheres Hays????.

You can find him on the TWIT thread.

http://www1.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2013/10/20/with-so-much-difference-between-the-weeks-polls-the-best-bet-is-to-rely-on-icm/

So many polls – so little clarity

With so many different pictures being recorded in the polls in the past week my normal recourse is to revert back to what I regard as the gold standard – the monthly phone poll from ICM.

The firm was the top British pollster at three of the past four general elections and got the AV referendum right down to one decimlal point.

This came out on Monday night and had CON 34, LAB 38, LD 12, UKIP 8. My sense is that is about the best reflection at the moment of where we will end up in eighteen months time – but, of course, things can change ,

You don't mean the labour party will be further ahead.

Say 15-20%



8-)

Hays,

Don't worry party HQ are working out what to give away next to solve their problem.


*-)

Whatever way you look at it, it wont be Call me Dave leading the next gov.


Which is good and bad, depending on the outcome. Personally, I think we are fooked!

the only immigrants the UK get are low life scum with no money
or just released from prison .

the government says we need the immigrants to pay taxes to pay the pensions
well who is going to pay theirs will we need another 20m to come to pay future pensioners .

its madness NHS SHCOOLS SERVICES ARE ALL BREAKING DOWN

IN MOST PLACES IT IS NOW 21 DAYS TO SEE THE DOCTOR
WHAT IS GOOD ABOUT IMMIGRANTS NOTHING THEY ARE RAPING THE UK

UKIP WILL BE THE SECOND PARTIE the CONS ARE FINISHED

i think that most sensible people have long been in favour of immigration being limited, typically by the imposition of the australian points system or similar
up to now, successive gov'ts have pretty much ignored what the grassroots constituents want in this respect, and allowed pretty much an open door policy, whatever their protestations to the contrary, and the whirlwind is starting to gather

however, to pretend that uk could have coped perfectly well without immigrants, or perhaps without allowing any more (s suggested by MrT and GF) is just nonsense and does not remotely stand up to scrutiny - e.g. who mans the NHS?

i have intentionally left aside the question of genuine political refugees - e.g. the ugandan asians in the 70s - and the apparent dismal failure of the uk border agency to stop and turn back known undesirables

Cynic again misquoting....ohhh dear.

lets get it clear immigration as cost the uk billions and does nothing for the uk
if we got out of the EU and sent back all migrants and illegals the UK would be a better place .

vote UKIP and get us out

the FRENCH are pushing the immigrants in to the uk they use the police to
stop them settling to sleep and move them on ever night and tell them to fcuk off home
and the UK says nothing the UK is the only country in the EU that abides the EU laws fact not fiction the EU is FCUKED we want out