FW: [IFADU] Friday and You could not make it stuff..

-----Original Message-----
From: IFADU@googlegroups.com On Behalf Of Gordon Burns
Sent: 28 November 2008 19:09
To: IFADU@googlegroup
Subject: [IFADU] Friday and You could not make it stuff..

I receive a weekly newsletter on IT stuff which is always funny and
satirical.

A round of the weeks IT news.

I thought I would share it with you this week,. It is not entirely off
topic as it is a acerbic comment on our leaders and governments management
abilities.

I think some of the comments here were a little unfair, some public service
employees do a great job in difficult and stressfull circumstances. Working
in the embassy n the Congo might qualify. We must not judge all public
servants by the common experience we share and even then it is with the very
senior management who set policy that we have the problems.

So to end the week some humour...

Have a good weekend.

ID Card Scheme
Consider the latest news on the scheme this week.

The first UK ID cards will be of limited use because the government has yet
to reveal a timetable for the deployment of scanners capable of reading the
clever high-tech biometric data. That would be a problem but where there's a
problem there's a solution. In fact there are two but neither of them are
very good.

It's quite simple really. You look at the card and then look at the person
and if they look like the kind of person on the card then they're probably
the same people. Brilliant, eh?

But that's not all. Hell no, there's another way you can check if the card
is genuine - you just give it a flick.

That's according to Phil Booth national co-ordinator of ID card pressure
group NO2ID who told silicon.com that employers who doubt the authenticity
of the card had been told to flick it to check for a distinctive sound.

"This is the mechanism by which employers are supposed to be checking a
worker's identity - it is farcical," he said. And who's the Round-Up to
argue?

What the 'distinctive sound' might be is a mystery to the Round-Up
- a hollow sounding ring for fraudulent cards, perhaps? Or if it's a genuine
card it could chime out the opening chords to 'Rule Britannia'.

Booth seethed: "It makes a lie of all these grandiose claims about
biometrics if there is not the infrastructure to back it up."

You can stop right there, Phil. You had the Round-Up at 'farcical'...

Whitehall....

The grey-suited denizens of Whitehall are confused enough as it is, flicking
ID cards against their ears, without adding software upgrades into the mix.

MPs, peers and civil servants are having a hell of a time getting by with
Microsoft Word. So what's new, you might ask. Tuning forks as it happens but
that gag is just sooo last section.

The civil servants in question are struggling to deal with compatibility
between documents produced in Word 2003 and 2007 formats. Much in the same
way the rest of the country is confused about policy initiatives launched
over the same period.

Happily, Microsoft is working with Westminster tech chiefs after politicians
and peers complained of being unable to open the latest Word documents. And
presumably they were not talking about the paper clip, which seems to be
working fine:

"Looks like you're trying to write an ill-thought-out technology-based
policy initiative on a national security scheme.
Would you like help:

Generating enough snake oil?
Finding someone to blame when it all goes wrong?
Over-inflating budgets?"

There is a solution - a fix can be downloaded - but as Lord Methuen
writes in an annual committee report: "A program can be downloaded
to read the documents but obviously not everybody knows how to do
this." Followed by a stream of random wingdings characters and 200
blank pages, the Round-Up likes to imagine.

It also transpires that politicos have gone mad for IT with a long
list of outrageous requests. Happily for them they'll soon be able
to download said patch from anywhere they choose.

Not content with having email accounts of Herculean proportions and
wi-fi in every nook and crevice of Whitehall, MPs are also lobbying
to be able to place clips of themselves in the House of Commons on
YouTube. In addition, members and peers want to embed official
Parliamentary video on their personal websites. Hark at them.

It's encouraging to see our government embracing technology with
such gusto, but as a wise man* once said: "With great power comes
great responsibility."

(*Spider-Man's Uncle Ben)

We're just a year on from the HMRC missing CDs debacle (the
department is still happy to receive those CDs if you do find them)
so maybe things have changed. Maybe government employees can be
trusted with all the high tech kit and privileges.

Wait. What's that? Yet more big government data breaches on the
way? Well that's something to look forward to in the new year.

Plus ça change...

Regards

Gordon

Retail Distribution Review - RDR

Dear IFA,

Due to the current financial situation caused by the slowdown of economy, the FSA has decided to implement a scheme to put IFAs of 30 years of age and above on early retirement.

This scheme will be known as RAPE (Retire Aging People Early).Persons selected to be RAPED can apply to the FSA to be eligible for the SHAFT scheme (Special Help after Forced Termination).

Persons who have been RAPED and SHAFTED will be reviewed under the SCREW programmed (Scheme Covering Retired Early Workers).

