Monday - August 31, 2009

Almost 50 thousand dollars just to drop one word, and that’s just a drop in the bucket.

Gotta wonder what makes ppl get up to really stupid stuff like this and it isn’t funny!

In an update in another newspaper this morning, the sum for stupid spending is actually £170,000 of taxpayer money on just this one thing.
The thing being, dropping a word from documents or changing logos and like items.
Why do they need to be changed when they’re working.

In this particular case, it really is the very height of stupid. They’re removing ONE name from a govt. department.  And what word is being deleted?

DEPARTMENT.

I have this photo inside my head of a group of bored looking and vacant people, trying to think of things to do. Ideas to change something, anything.
Just for the sake of change and justifying their jobs.  Which they should not be in to begin with.
But hey ...  The taxpayer is always RIPE!  Don’t believe it?  Here.  Take a look at some of the dumb assed things that just HAD to be changed. NOT!

And this is a govt. telling ppl to save. Warning everyone of hard times. Yeah. Hard times for who?  Not the ppl who spend the money in govt.

£25,000 bill as Government drops single word from department name

By Miles Goslett
Daily Mail

The Government has spent nearly £25,000 of taxpayers’ money removing one word from the name of a Whitehall department.

In a ‘rebranding project’, the Department for Communities and Local Government (DCLG) has been renamed Communities and Local Government (CLG).

The change involved producing a new logo for the department’s website and headed paper. In a parliamentary answer, a Minister explained that the name change was deemed necessary to ‘emphasise the mission of the department’.

Freedom of Information documents reveal that the rebranding cost £24,765.
The Government has spent nearly £25,000 of taxpayers’ money removing one word from the name of a Whitehall department

The Government has spent nearly £25,000 of taxpayers’ money removing one word from the name of a Whitehall department

The move was described as ‘farcical’ last night by a Conservative spokesman.

The DCLG was established in May 2006, after the Office of the Deputy Prime Minister, under John Prescott, was abolished following a string of revelations about his private life.

But within months the decision was taken to refine the department’s name from DCLG to CLG on letterheads and its website ‘for ease of branding’. A spokesman for the CLG, which has been headed by John Denham since June, refused to name the person responsible for implementing the change.

The Government has spent millions on other rebranding exercises since 1997.

Mr Prescott spent £645 of public money on a new brass plaque for his office, replacing a sign saying Office of the Deputy Prime Minister with one which read Deputy Prime Minister’s Office.

He was given the sign as a memento when he left his office in June 2007.

The Department of Trade and Industry (DTI) was renamed twice between 2005 and 2007 at a cost of £250,000.

Earlier this year, Lord Mandelson decided to change its name for a third time to the Department of Business, Innovation and Skills (DBIS). The Government refused to reveal how much it cost to create the new department, or to rebrand it.

Caroline Spelman, Shadow Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, said: ‘This is a Whitehall farce at taxpayers’ expense.

Taxes have gone through the roof under Labour and examples like these show how the public’s money is squandered on Ministerial vanity projects and a corrosive culture of spin.’

A CLG spokesman said: ‘Given the scale of the restructuring and the department’s new policy agenda, a more fundamental overhaul of our corporate identity was deemed necessary.

Since October 2006, therefore, the department has been branded as Communities and Local Government in all of our corporate communications and contact with the public and outside bodies.’

SOURCE

Posted by peiper     on 08/31/2009 at 05:17 AM   
Filed Under: • Daily Life • Outrageous • Stoopid-People • UK •  
• Comments (1) • Trackbacks(0)  Permalink •  

DISCLAIMER

THE SERVICES AND MATERIALS ON THIS WEBSITE ARE PROVIDED "AS IS" AND THE HOSTS OF THIS SITE EXPRESSLY DISCLAIMS ANY AND ALL WARRANTIES, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, TO THE EXTENT PERMITTED BY LAW INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF SATISFACTORY QUALITY, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, WITH RESPECT TO THE SERVICE OR ANY MATERIALS.

Not that very many people ever read this far down, but this blog was the creation of Allan Kelly and his friend Vilmar. Vilmar moved on to his own blog some time ago, and Allan ran this place alone until his sudden and unexpected death partway through 2006. We all miss him. A lot. Even though he is gone this site will always still be more than a little bit his. We who are left to carry on the BMEWS tradition owe him a great debt of gratitude, and we hope to be able to pay that back by following his last advice to us all:

1. Keep a firm grasp of Right and Wrong
2. Stay involved with government on every level and don't let those bastards get away with a thing
3. Use every legal means to defend yourself in the event of real internal trouble, and, most importantly:
4. Keep talking to each other, whether here or elsewhere

It's been a long strange trip without you Skipper, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction and giving us a swift kick in the behind to get us going. Keep lookin' down on us, will ya? Thanks.

THE INFORMATION AND OTHER CONTENTS OF THIS WEBSITE ARE DESIGNED TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. THIS WEBSITE SHALL BE GOVERNED BY AND CONSTRUED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND ALL PARTIES IRREVOCABLY SUBMIT TO THE JURISDICTION OF THE AMERICAN COURTS. IF ANYTHING ON THIS WEBSITE IS CONSTRUED AS BEING CONTRARY TO THE LAWS APPLICABLE IN ANY OTHER COUNTRY, THEN THIS WEBSITE IS NOT INTENDED TO BE ACCESSED BY PERSONS FROM THAT COUNTRY AND ANY PERSONS WHO ARE SUBJECT TO SUCH LAWS SHALL NOT BE ENTITLED TO USE OUR SERVICES UNLESS THEY CAN SATISFY US THAT SUCH USE WOULD BE LAWFUL.

Copyright © 2004-2015 Domain Owner