Southampton City Council's extra £5m 'should have been used to save jobs' say Union leaders

Southampton Civic Centre

Southampton Civic Centre

First published in News
Last updated
Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Education Reporter

UNION leaders have attacked Southampton’s Labour council chiefs for failing to use its extra £5m cash to safeguard jobs.

Unison bosses have accused the administration of prioritising a mayoral chauffeur over protecting frontline services and improving redundancy payments for staff losing their jobs.

Civic chiefs are due to unveil parts of their revised budget today, after Southampton was given an extra £5m in government funding.

It is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget.

The unions campaigned heavily for the party during last year’s election, at which Labour swept to power, ending four years of Tory rule in which the Conservatives had pushed through controversial pay cuts for many council staff.

But Unison said today it was “bitterly disappointed” with the choices made in the revised budget.

The union said it was angry at the decision to reinstate £40,000 to the budget to ensure the mayor has a chauffeur and putting £1.6m back into council reserves, while almost 150 full-time-equivalent posts are at risk.

The authority is putting £193,000 back into its youth services, but Unison said a quarter of that cash will go on one manager, whose role will be to encourage community groups to take over council provisions.

The children’s home Our House and the city’s archaeology services will still close, while face-to-face and telephone visitor information services will also be removed.

But the council will put £500,000 into a new fund which council leader Richard Williams can use for investment in projects that will help “get the economy moving”.

Branch secretary Mike Tucker said not all the staffing implications of the revised budget are known at this stage, as the trade unions and staff have not been consulted on all the revisions to the budget: He said: “Unison is bitterly disappointed at the choices Labour councillors have made.

“We still believe that the financial problems the council are in are caused by the Conservative Government and the decisions made by the previous Conservative administration. “But councillors are only saving five jobs in the youth service while at the same time spending £300,000 on employing consultants for three months to develop the “Peoples Directorate” which will include services to young people. “The council is refusing to improve redundancy terms for over 50 long-serving council employees who are facing compulsory redundancy while spending £40,000 to ensure that the mayor gets driven round the City for the next 12 months. “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Comments (104)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:16am Tue 29 Jan 13

aldermoorboy says...

Take unions off the pay role that will save us Tax payers £500,000 each year.
Take unions off the pay role that will save us Tax payers £500,000 each year. aldermoorboy
  • Score: 0

11:22am Tue 29 Jan 13

good-gosh says...

Since when has the town hall been an employment agency?
Since when has the town hall been an employment agency? good-gosh
  • Score: 0

11:36am Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

good-gosh wrote:
Since when has the town hall been an employment agency?
Ever since the Torys turned it into one
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: Since when has the town hall been an employment agency?[/p][/quote]Ever since the Torys turned it into one southy
  • Score: 0

11:40am Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget.

Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again
t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget. Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again southy
  • Score: 0

11:46am Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget.

Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again
.. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget. Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again[/p][/quote].. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'? freefinker
  • Score: 0

11:47am Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

same time spending £300,000 on employing consultants for three months to develop the “Peoples Directorate” which will include services to young people.
What is wrong with the councillors now days, don't they want to do there jobs that they was elected for, another councillor job being handed over for some to earn a high wage.
same time spending £300,000 on employing consultants for three months to develop the “Peoples Directorate” which will include services to young people. What is wrong with the councillors now days, don't they want to do there jobs that they was elected for, another councillor job being handed over for some to earn a high wage. southy
  • Score: 0

11:49am Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system southy
  • Score: 0

11:52am Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget.

Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again
.. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?
In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget. Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again[/p][/quote].. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?[/p][/quote]In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes. southy
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget.

Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again
.. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?
In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes.
.. ah, really? Let's see your vote in Redbridge went up by a massive 8 votes between 2011 and 2012; from 212 to 220.

So, are you now predicting an increase to at least 245 in 2014? I do like to keep track of your predictions; always good for a laugh when they fail to materialise.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget. Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again[/p][/quote].. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?[/p][/quote]In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes.[/p][/quote].. ah, really? Let's see your vote in Redbridge went up by a massive 8 votes between 2011 and 2012; from 212 to 220. So, are you now predicting an increase to at least 245 in 2014? I do like to keep track of your predictions; always good for a laugh when they fail to materialise. freefinker
  • Score: 0

12:04pm Tue 29 Jan 13

EASYPHIL says...

£40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton???
I'll do it for £20.000!
Nice little earner!
£40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner! EASYPHIL
  • Score: 0

12:07pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired. freefinker
  • Score: 0

12:18pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me southy
  • Score: 0

12:20pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time.
But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters.

Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me[/p][/quote]Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't southy
  • Score: 0

12:25pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Torchie1 says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
It's always been a mystery to me why so many people continually vote for a 'failed system' in the face of overwhelming 'evidence' provided by Southy.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]It's always been a mystery to me why so many people continually vote for a 'failed system' in the face of overwhelming 'evidence' provided by Southy. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel? loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:32pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
Since when has the town hall been an employment agency?
Ever since the Torys turned it into one
Southy I try to talk with you but WHY when the Party supporters you should be attracting over to your party lies & makes ridiculous actions do you turn it into an attack on the Tories?
It wasn't the Tories Tucker had an agreement with to oust the last council.
It wasn't the Tories that Tucker & his Union mates bought in members to get elected was it?
It wasn't the Tories where the Unions sat an advised on the budget.
It wasn't the Tories who got their members to drop legal action & accept a deal whilst knowing of the councils plans for job losses & fortnightly collections was it?
Try winning votes not just making up stories!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: Since when has the town hall been an employment agency?[/p][/quote]Ever since the Torys turned it into one[/p][/quote]Southy I try to talk with you but WHY when the Party supporters you should be attracting over to your party lies & makes ridiculous actions do you turn it into an attack on the Tories? It wasn't the Tories Tucker had an agreement with to oust the last council. It wasn't the Tories that Tucker & his Union mates bought in members to get elected was it? It wasn't the Tories where the Unions sat an advised on the budget. It wasn't the Tories who got their members to drop legal action & accept a deal whilst knowing of the councils plans for job losses & fortnightly collections was it? Try winning votes not just making up stories! loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:34pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time.
But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters.

Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't
Rome wasn't that a dictatorship?
Oh! that's what most Socialist states are aren't they?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me[/p][/quote]Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't[/p][/quote]Rome wasn't that a dictatorship? Oh! that's what most Socialist states are aren't they? loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:35pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Maine Lobster says...

aldermoorboy wrote:
Take unions off the pay role that will save us Tax payers £500,000 each year.
Odds on you would be first!
[quote][p][bold]aldermoorboy[/bold] wrote: Take unions off the pay role that will save us Tax payers £500,000 each year.[/p][/quote]Odds on you would be first! Maine Lobster
  • Score: 0

12:39pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Maine Lobster says...

loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
It feels better than under the last lot, I bet!
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]It feels better than under the last lot, I bet! Maine Lobster
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time.
But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters.

Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't
.. yes, that's the way to win friends and influence people. Tell them they are all thick and don't ‘understand anything’. And you wonder why you get hardly any votes?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me[/p][/quote]Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't[/p][/quote].. yes, that's the way to win friends and influence people. Tell them they are all thick and don't ‘understand anything’. And you wonder why you get hardly any votes? freefinker
  • Score: 0

12:41pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't
You'd be better off building sand castles.

And you only think you know about politics, there's a big difference!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me[/p][/quote]Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't[/p][/quote]You'd be better off building sand castles. And you only think you know about politics, there's a big difference! Shoong
  • Score: 0

12:48pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Linesman says...

EASYPHIL wrote:
£40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton???
I'll do it for £20.000!
Nice little earner!
I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel.

Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000?

As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.
[quote][p][bold]EASYPHIL[/bold] wrote: £40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner![/p][/quote]I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel. Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000? As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify. Linesman
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Outside of the Box says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget.

Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again
.. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?
In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes.
Oh well Pete,,, that's 50 vote you'll get next time round,,,why don't you save your money and not bother?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget. Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again[/p][/quote].. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?[/p][/quote]In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes.[/p][/quote]Oh well Pete,,, that's 50 vote you'll get next time round,,,why don't you save your money and not bother? Outside of the Box
  • Score: 0

12:53pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Torchie1 says...

Linesman wrote:
EASYPHIL wrote:
£40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton???
I'll do it for £20.000!
Nice little earner!
I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel.

Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000?

As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.
I seem to remember this one coming up before and it turned out that driving was only part of the role.
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EASYPHIL[/bold] wrote: £40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner![/p][/quote]I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel. Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000? As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.[/p][/quote]I seem to remember this one coming up before and it turned out that driving was only part of the role. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

12:56pm Tue 29 Jan 13

minnie64 says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Linesman wrote:
EASYPHIL wrote: £40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner!
I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel. Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000? As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.
I seem to remember this one coming up before and it turned out that driving was only part of the role.
Must be an expensive car for £40,000 on upkeep and fuel !!!! Make them get public transport which will then help to boost the economy !!!
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EASYPHIL[/bold] wrote: £40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner![/p][/quote]I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel. Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000? As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.[/p][/quote]I seem to remember this one coming up before and it turned out that driving was only part of the role.[/p][/quote]Must be an expensive car for £40,000 on upkeep and fuel !!!! Make them get public transport which will then help to boost the economy !!! minnie64
  • Score: 0

12:58pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Rockhopper says...