A person may be RAPED once, SHAFTED twice and SCREWED as many times as Management deems appropriate.Persons who have been RAPED can only get AIDS (Additional Income for Dependants & Spouse) or HERPES (Half Earnings for Retired Personnel Early Severance).

Obviously persons who have AIDS or HERPES will not be SHAFTED or SCREWED any further by FSA.Persons who are not RAPED and are staying on will receive as much SHIT (Special High Intensity Training) as possible.

The FSA has always prided itself on the amount of SHIT it gives IFAs.

Should you feel that you do not receive enough SHIT, please bring to the attention of your FSA supervisor.

They have been trained to give you all the SHIT you can handle.

Open letter to the FSA regarding GABRIEL

 

---

From: IFA Defence Union [mailto:enquiriesadu.co.uk]
Sent: 05 November 2008 16:27
To:  hectorfsa.gov.uk
Subject: Open letter to the FSA regarding GABRIEL

Why has the FSA forced the IFA community to act as Beta testers for a piece of software that is, at this moment in time, not fit for purpose?

If sufficient testing was done then the testers have been negligent.  If it was not done then the individual(s) who authorised the launch have been negligent.

Who is responsible and why,  until the system is working, have they simply not reverted to using the previous system?  Surely, as a test, data could have been transferred from one system to another.

The use of computerised data input is supposed to save time on both sides i.e. the FSA and the adviser community.  The waste of adviser time does not appear to have been factored in and no one is taking responsibility.  No explanation is being given and no time scale for when the system will be up to speed.

Is it a software problem or a hardware problem?

'Due to a high level of demand' is given as the reason.   If this is indeed the correct explanation. Who is responsible for this poor forecasting of demand?


Evan Owen
IFA Defence Union

FW: Not anonymous

-----Original Message-----
From: Evan
Sent: 25 October 2008 12:29
To: 'bankingcrisisparliament.uk'
Subject: Not anonymous

I wish to submit the following questions:

Do you now agree with an overwhelming majority of people in the financial
services industry that the "tripartite agreement" is fundamentally flawed
due to conflicts of interest?

Do you now agree that banking supervision is something one state body should
have full responsibility for and that it should be the role of the Bank of
England and its former staff who are now at the FSA?

Given the risks that banks pose to the financial system was there ever a
time when you felt the need to 'supervise' them very closely rather than
regulate certain activities and allow other, more dangerous, unregulated
activities to be carried out in London, the largest financial centre on
Earth?

Did any of you understand the business model of Northern Rock?

Did anyone not think that lending 125% of the value of a home was
irresponsible?

Did you really learn some lessons from Northern Rock and if so why weren't
they applied immediately?

Did John Tiner foresee any of this and why isn't he being questioned along
with Howard Davies in the same manner as Alan Greenspan was in the US?

Why are the bank auditors not being questioned about the accounts supplied
to the FSA?

Why were Bradford and Bingley shareholders misled, or coerced, into
subscribing to the rights issue when there was a high probability it would
be nationalised?

Why was the RBS rights issue allowed to go ahead and cause unnecessary
losses for shareholders?

What hope is there for shareholders to subscribe to rights issues in future
given that the facts are not available and neither are dividends?

Why were golden parachutes and pensions handed to FSA staff who left, and
are leaving, as this was unfolding while they criticised banks for similar
practices?

Does the FSA think it has achieved the Statutory Objective of "maintaining
confidence in the financial system"?

Has the FSA been so busy with intangibles such as the Retail Distribution
Review and Treating Customers Fairly initiatives that it missed the bigger
picture?

Does the FSA now recognise that small advisers are not a threat to the
financial system and that it should foster a new, open and transparent,
relationship with the distribution model which generates the lowest
proportion of complaints yet pays the highest proportion of FSA fees and is
burdened by an unwarranted level of regulatory burdens by ratio of size?

Why does Barclays have six months to comply with the Financial Services
Authority's (FSA) new capital ratio target, but not Lloyds TSB ?

How did the FSA arrive at its new capital ratio targets for the banks?

Were the new capital requirements calculated according to transparent
principles and can we know what they are?

Why do Ministers believe that a bank is able to sustainably borrow at 12%
yet lend at much lower rates?

Is it right that small savers both directly through shareholdings and
indirectly through pensions and savings should lose out on dividend income
because of the onerous lending terms?

Who has been 'leaking' so much detail to Robert Peston of the BBC?

We are expecting a public inquiry into the involvement of the Bank of
England, the FSA and HM Treasury in all of this, will Ministers demand one?


