Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment

Beyond New Labour Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 10:47:38 AM GMT Print-friendly version Facebook

The man who came to London to end the frivolous and unaccountable spending has just paid an invoice for changing lightbulbs during his Mayoral campaign.



The total bill for changing 5 lightbulds, including £28.98 per hour for 2 hours work (24mins per bulb) and 10% admin charge, came to £88.81. Efficiency at the heart of the Conservative agenda.

Hat tip to lib dem voice who has a copy of the invoice: http://www.libdemvoice.org/how-much-does-it-cost-to-change-a-light-bulb-cost-efficiency-boris-johnso n-style-3121.html

tags: , (all tags)

Display: Sort:
Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment | 25 comments (25 topical)

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#1)

by NB on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:19:47 PM GMT

If this is the most serious criticism of Boris then he must be St Peter...


Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#3)

by Floating voter on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:38:46 PM GMT

" If this is the most serious criticism of Boris then he must be St Peter..."

Indeed. It has clearly been written by someone with no clue about business costing. Someone has to change the lightbulbs and that someone has to be paid. Even if a council workman changed them then his cost (not his wages - Boris has to pay the council worker's tax, 'ees and 'ers and possibly pension, so add 40% to his wage cost) would have to be factored in. With our ludicrous health and safety laws and insurance provisions, whoever changes lightbulbs probably has to be a trained electrician who has attended a course on light bulb changing and ladder use.

Also, an external electrician will only turn up when needed. A council employee has to be paid for all the time whether he has any light bulbs to change  or not.

Finally, £88 included the cost of bulbs at £11 which is a fixed cost no matter who fits them. A business would reclaim another £11 in VAT, but I don't think Boris can. Is the GLC VAT registered?


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#6)

by Beyond New Labour on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:25:51 PM GMT

Of course this isn't serious, I didn't think that would need to be spelt out. In future it is safe to assume that posts I make about campaigns and the amount they spend on lightbulbs will not be serious.

 For serious criticsims of Boris go here:

Deleting history:
http://www.recessmonkey.com/2008/08/02/exclusive-boris-deletes-kens-100-days-of-achievements/
Ray Lewis resigns:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/jul/04/boris.london
James McGraph resigns:
http://www.london.gov.uk/view_press_release.jsp?releaseid=17454
Breaking promises:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-mayor/article-23527424-details/Mayor+%27breaking+promises+ove r+%C2%A375m+skyscraper+on+market+site%27/article.do
LDA damp squib audit:
http://www.accountancyage.com/accountancyage/analysis/2222384/showdown-gla-forensic-audit
Simon Milton conflict of interest:
http://torytroll.blogspot.com/2008/05/boris-johnsons-advisor-loses-salary-in.html
Appointing Tim Parker - Made up title and the most inexcusable hair in politics:
http://www.london.gov.uk/mayor/team/deputy.jsp

(FYI the GLC was abolished in 1986, I assume you meant the GLA - who I guess will have their own electricians and lightbulbs)

Also, a person who did have a clue about business costings would note that this invoice was for 31st April for his campaign office pre-election, not a public authority.

Thanks for your posts!


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#8)

by Beyond New Labour on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:42:00 PM GMT

Have just re-read your post and thoguht you said something different to what you actually did say, therefore the last 2 paragraphs may not make total sense. Apologies for that - cant seem to edit my own posts though!


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#12)

by Prbo on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 04:53:23 PM GMT

So Boris claims an invoice for under a hundred quid, and yesterday it was reported that some of Ken's staff are to receive payoffs totally £1.6 million.  Perspective, anyone?


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#16)

by jkitleft on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:18:26 PM GMT

So why was Lee Jasper (who?), telling Kumar Murshid (who?), how he would spend 0.00000000001% of the mayoral budget such a scandal?


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#18)

by Prbo on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 01:33:39 PM GMT

I'm assuming you read the same press as I did - I'll leave you to work it out, I'm sure you're an intelligent chap.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#13)

by Floating voter on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 04:53:50 PM GMT

Happens to us all.... ;-)


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#2)

by DevonChap on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:26:18 PM GMT

Sounds like a PFI project to me. Now who introduced that?


Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#4)

by adwilliams134 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 12:47:53 PM GMT

Because of pathetic H & S legislation brought in by Government, not just any old Charlie can change a lightbulb.  It is an electrical appliance and must be changed by a qualified fitter not just some odd-job 'Harry'.

Not only that,  but if it involved the use of any form of step ladders then the fitter would have required an assistant to make sure the step ladder didn't slip, that people didn't walk into it etc etc.  It's H & S and ladders etc that's led to Sky dishes now usually being a lot lower down the wall than they used to be.

Not only that,  but because it's an electrical appliance,  bit's of paperwork attesting to the fact that H&S had been adhered to would have to be completed.   Invoices for the work filled in and submitted,  not to mention the demand form for the fitter to procure the lightbulbs from the stores to start with.

Sorry,  but in this day and age £17.76 for something like this is a bargain. 

Now then,  are we all in favour that H & S needs a radical rooting out to stop this sort of rubbish?  Because that's a central governmemnt legislation thing and who is it that's in office? 


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#5)

by adwilliams134 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:01:12 PM GMT

Oh,  and I forgot to mention,  the step-ladders themselves have to have a certificate of worthiness and load-bearing.  Not to mention that the fitter would also have to inspect the light fittings for wear, tear, serviceability, cleanliness etc and sign-off that he/she had done so.

Can't have any old odd-job caretaker type person changing light bulbs in public buildings. Oh deary-me no, that won't do at all.

Those of you who work in offices know what I mean.  Once a year someone comes round and sticks silly green stickers on everything to certify that your kettle won't turn thermo-nuclear when you brew up.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#7)

by jkitleft on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 01:26:27 PM GMT

Something I always want to ask people who talk about Elf n' safety Nazis, can you name for me a significant piece of health and safety legislation in the last 10 years?

Do you also realise that this obsession with a mythical health and safety tyranny is a major obstacle to the government introducing a beefed up Corporate Manslaughter act for the trade union brothers who you say feel betrayed?


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#10)

by adwilliams134 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 03:07:33 PM GMT

It doesn't really matter.  If you don't abide by H & S legislation & COSHH and all the other BLX and someone slips, bumps, bangs etc etc you get sued . Simple as that.

Quick example where I work.  Employee barged through a door, caught her finger, broke it. Company had to pay £3,500 in compo,  and then fit 'dampers' on every door in the complex at a cost of thousands.

H & S is not 'mythical', the more employees you have, the more nominated H&S poeple you have to have, trained to certain recognised standards such as NEBHS. It is an industry in it's own right.

Do you work?  If so, look at all your electrical stuff.  Once a year, because of H&S, a 'sparky' has to come around and test it all and stick a little sticker on it and record it in a book.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#14)

by Floating voter on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 04:58:48 PM GMT

"If so, look at all your electrical stuff. Once a year, because of H&S, a 'sparky' has to come around and test it all and stick a little sticker on it and record it in a book."

Indeed. Recently we had a letter from a comapny reminding us that is was an offence not to pay someone to test every single electrical appliance.

Also, a lot of this stuff does not require legislation. It just existing stuff that gets "upgraded" past the point of usefulness.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#15)

by jkitleft on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 05:14:05 PM GMT

The Better Regulation Task Force, filled to the brim with businessmen, found that the compensation culture was a "damaging urban myth".

It was the TUC who found that only 1 in 10 people who are ill or injured in the workplace recieve compensation.

Indeed, it seems that the regulations and health and safety rules that the media moan about, are self-imposed, by companies and people who have bought into the myth that they need stifling regulations or they will be fired.

But if they wanted to, they could let their workers die, and they might be fined around 1/700th of their turnover. The conviction rate for the deaths of say, builders, has fallen by 30%. This is because the government has wittled down the Health and Safety inspectorate. And work inspectorates too which means many workers are being exploited at shocking levels.

Or what of REACH proposals? As per usual, the CBI denounces making sure that 30,000 harmful chemicals have to be stopped from going into products. It costs at most £3.5 billion. But in the long term, could save almost £200 billion.