The 50 posts subject to compulsory redundancy should appreciate what they are getting let alone wanting improved terms!
Many businesses are closing down with employees being made redundant with no notice or redundancy pay.
The 50 posts subject to compulsory redundancy should appreciate what they are getting let alone wanting improved terms! Many businesses are closing down with employees being made redundant with no notice or redundancy pay. Rockhopper
  • Score: 0

1:39pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
southy wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
Since when has the town hall been an employment agency?
Ever since the Torys turned it into one
Southy I try to talk with you but WHY when the Party supporters you should be attracting over to your party lies & makes ridiculous actions do you turn it into an attack on the Tories?
It wasn't the Tories Tucker had an agreement with to oust the last council.
It wasn't the Tories that Tucker & his Union mates bought in members to get elected was it?
It wasn't the Tories where the Unions sat an advised on the budget.
It wasn't the Tories who got their members to drop legal action & accept a deal whilst knowing of the councils plans for job losses & fortnightly collections was it?
Try winning votes not just making up stories!
Loose listen and learn, the Torys, Lib/dems and Labour are as bad in one another, its is Capitalism any party that supports and use Capitalism do so knowing it only suited for the few and never suited for the majority, You have openly Labour memebers, Councillors and MP's saying they are Capitalist and team players, Labour is slowly been moving to the Right for a very long time, Williams is a Capitalist and a team player to the National Labour body, Union leaders are the same and so many of the top ranking members to a union like this Mike Tucker (you should read some of the letters he as writen out to be sent out to members the last one was a corker), those in the top ranking with in a union will only fall on the rank and file side when they think there union post is under threat. The next local elections the actions of getting union rank and file to go round the doors is not going to work, people will remember when the time comes.
The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it, it took the Unions Unite which there a great deal of members here in this ward and Unison to hit the area a few days before polling day to make sure that the union members voted Labour many where not going to, but the usual black mailing stuff was handed out by the right wing of the union about letting the Torys stay in power and what would happen if they did, but failed to tell them that Labour was going to do the same as the Torys but in a different way, the difference between Labour and Torys was about 100 job loses with labour being the lesser of the 2 evils
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: Since when has the town hall been an employment agency?[/p][/quote]Ever since the Torys turned it into one[/p][/quote]Southy I try to talk with you but WHY when the Party supporters you should be attracting over to your party lies & makes ridiculous actions do you turn it into an attack on the Tories? It wasn't the Tories Tucker had an agreement with to oust the last council. It wasn't the Tories that Tucker & his Union mates bought in members to get elected was it? It wasn't the Tories where the Unions sat an advised on the budget. It wasn't the Tories who got their members to drop legal action & accept a deal whilst knowing of the councils plans for job losses & fortnightly collections was it? Try winning votes not just making up stories![/p][/quote]Loose listen and learn, the Torys, Lib/dems and Labour are as bad in one another, its is Capitalism any party that supports and use Capitalism do so knowing it only suited for the few and never suited for the majority, You have openly Labour memebers, Councillors and MP's saying they are Capitalist and team players, Labour is slowly been moving to the Right for a very long time, Williams is a Capitalist and a team player to the National Labour body, Union leaders are the same and so many of the top ranking members to a union like this Mike Tucker (you should read some of the letters he as writen out to be sent out to members the last one was a corker), those in the top ranking with in a union will only fall on the rank and file side when they think there union post is under threat. The next local elections the actions of getting union rank and file to go round the doors is not going to work, people will remember when the time comes. The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it, it took the Unions Unite which there a great deal of members here in this ward and Unison to hit the area a few days before polling day to make sure that the union members voted Labour many where not going to, but the usual black mailing stuff was handed out by the right wing of the union about letting the Torys stay in power and what would happen if they did, but failed to tell them that Labour was going to do the same as the Torys but in a different way, the difference between Labour and Torys was about 100 job loses with labour being the lesser of the 2 evils southy
  • Score: 0

1:54pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
. oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks. freefinker
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
southy wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time.
But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters.

Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't
Rome wasn't that a dictatorship?
Oh! that's what most Socialist states are aren't they?
It just means that Things like political partys do not happen over night it takes time, and the first thing any political party that is new, needs to find where and how many are its base voters, once you got that, then you can move onto the next stage the build up, How long as the BNP and UKIP been at it for and still only in the second stage, and they are the 2 of the oldest, newest partys about. The TUSC is only a few years old and they are all ready at a stage that is larger than what the BNP and UKIP was at the same number of years after first starting.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me[/p][/quote]Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't[/p][/quote]Rome wasn't that a dictatorship? Oh! that's what most Socialist states are aren't they?[/p][/quote]It just means that Things like political partys do not happen over night it takes time, and the first thing any political party that is new, needs to find where and how many are its base voters, once you got that, then you can move onto the next stage the build up, How long as the BNP and UKIP been at it for and still only in the second stage, and they are the 2 of the oldest, newest partys about. The TUSC is only a few years old and they are all ready at a stage that is larger than what the BNP and UKIP was at the same number of years after first starting. southy
  • Score: 0

2:02pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time.
But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters.

Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't
.. yes, that's the way to win friends and influence people. Tell them they are all thick and don't ‘understand anything’. And you wonder why you get hardly any votes?
I not calling you thick or any one else, you do that your self, I just saying you don't under stand politics, but then you need to get involve to under stand it, And unlike you free I chose to get involved insted of sitting on the out side and moan about what is happening.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me[/p][/quote]Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't[/p][/quote].. yes, that's the way to win friends and influence people. Tell them they are all thick and don't ‘understand anything’. And you wonder why you get hardly any votes?[/p][/quote]I not calling you thick or any one else, you do that your self, I just saying you don't under stand politics, but then you need to get involve to under stand it, And unlike you free I chose to get involved insted of sitting on the out side and moan about what is happening. southy
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

Outside of the Box wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget.

Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again
.. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?
In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes.
Oh well Pete,,, that's 50 vote you'll get next time round,,,why don't you save your money and not bother?
Because what I do maybe not for my benefit but for others that will follow, I am setting down the roots for the next person.
[quote][p][bold]Outside of the Box[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: t is the first time the trade unions, who wanted the cash spent on services and improved pay-offs for staff facing compulsory redundancy, have broken ranks with Labour over their handling of the budget. Union leaders not its rank and file members, a number of the members have all ready said they will not longer vote labour again[/p][/quote].. would you like to put a quantity to 'a number'?[/p][/quote]In my area around 25 and is growing. I know it don't sound a lot, but there is over 12 mths before the next local election, this time when Labour voters revolt against the Labour party, they will not be voting Torys the TUSC will pick up there votes.[/p][/quote]Oh well Pete,,, that's 50 vote you'll get next time round,,,why don't you save your money and not bother?[/p][/quote]Because what I do maybe not for my benefit but for others that will follow, I am setting down the roots for the next person. southy
  • Score: 0

2:19pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting southy
  • Score: 0

2:29pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
Which would mean the Torys where out of it, like they normally are, the Tory vote in the Redbridge alters very little, and in the pass could only win this ward when there is a backlash against the Labour Party.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote]Which would mean the Torys where out of it, like they normally are, the Tory vote in the Redbridge alters very little, and in the pass could only win this ward when there is a backlash against the Labour Party. southy
  • Score: 0

2:35pm Tue 29 Jan 13

IronLady2010 says...

That must be the best answer I've ever seen Southy give on here.

You see it doesn't matter about what actually happens, it's all about what could have happened that is factual.

Did you not know this freefinker, you're so behind the times ;-)
That must be the best answer I've ever seen Southy give on here. You see it doesn't matter about what actually happens, it's all about what could have happened that is factual. Did you not know this freefinker, you're so behind the times ;-) IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

2:37pm Tue 29 Jan 13

rich the stitch says...

So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest.
You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them. rich the stitch
  • Score: 0

2:41pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

rich the stitch wrote:
So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest.
You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
[quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party. southy
  • Score: 0

2:49pm Tue 29 Jan 13

EASYPHIL says...

Linesman wrote:
EASYPHIL wrote:
£40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton???
I'll do it for £20.000!
Nice little earner!
I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel.

Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000?