Evan Owen
The IFA Defence Union
Preswylfa
Dyffryn Ardudwy
Gwynedd
LL44 2EH

Tel

Aifa urges FSA to separate the barbers from the surgeons - 3 November 2008

 

 

 

WITH AN AIFA FRIEND LIKE THIS WHO NEEDS AN FSA ENEMY?

 

I'm sorrry Chris you are wrong on a number of points:

 

Q: Aifa’s new report, The Future of Retail Financial Services, calls for an advice profession with higher qualifications and standards, access to the whole of the market and remuneration models agreed between the adviser and the client.

 

A: Cut the industry down by two thirds - this should resolve the savings crisis at a stroke!  IFA complaints are 4%. However if we look beyond that we can see that excluding endowments the actual figure is 1.4%. Independent Financial Advisers (IFA's) generate 80%* of distribution but are only responsible for 1.4% of complaints! It comes a little surprise to read that, now the FSA-orchestrated hindsight review of mortgage related endowments is finally fading into history, we are seeing a dramatic increase in the proportion of complaints against banks and other large financial services organisations. What this tells us is that the business transacted by IFAs represents the lowest risk to consumer interests. 

 

Q: Aifa director general Chris Cummings says: “At some point surgeons stopped being barbers and become a recognised profession. The advice community has shaken off its old-ties but keeps being tarnished because of the behaviour of others who have appropriated the advice word, who wish to be cloaked in professional language, but who won't accept the higher standards. These are barbers not surgeons and the consumer must be protected from them.”

 

A: The industry has been "tarnished" by retrospective regulatory reviews and bankrupted by regulatory failures. If surgeons were paid via fees rather than by the NHS there would be a lot of dead patients and many more bankrupt! Public sewers have done more for public health than have the medical profession. If you want to use the surgeon analogy then perhaps you should be talking about a NHS funded advice system to pay for it all!  There are currently 6,000 outstanding complaints and regulatory investigations against solicitors. Each year about 200 lawyers are found guilty of breaching the solicitors' rules and sentenced by the Law Society's Solicitors' Disciplinary Tribunal (SDT). You are wrong if you think higher qualifications will resolve complaints.

 

Q: Cummings says: “It should be made clear here that we see advice and sales as being options that consumers can select between; that they can and should be supportive and increasingly leverage better consumer outcomes. We must recognise consumer-buying behaviour that exists in all other markets, where people vary between seeking advice and opting to make transactions.

 

A: Well what does that mean: "increasingly leverage consumer outcomes!" Chris you should have written the RDR it was equally unintelligible!

 

Regards

 

SIMON MANSELL

 

[Simon Mansell] -----Original Message-----
From: IFADUglegroups.com [mailto:IFADoglegroups.com]On Behalf Of Evan
Sent: 03 November 2008 13:52
To: IFADUoglegroups.com
Subject: [IFADU] Aifa urges FSA to separate the barbers from the surgeons - 3 November 2008

Aifa urges FSA to separate the "barbers" from the "surgeons"

Nicole Blackmore | 03-Nov-2008

The Association of Independent Financial Advisers has urged the FSA to use its retail distribution review to help consumers re-engage with savings and support the development of a distinct advisory profession.

Aifa’s new report, The Future of Retail Financial Services, calls for an advice profession with higher qualifications and standards, access to the whole of the market and remuneration models agreed between the adviser and the client.

The trade body says only those who meet the requirements should be termed as offering financial advice.

Aifa director general Chris Cummings says: “At some point surgeons stopped being barbers and become a recognised profession. The advice community has shaken off its old-ties but keeps being tarnished because of the behaviour of others who have appropriated the advice word, who wish to be cloaked in professional language, but who won't accept the higher standards. These are barbers not surgeons and the consumer must be protected from them.”

The report also proposes that Money Guidance will act as an introduction to the retail financial services market and a sales channel will service those who do not want their financial circumstances considered by an adviser.

Cummings says: “It should be made clear here that we see advice and sales as being options that consumers can select between; that they can and should be supportive and increasingly leverage better consumer outcomes. We must recognise consumer buying behaviour that exists in all other markets, where people vary between seeking advice and opting to make transactions.

“Also, in some sectors of the industry, there is a ‘myth of scarcity’ but we believe that our focus should be on attracting and re-engaging those who have turned their backs on the sector, and the RDR is the tool to achieve this goal.”

Source: Money Marketing

moneymarketing.co.uk was built by Sift Group Ltd.
Money Marketing is a division of Centaur Media plc  ©2007.

 

 

---

For audit and compliance purposes the electronic Message Tag attached to this e-mail "automatically" notifies the sender (Temple Bar) the moment this message is opened. The notification also details: 1. When the message was sent 2. When it was viewed, and 3. What the delay has been in between.