If you still don't believe me, then I won't at all be happy to list the sites of the graves of hundreds, perhaps thousands of blue-collar workers killed by a lack of a beefed up Corporate Manslaughter act.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#17)

by adwilliams134 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 07:15:31 PM GMT

Why oh Why whenever I get into an exchange with you do I get this impression that you are youngish - late teens early 20's.   

H & S is legislated and enforced - right down to silly green stickers on kettles.  It isn't voluntary thing or companies overreacted, it is law and unions check to make sure companies abide by it.

So what are you saying?  We should ignore the law and unions should ignore it as well?

How about a LABOUR government,  that has had over a decade to clarify, repeal where necessary and further legislate where necessary,  actual do what it is supposed to do and govern.

Oh,  forgot.  It's to busy trying to be tory.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#19)

by jkitleft on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 07:16:14 PM GMT

And why is it that whenever I debate with you, and when you can't think of a counter-argument you pick from a choice of 3, the following responses:

"You just don't get it, do you?"
"Do you know why you are going to lose?"
"You are young"- so what?

I'll give you another example. School trips. Teachers think that they can't take kids on school trips. Why might that be? Name for me please, a significant piece of health and safety legislation under this government. Now, tell me how it has precipitated this 'Elf and Safety' culture.

Say a terrorist packs a car full of explosives, and parks it next to a busy construction site. It goes off, and kills 77 builders. Now, take our lax laws on corporate manslaughter, and you get the equivalent every year.

Well we have had notable cases. Driving past school one day, I saw a crane in a big arc shape, which had crushed a man named Michael Alexa. Or remember when the Glasgow factory exploded, killing four? Simon Jones was decapitated after recieving a few minutes training.

Hundreds die every year in the workplace, with a massive proportion in cases where it could have been prevented by regulating workplaces so that they can't cut corners on people's safety. And if you really think that we have too much regulation, I'll remind you that Ireland cut deaths in the construction industry by half by doubling the number of HSE inspectors.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#20)

by adwilliams134 on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 09:55:28 PM GMT

Listen kiddo,  there are several very good reasons why I know more about life than you.

1.  5 of my friends were murdered by the scum of the Provisional IRA.  Be under no illusion.  Next time you see McGuiness on TV he has been directly and indirectly reponsible for a huge amount of deaths, mostly civilian.

2.  I have been a witnes in three war crimes trials regarding Bosnia and the former Yugoslavia.

3.  Combat18 targeted me and attacked me twice.

4. I have worked in natural disaster areas.

I fought for what I believe in, up to and including at the point of a gun.  I know more about the misery of poverty, racism and natural disasters than you will probably ever know.

I have watched pregnant women get rounded up to be forcibly aborted.  Seen the horrors of public execution first hand.

I have stood alongside proud working men fighting for the right to feed their families.

I know what the struggle for socialism means in real life.

New Labour - be it Blairism or Brownite - is finished.   You either go back to being the Labour party or you will get what you thoroughly deserve in 2010.

OK?


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#22)

by jkitleft on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 09:13:24 AM GMT

1) I'm fairly aware of the crimes of both sides in the war in Northern Ireland. While I supported the peace agreement, I couldn't bear the fawning over far-right Paisley, and terrorist McGuinness.


2) I know


3) That's awful


4) Good for you


But, could you PLEASE respond to my points? While I don't doubt your many heroic efforts, please don't use them to beat me with a stick.

This doesn't answer one of my questions, or points about corporate manslaughter.

You're probably right. I won't know of similar horrors. But it doesn't make my points less valid. It doesn't make you or I right over any particular issue.


And I actually think we're doing a reasonable job of being a Labour party now. And I support many of your sentiments.


But in future, respond directly to my points and arguments and questions, rather than adding your life experiences as a fourth option to the eclectic responses you give when avoiding my arguments or questions.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#23)

by adwilliams134 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 09:22:34 AM GMT

You are not going to get any really meaningful law about corporate manslughter from either a tory government or a New Labour one.  You would be remarkably niaive to think otherwise.   Neither are going to bite the hand that feeds them and too many of the big corporations are foreign owned and we don't want to be upsetting them do we.