As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.
Let you know Linesman, how dare you suggest that I am not clean and smart(rsole)
And yes I do know the FULL repsonsibilites of a chauffeur.
Been in the hospitality industry for many many years so dont jump to conclusions
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EASYPHIL[/bold] wrote: £40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner![/p][/quote]I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel. Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000? As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.[/p][/quote]Let you know Linesman, how dare you suggest that I am not clean and smart(rsole) And yes I do know the FULL repsonsibilites of a chauffeur. Been in the hospitality industry for many many years so dont jump to conclusions EASYPHIL
  • Score: 0

2:58pm Tue 29 Jan 13

George4th says...

loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! > George4th
  • Score: 0

3:00pm Tue 29 Jan 13

rich the stitch says...

southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it. rich the stitch
  • Score: 0

3:06pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour.
Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour.
He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes?
[quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.[/p][/quote]Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour. Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour. He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes? loosehead
  • Score: 0

3:12pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

I was asked if I was in budget meetings?
I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks.
Where's my apology?
will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it?
Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it.
did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election?
But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair?
if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour?
I was asked if I was in budget meetings? I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks. Where's my apology? will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it? Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it. did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election? But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair? if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour? loosehead
  • Score: 0

3:22pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour.
Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour.
He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes?
Simple loosehead .............. Like the majority of people that voted in May .. They would rather see a Labour Council than Tories at any price.
.
Despite the usual Tory Dinosaur's posting on here the City had 4 years of poor leadership under Smith and his band.
.
Money wasted on a white elephant and taxpayers picking up the bill for their lies re funding.
.
The people of Southampton democratically gave their decision on who should run this City ..... Despite the cr@p from you and one or two others on here, despite the propoaganda from Smith and Co and despite the Echo .......... Labour won.
.
Get over it ..... It aint changing yet .. If at all
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.[/p][/quote]Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour. Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour. He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes?[/p][/quote]Simple loosehead .............. Like the majority of people that voted in May .. They would rather see a Labour Council than Tories at any price. . Despite the usual Tory Dinosaur's posting on here the City had 4 years of poor leadership under Smith and his band. . Money wasted on a white elephant and taxpayers picking up the bill for their lies re funding. . The people of Southampton democratically gave their decision on who should run this City ..... Despite the cr@p from you and one or two others on here, despite the propoaganda from Smith and Co and despite the Echo .......... Labour won. . Get over it ..... It aint changing yet .. If at all Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

3:36pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

loosehead wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour.
Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour.
He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes?
But in the Redbridge ward they was not telling there members not to vote Tory, they was telling there members not to vote TUSC as the TUSC was the biggest threat to the Labour party in the Redbridge ward
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.[/p][/quote]Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour. Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour. He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes?[/p][/quote]But in the Redbridge ward they was not telling there members not to vote Tory, they was telling there members not to vote TUSC as the TUSC was the biggest threat to the Labour party in the Redbridge ward southy
  • Score: 0

3:39pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
What utter rubbish yet again.
.
I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here.
.
As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!.
.
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. . Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

3:47pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
How could they trash any one in the Redbridge ward, to be able to do that you need to be improving and that what the Torys are not doing improving in the Redbridge ward they are stagnant.
The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little, If very voter was to vote in the Redbridge ward the Torys would not gain any more votes than they are doing so now.
[quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.[/p][/quote]How could they trash any one in the Redbridge ward, to be able to do that you need to be improving and that what the Torys are not doing improving in the Redbridge ward they are stagnant. The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little, If very voter was to vote in the Redbridge ward the Torys would not gain any more votes than they are doing so now. southy
  • Score: 0

4:21pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
.. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'.

Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011.

And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote].. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'. Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011. And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny. freefinker
  • Score: 0

4:23pm Tue 29 Jan 13

localnews says...

southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
How could they trash any one in the Redbridge ward, to be able to do that you need to be improving and that what the Torys are not doing improving in the Redbridge ward they are stagnant.
The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little, If very voter was to vote in the Redbridge ward the Torys would not gain any more votes than they are doing so now.
There's no proof your lot would gain anywhere near enough to be seriously considered anything other than a poor substitute for the monster raving lunatic party,so what exactly is your ranting and raving about.
Most sensible people know all parties promise the earth and fail miserably,they're all looking out for themselve's......tha
ts politics for you,lies more lies and topped up with B*llsh1t
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.[/p][/quote]How could they trash any one in the Redbridge ward, to be able to do that you need to be improving and that what the Torys are not doing improving in the Redbridge ward they are stagnant. The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little, If very voter was to vote in the Redbridge ward the Torys would not gain any more votes than they are doing so now.[/p][/quote]There's no proof your lot would gain anywhere near enough to be seriously considered anything other than a poor substitute for the monster raving lunatic party,so what exactly is your ranting and raving about. Most sensible people know all parties promise the earth and fail miserably,they're all looking out for themselve's......tha ts politics for you,lies more lies and topped up with B*llsh1t localnews
  • Score: 0

4:28pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
“By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.”

Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system
.. Labour has 'lost touch'??

Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them?

2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.
2.6 for me
Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time.
But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters.

Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't
.. yes, that's the way to win friends and influence people. Tell them they are all thick and don't ‘understand anything’. And you wonder why you get hardly any votes?
I not calling you thick or any one else, you do that your self, I just saying you don't under stand politics, but then you need to get involve to under stand it, And unlike you free I chose to get involved insted of sitting on the out side and moan about what is happening.
.. er, no. I don't think I have called myself thick. But you saying I don't understand politics is tantamount to you calling me thick.

It would seem from what you have posted today that you have a limited understanding of the political processes. Your ignorance of how local government is funded, as you clearly demonstrated last year, further backs up this assessment.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: “By the choices they have made, Labour councillors have demonstrated that they are at risk of losing touch with the people of Southampton who put them in office in May 2012.” Like the Torys and the Lib/dem, Labour as a whole have lost touch with the people ever since they push the left wing out of the party and turn to 100% Capitalism the failed system[/p][/quote].. Labour has 'lost touch'?? Strange, did they not sweep into power in 2012 because, er, lots of people voted for them? 2012 Southampton results: Labour 43.7%, TUSC 2.1%. I think your analysis leave a lot to be desired.[/p][/quote]2.6 for me[/p][/quote]Rome was not built in a day as you might like to think, it will take a bit of time. But we are going in the right direction and that is up wards, which means we still not reach the Base number of voters. Its a shame you don't understand any thing about politics like so many don't[/p][/quote].. yes, that's the way to win friends and influence people. Tell them they are all thick and don't ‘understand anything’. And you wonder why you get hardly any votes?[/p][/quote]I not calling you thick or any one else, you do that your self, I just saying you don't under stand politics, but then you need to get involve to under stand it, And unlike you free I chose to get involved insted of sitting on the out side and moan about what is happening.[/p][/quote].. er, no. I don't think I have called myself thick. But you saying I don't understand politics is tantamount to you calling me thick. It would seem from what you have posted today that you have a limited understanding of the political processes. Your ignorance of how local government is funded, as you clearly demonstrated last year, further backs up this assessment. freefinker
  • Score: 0

4:30pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
That must be the best answer I've ever seen Southy give on here.

You see it doesn't matter about what actually happens, it's all about what could have happened that is factual.

Did you not know this freefinker, you're so behind the times ;-)
.. have to admit it's up there with the best. LOL
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: That must be the best answer I've ever seen Southy give on here. You see it doesn't matter about what actually happens, it's all about what could have happened that is factual. Did you not know this freefinker, you're so behind the times ;-)[/p][/quote].. have to admit it's up there with the best. LOL freefinker
  • Score: 0

4:42pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Linesman says...

minnie64 wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Linesman wrote:
EASYPHIL wrote: £40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner!
I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel. Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000? As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.
I seem to remember this one coming up before and it turned out that driving was only part of the role.
Must be an expensive car for £40,000 on upkeep and fuel !!!! Make them get public transport which will then help to boost the economy !!!
The driver has to be paid, or did you think that the mayor drove it himself?
[quote][p][bold]minnie64[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]EASYPHIL[/bold] wrote: £40.000 to drive the mayor around the city of Southampton??? I'll do it for £20.000! Nice little earner![/p][/quote]I would assume that the £40,000 includes maintenance of the vehicle and the fuel. Would you still be prepared to take it on for £20,000? As the chauffeur has to be smart, if you say that you would take that on for £20,000, then I don't think you would qualify.[/p][/quote]I seem to remember this one coming up before and it turned out that driving was only part of the role.[/p][/quote]Must be an expensive car for £40,000 on upkeep and fuel !!!! Make them get public transport which will then help to boost the economy !!![/p][/quote]The driver has to be paid, or did you think that the mayor drove it himself? Linesman
  • Score: 0

4:42pm Tue 29 Jan 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
.. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'.

Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011.

