• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!

Public Sector or Not?

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
Collapse
  •  
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
    He hasn't got one. His read something somewhere and has decide to fart it on to the forum without thinking again so others have to clean the thread up again.
    Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

    Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by breaktwister View Post
      Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

      Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.
      I think that might be because we've discussed RBS 3 times already including with you last week and nothing has changed during the past 3 months.

      RBS is not covered by the FoI act and therefore isn't affected by these changes.
      merely at clientco for the entertainment

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by eek View Post
        I think that might be because we've discussed RBS 3 times already including with you last week and nothing has changed during the past 3 months.

        RBS is not covered by the FoI act and therefore isn't affected by these changes.
        Stop sucking off the admins.
        "You’re just a bad memory who doesn’t know when to go away" JR

        Comment


          #34
          Originally posted by northernladuk View Post
          Words fail me.
          That's a first.
          The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

          Comment


            #35
            Originally posted by LondonManc View Post
            That's a first.
            Ones that I can post without a ban then....
            'CUK forum personality of 2011 - Winner - Yes really!!!!

            Comment


              #36
              Originally posted by SueEllen View Post
              Stop sucking off the admins.


              I thought NAT seemed a lot happier these days
              The Chunt of Chunts.

              Comment


                #37
                Originally posted by breaktwister View Post
                Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

                Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.
                Teapot explained why RBS wasn't subject to FOI. You backed it up. Not sure what your beef is because Teapot gave you the correct answer with a supporting statement.
                The greatest trick the devil ever pulled was convincing the world that he didn't exist

                Comment


                  #38
                  Originally posted by breaktwister View Post
                  Just because you suck admins off you think you can get away with abuse while no-one can say anything back as they are then "warned by admins"? I guess the admins will warn or ban me now but you get away with insults and abuse with no consequence.

                  Teapot posted that RBS was not a public body without any analysis. All I was saying that that you need to look carefully at the OWNERSHIP of all companies to determine whether they fall within the meaning of a "public authority". I didn't see anyone else posting the info regarding being owned by the Crown.
                  No, it does not require analysis - it simply requires reading the list of organisations that fall within the remit of the FOI Act.

                  That's it. Nothing more, nothing less.

                  Anything else is navel gazing.

                  And as we have returned to the original point of this thread I am now locking it.
                  "I can put any old tat in my sig, put quotes around it and attribute to someone of whom I've heard, to make it sound true."
                  - Voltaire/Benjamin Franklin/Anne Frank...

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X