The blame for this lack of meaningful action will of course be pushed in the direction of that amorpeous grey mass the  EU,  where it can be hidden in yards of tape, rheams of papers and hours of sub-committees,  where it will be forgotten about by the newspapers but will occasionally re-surface evry other rail crash or so,  provided it doesn't clash with Big Brother in which case it will only be on BBC news or page 4 of the Daily Mirror.

Sorry about that,  but that is the way of the world and systems are never changed from within.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#21)

by adwilliams134 on Thu Aug 07, 2008 at 10:29:46 PM GMT

OH,  and as for school trips.  I know the answer to that for definate.  My sister is a teacher.  The problem is insurance.   The school's can't afford the insurance premiums for some of the more risky day trips and the teachers don't see why they should pay out of their own pocket.  Although H&S didn't directly stop ithem,  it did indirectly because the schoool has a legal Duty Of Care under H&S.  They in turn delegate that legal responsibility to the teachers who in turn then become reponsible for carrying out risk assesments which isn't really their job so they won't. 

The schools can't afford the insurance and they can't afford to employ a dedicated H&S officer.  You can ask the parents to sign a disclaimer,  but a lot won't and it's only legal if the kid is over a certain age anyway.

Now I dare say you could find reports saying it doesn't happen.  But then again I can produce my sister - a teacher - who will tell you that it does.  She will also tell you that classes are regularly left under the control of teaching assistants because of staff shortages, But the government says it only happens rarely and even then never for a full period.  Which is a bald-faced lie.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#24)

by Floating voter on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 01:14:37 PM GMT

jkitleft - you want examples of H&S lunacy?

Boy drowns because of H&S - "The conduct of the two PCSOs led to a national outcry after Greater Manchester Police claimed the officers could not jump into the water because of health and safety rules"

 

No cops on bikes - "Greater Manchester Police has stopped 300 fully-fledged officers and PCSOs from patrolling on their mountain bikes."

 

This one sound harmless but it is the sheer inconvenience of having to comply to solve a problem that never existed in the first place - "Despite a three-centuries-old tradition that there is no smoking in churches, modern brainless bureaucracy requires us to deface this ancient building with the following notice'."

 

Former Mayor Ken Lingstone had this to say - "‘At a stroke you are wiping out good housing for 40,000 Londoners, many of them in the direst need.  I wonder to what extent in reaching your decision, you factored in the fact that many of those 40,000 people are living in appalling conditions which have a dramatic impact on both their health and life chances."

 

Every task in a business or organisation MUST have a risk assessment. Each risk assessment must be kept up to date and even a small business can have dozens or hundreds of busines tasks that must be risk assessed. For example, changing a light bulb requires a risk assessment, moving a desk, hovering carpet, setting up a computer, moving a computer, putting pictures on walls, envelope stuffing, going to the postbox, packing a box, unpacking a box.... you get the idea and each risk assessement starts as a four page document like this one and soon grows. It then has to be updated, changed or maintained and it does not take long before you have to employ somebody to do nothing else but manage this cr*p.

 


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#25)

by adwilliams134 on Fri Aug 08, 2008 at 01:52:38 PM GMT

True story this.  In the 1980's when H&S first started to snowball,  I was an Infantry soldier.  They (MoD bureaucrats) actually wrote risk assesments for all the weaponry.  There was even a risk assessment for L2 hand grenades, warning you that they were an explosive device and extreme caution should be taken when using them.

Silly me.  There was I thinking that they were supposed to explode and turn people inside out, when all along I should have been showing extreme caution.


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#9)

by alexhilton on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 03:04:51 PM GMT

Are you referring to the Management of Health & Safety at Work Regs 1992?


[ Parent ]

Re: Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment (#11)

by adwilliams134 on Wed Aug 06, 2008 at 03:09:02 PM GMT

Probably.  But there's that much of the rubbish it's hard to say.


[ Parent ]

Boris' £17.76 lightbulb moment | 25 comments (25 topical)