And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny.
They decided to do what the Ubion leaders was telling to do, and nothing more, next time this tac will not work and it will be left to decide on the day of the next polling day.
Lets face it up till 2 years ago there was no choice for the people of Redbridge to vote for, and that vote went to Labour, the Torys vote as moved very little and there % only go up and down according the numbers of voting people, the number that votes for them changes very little, if every voter in Redbridge ward was to get out and vote then the Tory vote would be less than 8%, while the Labour and the TUSC would increase a great deal, but many left wing voters have become disalution with Labour in the last 25 years so much now that they don't vote, The TUSC is here for them to get them back to the ballot box, and when they do the real battle will begin, the Torys will just be push to one side.
How come loose knew and under stands what was going on and you don't Free, I tell you why that is because Loose is involved and takes more notice of what is going on.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote].. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'. Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011. And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny.[/p][/quote]They decided to do what the Ubion leaders was telling to do, and nothing more, next time this tac will not work and it will be left to decide on the day of the next polling day. Lets face it up till 2 years ago there was no choice for the people of Redbridge to vote for, and that vote went to Labour, the Torys vote as moved very little and there % only go up and down according the numbers of voting people, the number that votes for them changes very little, if every voter in Redbridge ward was to get out and vote then the Tory vote would be less than 8%, while the Labour and the TUSC would increase a great deal, but many left wing voters have become disalution with Labour in the last 25 years so much now that they don't vote, The TUSC is here for them to get them back to the ballot box, and when they do the real battle will begin, the Torys will just be push to one side. How come loose knew and under stands what was going on and you don't Free, I tell you why that is because Loose is involved and takes more notice of what is going on. southy
  • Score: 0

4:44pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
How could they trash any one in the Redbridge ward, to be able to do that you need to be improving and that what the Torys are not doing improving in the Redbridge ward they are stagnant.
The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little, If very voter was to vote in the Redbridge ward the Torys would not gain any more votes than they are doing so now.
.. ah, I see. So, as you say: -

'The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little'.

As you managed to increase your vote by a massive 8 (up from 212 to 220) we could rephrase your little quote to read: -

‘The TUSC vote in Redbridge is only the TUSC voters which change very little’.

Now, in reality, that would actually be true, wouldn't it?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.[/p][/quote]How could they trash any one in the Redbridge ward, to be able to do that you need to be improving and that what the Torys are not doing improving in the Redbridge ward they are stagnant. The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little, If very voter was to vote in the Redbridge ward the Torys would not gain any more votes than they are doing so now.[/p][/quote].. ah, I see. So, as you say: - 'The Tory vote in Redbridge is only the Tory voters which change very little'. As you managed to increase your vote by a massive 8 (up from 212 to 220) we could rephrase your little quote to read: - ‘The TUSC vote in Redbridge is only the TUSC voters which change very little’. Now, in reality, that would actually be true, wouldn't it? freefinker
  • Score: 0

4:48pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Linesman says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
And you fail to understand that pigs could fly if they had wings and feathers.

It Could have been TUSC 61% but, in actual fact it was TUSC 7.6% which is a 53.4% difference.

That would have been a swing of gigantic proportions, never seen before in British elections.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote]And you fail to understand that pigs could fly if they had wings and feathers. It Could have been TUSC 61% but, in actual fact it was TUSC 7.6% which is a 53.4% difference. That would have been a swing of gigantic proportions, never seen before in British elections. Linesman
  • Score: 0

4:51pm Tue 29 Jan 13

George4th says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
What utter rubbish yet again.
.
I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here.
.
As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!.
.
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!)

>

Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?"

>

BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions! George4th
  • Score: 0

4:53pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
.. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'.

Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011.

And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny.
They decided to do what the Ubion leaders was telling to do, and nothing more, next time this tac will not work and it will be left to decide on the day of the next polling day.
Lets face it up till 2 years ago there was no choice for the people of Redbridge to vote for, and that vote went to Labour, the Torys vote as moved very little and there % only go up and down according the numbers of voting people, the number that votes for them changes very little, if every voter in Redbridge ward was to get out and vote then the Tory vote would be less than 8%, while the Labour and the TUSC would increase a great deal, but many left wing voters have become disalution with Labour in the last 25 years so much now that they don't vote, The TUSC is here for them to get them back to the ballot box, and when they do the real battle will begin, the Torys will just be push to one side.
How come loose knew and under stands what was going on and you don't Free, I tell you why that is because Loose is involved and takes more notice of what is going on.
.. oh, no wonder you get so few votes when you consistently belittle the electorate in Redbridge ward with such condescending rubbish.

If you actually think the people in Redbridge are so stupid that union leaders can make them vote this way or that, then you really are a first class political fool.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote].. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'. Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011. And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny.[/p][/quote]They decided to do what the Ubion leaders was telling to do, and nothing more, next time this tac will not work and it will be left to decide on the day of the next polling day. Lets face it up till 2 years ago there was no choice for the people of Redbridge to vote for, and that vote went to Labour, the Torys vote as moved very little and there % only go up and down according the numbers of voting people, the number that votes for them changes very little, if every voter in Redbridge ward was to get out and vote then the Tory vote would be less than 8%, while the Labour and the TUSC would increase a great deal, but many left wing voters have become disalution with Labour in the last 25 years so much now that they don't vote, The TUSC is here for them to get them back to the ballot box, and when they do the real battle will begin, the Torys will just be push to one side. How come loose knew and under stands what was going on and you don't Free, I tell you why that is because Loose is involved and takes more notice of what is going on.[/p][/quote].. oh, no wonder you get so few votes when you consistently belittle the electorate in Redbridge ward with such condescending rubbish. If you actually think the people in Redbridge are so stupid that union leaders can make them vote this way or that, then you really are a first class political fool. freefinker
  • Score: 0

4:57pm Tue 29 Jan 13

soton-mike80 says...

Jobs are no longer for life. The problem here is that you could invest and safeguard the money to pay a person's salary for a year, but you would be in the same position the following year.

If the council have offered up a position as savings, then it is obvious that they can make do without that person being employed. Why keep someone employed for the sake of employment at the cost to the taxpayer.

Harsh I know - but then life is harsh - I was made redundant by Southampton City Council in the first rounds of cuts and yes... they could and did do without my post. I am now gainfully employed in the private sector.

In this climate, the council needs to get rid of all the warm and fluffy services that are non-essential - sack the Unions, they don't do anything but bluster and waste time, money and resources that could be used to keep more essential services running. Again - in the private sector I am not a member of a union and I do not need to be!
Jobs are no longer for life. The problem here is that you could invest and safeguard the money to pay a person's salary for a year, but you would be in the same position the following year. If the council have offered up a position as savings, then it is obvious that they can make do without that person being employed. Why keep someone employed for the sake of employment at the cost to the taxpayer. Harsh I know - but then life is harsh - I was made redundant by Southampton City Council in the first rounds of cuts and yes... they could and did do without my post. I am now gainfully employed in the private sector. In this climate, the council needs to get rid of all the warm and fluffy services that are non-essential - sack the Unions, they don't do anything but bluster and waste time, money and resources that could be used to keep more essential services running. Again - in the private sector I am not a member of a union and I do not need to be! soton-mike80
  • Score: 0

5:00pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
What utter rubbish yet again.
.
I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here.
.
As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!.
.
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!)

>

Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?"

>

BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST.
.
Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail.
.
You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time.
.
Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets.
...........
.
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... . Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

5:02pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.
The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.
I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it.
If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.
Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour.
Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour.
He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes?
Simple loosehead .............. Like the majority of people that voted in May .. They would rather see a Labour Council than Tories at any price.
.
Despite the usual Tory Dinosaur's posting on here the City had 4 years of poor leadership under Smith and his band.
.
Money wasted on a white elephant and taxpayers picking up the bill for their lies re funding.
.
The people of Southampton democratically gave their decision on who should run this City ..... Despite the cr@p from you and one or two others on here, despite the propoaganda from Smith and Co and despite the Echo .......... Labour won.
.
Get over it ..... It aint changing yet .. If at all
Didn't see bus loads of Tory supporters coming into the City knocking doors telling people to vote Tory or face higher council taxes. higher job losses,fortnightly collections & swinging cuts to services did we?
On the other hand we had Union members from out side this city knocking doors telling people to vote Labour or suffer more bin strikes is that the way Labour wins votes?
Is that really democratic?
Funny I've now been proved right about Car Park charges but no apologies from the person who called me a liar ?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: So the Tories would would still of been it in (2nd in fact), and not 'way out of it' as you suggest. You must be an embarrassment to the TUSC. If you want them to gain more votes, I suggest you hang your flat cap up and deny you have anything to do with them.[/p][/quote]The Torys in the Redbridge ward are all ways out of it, thats why they only put up paper candidates in this ward because they know they can not win the seat though electioneering and only get lucky when there is a back lash against the Labour Party.[/p][/quote]I'd say there were more in it than you were. They totally trashed you even with a 'paper candidate', how embarrassing is that. What with Southy, voice of the people, constantly on the streets getting the feedback of the common man to find out what they want. Their paper candidate knows more about what people want in Redbridge than you, the votes prove it. If you are a fair representation of a TUSC member than good luck to you, you're gonna need it.[/p][/quote]Southy also fails to mention the union members from outside the City that were knocking doors telling/advising people not to vote Tory but to vote Labour. Southy also seems to forget the letters sent to Union members ( no matter what their politics were/are) telling them to vote Labour. He says he's doing what he can to build a base support for the TUSC so why isn't he screaming about those underhanded tactics by the Unions & Labour party that in his words cost him votes?[/p][/quote]Simple loosehead .............. Like the majority of people that voted in May .. They would rather see a Labour Council than Tories at any price. . Despite the usual Tory Dinosaur's posting on here the City had 4 years of poor leadership under Smith and his band. . Money wasted on a white elephant and taxpayers picking up the bill for their lies re funding. . The people of Southampton democratically gave their decision on who should run this City ..... Despite the cr@p from you and one or two others on here, despite the propoaganda from Smith and Co and despite the Echo .......... Labour won. . Get over it ..... It aint changing yet .. If at all[/p][/quote]Didn't see bus loads of Tory supporters coming into the City knocking doors telling people to vote Tory or face higher council taxes. higher job losses,fortnightly collections & swinging cuts to services did we? On the other hand we had Union members from out side this city knocking doors telling people to vote Labour or suffer more bin strikes is that the way Labour wins votes? Is that really democratic? Funny I've now been proved right about Car Park charges but no apologies from the person who called me a liar ? loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:06pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
What utter rubbish yet again.
.
I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here.
.
As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!.
.
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!)

>

Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?"

>

BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST.
.
Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail.
.
You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time.
.
Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets.
...........
.
What about the one called the Snow dome?
out of those 8 Lidls was planned when we had a Tory council & Labour was against it sop you can't claim credit for that.
how many more are on the Millbrook industrial estate?
the same estate that was stagnating under Council control but seems to be going great guns since sold to a private company & the proceeds went towards the Sea City museum,
earning us more business rates which thanks to the coalition we now keep
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]What about the one called the Snow dome? out of those 8 Lidls was planned when we had a Tory council & Labour was against it sop you can't claim credit for that. how many more are on the Millbrook industrial estate? the same estate that was stagnating under Council control but seems to be going great guns since sold to a private company & the proceeds went towards the Sea City museum, earning us more business rates which thanks to the coalition we now keep loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:09pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
.. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'.

Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011.

And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny.
They decided to do what the Ubion leaders was telling to do, and nothing more, next time this tac will not work and it will be left to decide on the day of the next polling day.
Lets face it up till 2 years ago there was no choice for the people of Redbridge to vote for, and that vote went to Labour, the Torys vote as moved very little and there % only go up and down according the numbers of voting people, the number that votes for them changes very little, if every voter in Redbridge ward was to get out and vote then the Tory vote would be less than 8%, while the Labour and the TUSC would increase a great deal, but many left wing voters have become disalution with Labour in the last 25 years so much now that they don't vote, The TUSC is here for them to get them back to the ballot box, and when they do the real battle will begin, the Torys will just be push to one side.
How come loose knew and under stands what was going on and you don't Free, I tell you why that is because Loose is involved and takes more notice of what is going on.
Holmes Tory councillor for Redbridge?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote].. oh yes, southy; it 'could of been'. Except the electorate decisively decided otherwise; just like they did in 2011. And you tell me that I fail to understand. Now, that is funny.[/p][/quote]They decided to do what the Ubion leaders was telling to do, and nothing more, next time this tac will not work and it will be left to decide on the day of the next polling day. Lets face it up till 2 years ago there was no choice for the people of Redbridge to vote for, and that vote went to Labour, the Torys vote as moved very little and there % only go up and down according the numbers of voting people, the number that votes for them changes very little, if every voter in Redbridge ward was to get out and vote then the Tory vote would be less than 8%, while the Labour and the TUSC would increase a great deal, but many left wing voters have become disalution with Labour in the last 25 years so much now that they don't vote, The TUSC is here for them to get them back to the ballot box, and when they do the real battle will begin, the Torys will just be push to one side. How come loose knew and under stands what was going on and you don't Free, I tell you why that is because Loose is involved and takes more notice of what is going on.[/p][/quote]Holmes Tory councillor for Redbridge? loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:15pm Tue 29 Jan 13

bigfella777 says...

I will drive the mayor around for the next year for half the amount quoted for the next 12 months that will save 20k for a start.
40k a year for a driver that's a joke, £6.50 an hour in the real world.
I will drive the mayor around for the next year for half the amount quoted for the next 12 months that will save 20k for a start. 40k a year for a driver that's a joke, £6.50 an hour in the real world. bigfella777
  • Score: 0

5:16pm Tue 29 Jan 13

George4th says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
What utter rubbish yet again.
.
I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here.
.
As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!.
.
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!)

>

Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?"

>

BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST.
.
Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail.
.
You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time.
.
Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets.
...........
.
Best time to invest is in a recession!
>
Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging!
>
Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton. George4th
  • Score: 0

5:22pm Tue 29 Jan 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
. oh, southy, you say: -

'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it'

Result, 2012, Redbridge: -
Labour 61.6%.
Tories 24.4%.
TUSC 7.6%.

Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%.
the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote.
Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
.. oh, southy; wrong again.

In 2012 Bargate, Bevois and Swathling all had lower turnouts than Redbridge.

In 2011 these same 3 wards also recorded lower turnouts than Redbridge.

You see, it confirms my belief that you just make it up as you go along.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote].. oh, southy; wrong again. In 2012 Bargate, Bevois and Swathling all had lower turnouts than Redbridge. In 2011 these same 3 wards also recorded lower turnouts than Redbridge. You see, it confirms my belief that you just make it up as you go along. freefinker
  • Score: 0

6:26pm Tue 29 Jan 13

skin2000 says...

It is hard to believe that with all this austerity around that the council is spending £40,000 a year to get the Mayor about.
It is hard to believe that with all this austerity around that the council is spending £40,000 a year to get the Mayor about. skin2000
  • Score: 0

6:31pm Tue 29 Jan 13

thinklikealocal says...

loosehead wrote:
I was asked if I was in budget meetings? I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks. Where's my apology? will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it? Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it. did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election? But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair? if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour?
Firstly, no one has the right to park outside their house. Check you house deeds, they do not extend to the public highway. The offer of residents parking zones was to give them 'priority' parking and the charge just covers the cost of administering this 'privilege'. How can you argue against this?

Secondly, I feel better off under a labour administration!

Thirdly, this story somewhat blows your 'labour/union' power sharing theories out of the water doesn't it?
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: I was asked if I was in budget meetings? I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks. Where's my apology? will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it? Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it. did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election? But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair? if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour?[/p][/quote]Firstly, no one has the right to park outside their house. Check you house deeds, they do not extend to the public highway. The offer of residents parking zones was to give them 'priority' parking and the charge just covers the cost of administering this 'privilege'. How can you argue against this? Secondly, I feel better off under a labour administration! Thirdly, this story somewhat blows your 'labour/union' power sharing theories out of the water doesn't it? thinklikealocal
  • Score: 0

6:34pm Tue 29 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
What utter rubbish yet again.
.
I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here.
.
As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!.
.
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!)

>

Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?"

>

BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST.
.
Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail.
.
You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time.
.
Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets.
...........
.
Best time to invest is in a recession!
>
Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging!
>
Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.
Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to.
.
Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint.
.
As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound
.
SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc.
.
But its good to talk with you again !!!
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.[/p][/quote]Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!! Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

6:48pm Tue 29 Jan 13

George4th says...

Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?!
>
As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money!
>
As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct!
>
And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business!
Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business! George4th
  • Score: 0

6:49pm Tue 29 Jan 13

George4th says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote:
The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council.
the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay.
the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council.
We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not?
Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get.
You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be.
>
Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards!

It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot!

>

Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s!
>
What utter rubbish yet again.
.
I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here.
.
As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!.
.
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!)

>

Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?"

>

BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST.
.
Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail.
.
You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time.
.
Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets.
...........
.
Best time to invest is in a recession!
>
Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging!
>
Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.
Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to.
.
Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint.
.
As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound
.
SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc.
.
But its good to talk with you again !!!
Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?!
>
As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money!
>
As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct!
>
And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business!
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.[/p][/quote]Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!![/p][/quote]Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business! George4th
  • Score: 0

6:56pm Tue 29 Jan 13

thinklikealocal says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.
Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting
.. oh, southy; wrong again. In 2012 Bargate, Bevois and Swathling all had lower turnouts than Redbridge. In 2011 these same 3 wards also recorded lower turnouts than Redbridge. You see, it confirms my belief that you just make it up as you go along.
Agreed.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: . oh, southy, you say: - 'The last year local election in the Redbridge ward was a straight fight between the TUSC and Labour the Torys was way out of it' Result, 2012, Redbridge: - Labour 61.6%. Tories 24.4%. TUSC 7.6%. Yes, I must say it does look like the Tories were out of it. Funny then that they got over three times the vote TUSC received. Must be an illusion, me finks.[/p][/quote]Again you failed to under stand. that could of been TUSC 61% Torys 24% Labour 7%. the Redbridge ward is a working class stronghold and the only other time some thing different is put in, is because of a backlash or people don't vote. Redbridge had the lowest turn out of voters again because many of the normal voters that use to vote 30 years ago have stop voting[/p][/quote].. oh, southy; wrong again. In 2012 Bargate, Bevois and Swathling all had lower turnouts than Redbridge. In 2011 these same 3 wards also recorded lower turnouts than Redbridge. You see, it confirms my belief that you just make it up as you go along.[/p][/quote]Agreed. thinklikealocal
  • Score: 0

6:57pm Tue 29 Jan 13

thinklikealocal says...

skin2000 wrote:
It is hard to believe that with all this austerity around that the council is spending £40,000 a year to get the Mayor about.
Agreed.
[quote][p][bold]skin2000[/bold] wrote: It is hard to believe that with all this austerity around that the council is spending £40,000 a year to get the Mayor about.[/p][/quote]Agreed. thinklikealocal
  • Score: 0

7:05pm Tue 29 Jan 13

IronLady2010 says...

I feel the unions should Butt out, this is an additional £5 million which the Council have a duty to use in the best interests of the City.

Putting all the money into saving jobs would only be a short term fix and those jobs would be at risk again next year so the money would have been wasted.

Stop interfering in our City and leave the experts to run it.
I feel the unions should Butt out, this is an additional £5 million which the Council have a duty to use in the best interests of the City. Putting all the money into saving jobs would only be a short term fix and those jobs would be at risk again next year so the money would have been wasted. Stop interfering in our City and leave the experts to run it. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

7:38pm Tue 29 Jan 13

skin2000 says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
I feel the unions should Butt out, this is an additional £5 million which the Council have a duty to use in the best interests of the City.

Putting all the money into saving jobs would only be a short term fix and those jobs would be at risk again next year so the money would have been wasted.

Stop interfering in our City and leave the experts to run it.
If the experts are spending £40,000 to transport the mayor around, perhaps they are not so good as you think they are....If this is an example of how money is wasted, is not surprising why council tax is so costly.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I feel the unions should Butt out, this is an additional £5 million which the Council have a duty to use in the best interests of the City. Putting all the money into saving jobs would only be a short term fix and those jobs would be at risk again next year so the money would have been wasted. Stop interfering in our City and leave the experts to run it.[/p][/quote]If the experts are spending £40,000 to transport the mayor around, perhaps they are not so good as you think they are....If this is an example of how money is wasted, is not surprising why council tax is so costly. skin2000
  • Score: 0

7:51pm Tue 29 Jan 13

thinklikealocal says...

George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >
What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .
Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.
Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!!
Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business!
Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail!
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.[/p][/quote]Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!![/p][/quote]Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business![/p][/quote]Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail! thinklikealocal
  • Score: 0

8:40pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

thinklikealocal wrote:
loosehead wrote:
I was asked if I was in budget meetings? I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks. Where's my apology? will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it? Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it. did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election? But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair? if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour?
Firstly, no one has the right to park outside their house. Check you house deeds, they do not extend to the public highway. The offer of residents parking zones was to give them 'priority' parking and the charge just covers the cost of administering this 'privilege'. How can you argue against this?

Secondly, I feel better off under a labour administration!

Thirdly, this story somewhat blows your 'labour/union' power sharing theories out of the water doesn't it?
So some one from Eastleigh trying to defend cut in services & jobs to give restore her pay has the Gaul to comment about people not having the right to park outside their homes on the road the same road they pay tax to drive their vehicles on?
These resident bays were put there so locals could park there & not people saying going to the hospital or work stopping the locals from parking in front of their homes.
Now your saying it's okay to charge them? why are you after a pay rise as well as pay restoration?
[quote][p][bold]thinklikealocal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: I was asked if I was in budget meetings? I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks. Where's my apology? will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it? Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it. did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election? But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair? if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour?[/p][/quote]Firstly, no one has the right to park outside their house. Check you house deeds, they do not extend to the public highway. The offer of residents parking zones was to give them 'priority' parking and the charge just covers the cost of administering this 'privilege'. How can you argue against this? Secondly, I feel better off under a labour administration! Thirdly, this story somewhat blows your 'labour/union' power sharing theories out of the water doesn't it?[/p][/quote]So some one from Eastleigh trying to defend cut in services & jobs to give restore her pay has the Gaul to comment about people not having the right to park outside their homes on the road the same road they pay tax to drive their vehicles on? These resident bays were put there so locals could park there & not people saying going to the hospital or work stopping the locals from parking in front of their homes. Now your saying it's okay to charge them? why are you after a pay rise as well as pay restoration? loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:40pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

thinklikealocal wrote:
loosehead wrote:
I was asked if I was in budget meetings? I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks. Where's my apology? will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it? Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it. did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election? But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair? if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour?
Firstly, no one has the right to park outside their house. Check you house deeds, they do not extend to the public highway. The offer of residents parking zones was to give them 'priority' parking and the charge just covers the cost of administering this 'privilege'. How can you argue against this?

Secondly, I feel better off under a labour administration!

Thirdly, this story somewhat blows your 'labour/union' power sharing theories out of the water doesn't it?
So some one from Eastleigh trying to defend cut in services & jobs to give restore her pay has the Gaul to comment about people not having the right to park outside their homes on the road the same road they pay tax to drive their vehicles on?
These resident bays were put there so locals could park there & not people saying going to the hospital or work stopping the locals from parking in front of their homes.
Now your saying it's okay to charge them? why are you after a pay rise as well as pay restoration?
[quote][p][bold]thinklikealocal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: I was asked if I was in budget meetings? I was told I was a liar after repeating what I read in an article in this paper about charging to park in what is now free car parks. Where's my apology? will we see another U-Turn on a policy the Labour Party had said was not being proposed but will still be policy & they now have said they'll do it? Before the Tories won they were going to charge to park out side your home in designated areas this was unpopular so they dropped it but still wanted to do it. did they tell the electorate they were going to revive that policy before the local election? But they have said in residents parking areas those residents will have to pay is that fair? if what the Tories did was so unfair why does it feel we were far better off under them than under Labour?[/p][/quote]Firstly, no one has the right to park outside their house. Check you house deeds, they do not extend to the public highway. The offer of residents parking zones was to give them 'priority' parking and the charge just covers the cost of administering this 'privilege'. How can you argue against this? Secondly, I feel better off under a labour administration! Thirdly, this story somewhat blows your 'labour/union' power sharing theories out of the water doesn't it?[/p][/quote]So some one from Eastleigh trying to defend cut in services & jobs to give restore her pay has the Gaul to comment about people not having the right to park outside their homes on the road the same road they pay tax to drive their vehicles on? These resident bays were put there so locals could park there & not people saying going to the hospital or work stopping the locals from parking in front of their homes. Now your saying it's okay to charge them? why are you after a pay rise as well as pay restoration? loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:44pm Tue 29 Jan 13

loosehead says...

You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:53pm Tue 29 Jan 13

IronLady2010 says...

loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind! IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

12:07am Wed 30 Jan 13

George4th says...

thinklikealocal wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >
What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .
Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.
Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!!
Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business!
Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail!
Vague?! You are the one being Vague!

Just look up the business history of Southampton- it is self-explanatory. It is why, for example, that thousands of jobs were lost in the Docks etc! Southampton was in the thick (and a lot of people were thick!) of Unionism and it was detrimental to Southampton.
[quote][p][bold]thinklikealocal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.[/p][/quote]Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!![/p][/quote]Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business![/p][/quote]Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail![/p][/quote]Vague?! You are the one being Vague! Just look up the business history of Southampton- it is self-explanatory. It is why, for example, that thousands of jobs were lost in the Docks etc! Southampton was in the thick (and a lot of people were thick!) of Unionism and it was detrimental to Southampton. George4th
  • Score: 0

12:50am Wed 30 Jan 13

IronLady2010 says...

The Unions will destroy our City unless us residents stand up to them!

Our City has only recently started moving forward, Guildhall Square, the Sea City etc. We need to keep this going to attract more visitors.

Thus far, the new Council has blocked many plans to improve our City, instead backing down to Unions and re-instating pay for those who are supposed to work for us.

It's about time residents tackled the Unions in saying, we pay for our City and we will fight for it!

The only time you hear from Unions is when they are concerned about Council workers, well sorry, but they are workers who serve the residents.

Let's build a City to be proud of without the Unions interfering, or is that too much to ask?
The Unions will destroy our City unless us residents stand up to them! Our City has only recently started moving forward, Guildhall Square, the Sea City etc. We need to keep this going to attract more visitors. Thus far, the new Council has blocked many plans to improve our City, instead backing down to Unions and re-instating pay for those who are supposed to work for us. It's about time residents tackled the Unions in saying, we pay for our City and we will fight for it! The only time you hear from Unions is when they are concerned about Council workers, well sorry, but they are workers who serve the residents. Let's build a City to be proud of without the Unions interfering, or is that too much to ask? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

12:55am Wed 30 Jan 13

IronLady2010 says...

When was the last time ANYONE in Southampton had a green waste collection?

There have been no collections for months, do you see residents kicking off and waving flags etc.

One rule for workers and another for us residents!
When was the last time ANYONE in Southampton had a green waste collection? There have been no collections for months, do you see residents kicking off and waving flags etc. One rule for workers and another for us residents! IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

8:07am Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
When was the last time ANYONE in Southampton had a green waste collection?

There have been no collections for months, do you see residents kicking off and waving flags etc.

One rule for workers and another for us residents!
We had one before Christmas
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: When was the last time ANYONE in Southampton had a green waste collection? There have been no collections for months, do you see residents kicking off and waving flags etc. One rule for workers and another for us residents![/p][/quote]We had one before Christmas loosehead
  • Score: 0

8:12am Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

George4th wrote:
thinklikealocal wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >
What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .
Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.
Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!!
Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business!
Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail!
Vague?! You are the one being Vague!

Just look up the business history of Southampton- it is self-explanatory. It is why, for example, that thousands of jobs were lost in the Docks etc! Southampton was in the thick (and a lot of people were thick!) of Unionism and it was detrimental to Southampton.
Do you remember the strikes by the dock workers over expanding the area where only Dockies could work?
it would have taken in most of town.
I doubt if thinklikealocal remembers how insignificant Felixstowe was & through Union actions in all Nationalised docks grew as a private non striking docks.
once again a group of workers who could remember the thirties & having to queue up & maybe getting a days work being led to the edge & over by greedy Union conveners ?
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinklikealocal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.[/p][/quote]Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!![/p][/quote]Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business![/p][/quote]Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail![/p][/quote]Vague?! You are the one being Vague! Just look up the business history of Southampton- it is self-explanatory. It is why, for example, that thousands of jobs were lost in the Docks etc! Southampton was in the thick (and a lot of people were thick!) of Unionism and it was detrimental to Southampton.[/p][/quote]Do you remember the strikes by the dock workers over expanding the area where only Dockies could work? it would have taken in most of town. I doubt if thinklikealocal remembers how insignificant Felixstowe was & through Union actions in all Nationalised docks grew as a private non striking docks. once again a group of workers who could remember the thirties & having to queue up & maybe getting a days work being led to the edge & over by greedy Union conveners ? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:28am Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

George4th wrote:
thinklikealocal wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
loosehead wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?
The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >
What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .
In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions!
The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .
Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.
Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!!
Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business!
Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail!
Vague?! You are the one being Vague!

Just look up the business history of Southampton- it is self-explanatory. It is why, for example, that thousands of jobs were lost in the Docks etc! Southampton was in the thick (and a lot of people were thick!) of Unionism and it was detrimental to Southampton.
History ..... In the past.
.
Dont know how old you are but your comments and observations are antiquated.
.
Business & Economy Information that you are obviously unaware of in your time capsule
.
The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. There are 7,700 businesses operating, employment for over 109,000 people and it is the UK’s cruise capital with a world-class port and one of the country’s leading commercial dockyards, contributing over £2billion to the economy. With statistics like this it is easy to see why Southampton is such a boost to the British economy.
.
With a current population of 236,700, Southampton is recognised as the commercial, cultural and retail capital of the south coast. It’s diverse and thriving economy, along with its mild climate, wealth of countryside and proximity to the sea, makes Southampton one of the best places in the UK to live and work.
.
The area has excellent schools and further education establishments, and has two universities, Southampton University and Southampton Solent University.
.
Yes copy and pasted dated 2013.
.
The world is changing .... this Country and City are changing ... so stop holding on to the past and move forward
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thinklikealocal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: The Unions were hell bent on getting in a Labour Council. the last administration said pay cuts starting at £17,500 which moved up to £22,000 at a start of 2% going up to 5.5% but with minimal cuts to services &^ minimal cut to jobs & when we start getting more money from central Government we'll reinstate the pay. the Unions never looked at this properly but took at as a way to rile up the workers & get rid of the council. We've been told the Unions sat in & advised the council on the budget but no mention of job losses at the meeting where the deal between council & unions was accepted why not? Is Mike Tucker that stupid? he & his partner in Unite got outsiders to knock doors they sent out letters to Union members telling them who to vote for well sorry Mr Tucker Cllr Williams has got what he wanted from you so scurry off back down that hole & be grateful for the money you receive & the free offices you get. You & all the people of this city who voted for Labour have been sold down the rive4r how does it feel?[/p][/quote]The Labour council is controlled by the Unions, always was and always will be. > Southampton will always be behind the times and unattractive to business, the young and educated and the budding entrepreneur while there are Labour councils - we had Labour councils all the way down the line and they achieved nothing other than going backwards! It may have escaped people's notice that Southampton isn't exactly a property hotspot! > Take away the NHS and the Universities and Southampton would be a ghost City! The Unions drove all the businesses away in the 70s and 80s! >[/p][/quote]What utter rubbish yet again. . I have pinpointed 8 new large businesses opening up in Southampton over the last few weeks ........ Companies dont and never have had a problem in being here. . As regards the Uni and NHS how pathetic a statement is that .......... Just think take away Bournemouth Beach ..... And it would be a ghost town !!!!. .[/p][/quote]In BIG business, Southampton has a bad reputation - earned in the past from the trouble and strife caused by the Unions. (And still applicable!) > Look up how many BIG businesses were once in Southampton and ask yourself "Where are they now?" > BIG business won't invest in Southampton (other than guaranteed Retail like Ikea) knowing the reputation of the people together with the Labour council with their affiliation to the Unions![/p][/quote]The key word with your post is PAST. . Thats all you can see is the past ...... Like i said 8 businesses that have not been in the City before are opening up and that does no include retail. . You need to look at other publications that are locally business based and not refecting the Echo all the time. . Oh and by the way BIG business is hardly investing anywhere at the moment thanks to the threat of a triple dip recession and insecure markets. ........... .[/p][/quote]Best time to invest is in a recession! > Southampton HAS the reputation and nothing that Southampton does under Labour will shift it! Southampton is also known for its whinging! > Any large business with any sense places itself OUTSIDE Southampton.[/p][/quote]Without continually going backwards and forth ....... I will stick to what i know to be the facts that are easy to find if you really want to. . Your comments are incorrect and you are ilinformed ........ Fortunately, like myself, hardly anybody shares your viewpoint. . As regards the best time to invest is in a recession ........ Well you are partly correct ......... But only IF you have the money ........ And it is widely stated that BIG business does have the money but will not invest due to market uncertainty. Proven even more by the weakness of the £pound . SME's would love to invest to expand but cannot get the funding from banks etc. . But its good to talk with you again !!![/p][/quote]Well ,you managed to duck the major points! e.g. where has all the business gone?! > As for bank funding - have you seen the long list of people after HMV, Jessops and Blockbuster?! Whoever they are, they have access to money! > As that well known Labour supporter, Alan Sugar, said "If the banks won't lend it, it's because it's a poor investment!! Quite correct! > And I stick to my point about the reputation of Southampton. Look around, no big business![/p][/quote]Perhaps you could stop being so 'vague' and tell us which businesses you are referring to, and, how you link their departure from the city to the city? Easy to make 'sweeping' statements, lets have some detail![/p][/quote]Vague?! You are the one being Vague! Just look up the business history of Southampton- it is self-explanatory. It is why, for example, that thousands of jobs were lost in the Docks etc! Southampton was in the thick (and a lot of people were thick!) of Unionism and it was detrimental to Southampton.[/p][/quote]History ..... In the past. . Dont know how old you are but your comments and observations are antiquated. . Business & Economy Information that you are obviously unaware of in your time capsule . The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. There are 7,700 businesses operating, employment for over 109,000 people and it is the UK’s cruise capital with a world-class port and one of the country’s leading commercial dockyards, contributing over £2billion to the economy. With statistics like this it is easy to see why Southampton is such a boost to the British economy. . With a current population of 236,700, Southampton is recognised as the commercial, cultural and retail capital of the south coast. It’s diverse and thriving economy, along with its mild climate, wealth of countryside and proximity to the sea, makes Southampton one of the best places in the UK to live and work. . The area has excellent schools and further education establishments, and has two universities, Southampton University and Southampton Solent University. . Yes copy and pasted dated 2013. . The world is changing .... this Country and City are changing ... so stop holding on to the past and move forward Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

11:09am Wed 30 Jan 13

George4th says...

"The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. "


B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are!
HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses!

Now who is living in the past?


Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses.

Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!!
"The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. " B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are! HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses! Now who is living in the past? Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses. Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!! George4th
  • Score: 0

11:30am Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

George4th wrote:
"The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. "


B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are!
HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses!

Now who is living in the past?


Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses.

Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!!
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: "The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. " B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are! HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses! Now who is living in the past? Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses. Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!![/p][/quote]Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

12:01pm Wed 30 Jan 13

George4th says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
"The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. "


B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are!
HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses!

Now who is living in the past?


Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses.

Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!!
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
Thanks to the Test Valley Borough Council, Lidls are setting up a RETAIL distribution warehouse - Great news! So, what kind of education levels will be required for the available jobs? Degrees? A Levels? MBAs?!

You gave me some really poor, and wrong, examples of companies associated with Southampton and all you could come up with in further retaliation is Lidls!!!

Joking aside, I truly believe what I said. As a parent, Southampton holds nothing for my children. Southampton has lacked ambition for as long as I can remember - it has only been saved by the Public Sector purse!
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: "The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. " B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are! HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses! Now who is living in the past? Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses. Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!![/p][/quote]Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl[/p][/quote]Thanks to the Test Valley Borough Council, Lidls are setting up a RETAIL distribution warehouse - Great news! So, what kind of education levels will be required for the available jobs? Degrees? A Levels? MBAs?! You gave me some really poor, and wrong, examples of companies associated with Southampton and all you could come up with in further retaliation is Lidls!!! Joking aside, I truly believe what I said. As a parent, Southampton holds nothing for my children. Southampton has lacked ambition for as long as I can remember - it has only been saved by the Public Sector purse! George4th
  • Score: 0

12:42pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

George4th wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
"The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. "


B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are!
HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses!

Now who is living in the past?


Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses.

Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!!
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
Thanks to the Test Valley Borough Council, Lidls are setting up a RETAIL distribution warehouse - Great news! So, what kind of education levels will be required for the available jobs? Degrees? A Levels? MBAs?!

You gave me some really poor, and wrong, examples of companies associated with Southampton and all you could come up with in further retaliation is Lidls!!!

Joking aside, I truly believe what I said. As a parent, Southampton holds nothing for my children. Southampton has lacked ambition for as long as I can remember - it has only been saved by the Public Sector purse!
Joking aside ....... I too have two children who have done very well in education and in their respective careers.
.
They and i have never been disapponited with Southampton and its offering.
.
No it may not be as grand as London or Manchester ot whatever ....... But really who the hell wants to live there.
.
I also believe that life is what you make it ....... and without being corny i am very happy with our families lot.
.
Of course you have the option to move away ........ But .... Is the grass that much greener
[quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: "The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. " B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are! HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses! Now who is living in the past? Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses. Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!![/p][/quote]Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl[/p][/quote]Thanks to the Test Valley Borough Council, Lidls are setting up a RETAIL distribution warehouse - Great news! So, what kind of education levels will be required for the available jobs? Degrees? A Levels? MBAs?! You gave me some really poor, and wrong, examples of companies associated with Southampton and all you could come up with in further retaliation is Lidls!!! Joking aside, I truly believe what I said. As a parent, Southampton holds nothing for my children. Southampton has lacked ambition for as long as I can remember - it has only been saved by the Public Sector purse![/p][/quote]Joking aside ....... I too have two children who have done very well in education and in their respective careers. . They and i have never been disapponited with Southampton and its offering. . No it may not be as grand as London or Manchester ot whatever ....... But really who the hell wants to live there. . I also believe that life is what you make it ....... and without being corny i am very happy with our families lot. . Of course you have the option to move away ........ But .... Is the grass that much greener Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

1:31pm Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
"The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. "


B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are!
HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses!

Now who is living in the past?


Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses.

Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!!
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
You mean the planned Lidl warehouse/distributi
on centre that was put forward by lidl & Barker Mills when we had a Tory Council?
The labour Party were opposed to it & promised the local residents it wouldn't go ahead if Labour was elected?
i was on here rowing with the Labour councillor for Millbrook in favour of this development he wanted it stopped.
So how can you have the nerve to claim it as a Labour success?
most of the good things happening in this city were begun by the Tories & Labour has tried taking the credit for it like the grant that's kept weekly collections & saved countless jobs now call me a liar on that?
I get communiques from Barker Mills in case your thinking of calling me a liar
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: "The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. " B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are! HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses! Now who is living in the past? Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses. Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!![/p][/quote]Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl[/p][/quote]You mean the planned Lidl warehouse/distributi on centre that was put forward by lidl & Barker Mills when we had a Tory Council? The labour Party were opposed to it & promised the local residents it wouldn't go ahead if Labour was elected? i was on here rowing with the Labour councillor for Millbrook in favour of this development he wanted it stopped. So how can you have the nerve to claim it as a Labour success? most of the good things happening in this city were begun by the Tories & Labour has tried taking the credit for it like the grant that's kept weekly collections & saved countless jobs now call me a liar on that? I get communiques from Barker Mills in case your thinking of calling me a liar loosehead
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Ironlady how can Lone Ranger claim that the Labour council bought Lidl to the city?
how can these Labour /Union supporters claim it was Labour who put in for the grant to secure 1-10 refuse jobs & weekly collections when all they did was up the amount the Tory council had applied for?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Ironlady how can Lone Ranger claim that the Labour council bought Lidl to the city? how can these Labour /Union supporters claim it was Labour who put in for the grant to secure 1-10 refuse jobs & weekly collections when all they did was up the amount the Tory council had applied for? loosehead
  • Score: 0

1:37pm Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

In times of austerity I think it's sick & below the belt for the TUSC to stand out side Sainsburies Lordshill claiming we shouldn't have cuts & they would/could stop cuts & save services.
this is giving false hope when it's all fairy stories
In times of austerity I think it's sick & below the belt for the TUSC to stand out side Sainsburies Lordshill claiming we shouldn't have cuts & they would/could stop cuts & save services. this is giving false hope when it's all fairy stories loosehead
  • Score: 0

1:40pm Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts? loosehead
  • Score: 0

2:05pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
George4th wrote:
"The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. "


B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are!
HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses!

Now who is living in the past?


Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses.

Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!!
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
You mean the planned Lidl warehouse/distributi

on centre that was put forward by lidl & Barker Mills when we had a Tory Council?
The labour Party were opposed to it & promised the local residents it wouldn't go ahead if Labour was elected?
i was on here rowing with the Labour councillor for Millbrook in favour of this development he wanted it stopped.
So how can you have the nerve to claim it as a Labour success?
most of the good things happening in this city were begun by the Tories & Labour has tried taking the credit for it like the grant that's kept weekly collections & saved countless jobs now call me a liar on that?
I get communiques from Barker Mills in case your thinking of calling me a liar
Why are you so average at writing and so pathetic at reading
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]George4th[/bold] wrote: "The city of Southampton is home to some of the most famous household names in the UK – B&Q, HSBC, Skandia and Ordnance Survey to name just a few. " B & Q are NOT in Southampton! A couple of their stores are! HSBC has and is, drastically downsizing in Southampton. Skandia has downsized! Ordnance Survey is the Public Sector and has been here since Moses! Now who is living in the past? Southampton's geographical position is excellent - however, it has been wasted! (For example - If you remember, the Unionised workforce in the Docks all but ruined Southampton while the likes of Felixstowe flourished and grew without the natural benefits that Southampton had!).As I said, other than those paid by the Public Sector or Retail outlets, there is little or no investment in Southampton and no major businesses. Why in heavens name would you invest your money in Southampton with its long history of Union agitation together with general apathy?!![/p][/quote]Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl[/p][/quote]You mean the planned Lidl warehouse/distributi on centre that was put forward by lidl & Barker Mills when we had a Tory Council? The labour Party were opposed to it & promised the local residents it wouldn't go ahead if Labour was elected? i was on here rowing with the Labour councillor for Millbrook in favour of this development he wanted it stopped. So how can you have the nerve to claim it as a Labour success? most of the good things happening in this city were begun by the Tories & Labour has tried taking the credit for it like the grant that's kept weekly collections & saved countless jobs now call me a liar on that? I get communiques from Barker Mills in case your thinking of calling me a liar[/p][/quote]Why are you so average at writing and so pathetic at reading Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

2:08pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Ironlady how can Lone Ranger claim that the Labour council bought Lidl to the city?
how can these Labour /Union supporters claim it was Labour who put in for the grant to secure 1-10 refuse jobs & weekly collections when all they did was up the amount the Tory council had applied for?
OK ..... Where in my posts have i said about Labour Council ...brought Lidl to the City.
.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Ironlady how can Lone Ranger claim that the Labour council bought Lidl to the city? how can these Labour /Union supporters claim it was Labour who put in for the grant to secure 1-10 refuse jobs & weekly collections when all they did was up the amount the Tory council had applied for?[/p][/quote]OK ..... Where in my posts have i said about Labour Council ...brought Lidl to the City. . Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN . Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

5:04pm Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside? loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:17pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. . Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

8:02pm Wed 30 Jan 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them.
I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. .[/p][/quote]If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them. I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:46pm Wed 30 Jan 13

IronLady2010 says...

Glad that's all sorted!

I have to agree though that the Unions did bring down the previous administration, which in all fairness was wrong.

Unions should be there for their paying members and not try to wangle votes on behalf of the public who don't pay subscriptions.

The Unions had a massive Facebook and Twitter campaign encouraging people to vote against Conservative, this is not the role they play.

They exist to represent their members, but they have over stepped their responsibility.

I won't forgive them for that and nor will many of their members.

However, I'm prepared to give Williams the benefit of the doubt, he got off to a bad start, but I think in all honesty we expected that.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions, then he will prove to be a good leader as Royston was.
Glad that's all sorted! I have to agree though that the Unions did bring down the previous administration, which in all fairness was wrong. Unions should be there for their paying members and not try to wangle votes on behalf of the public who don't pay subscriptions. The Unions had a massive Facebook and Twitter campaign encouraging people to vote against Conservative, this is not the role they play. They exist to represent their members, but they have over stepped their responsibility. I won't forgive them for that and nor will many of their members. However, I'm prepared to give Williams the benefit of the doubt, he got off to a bad start, but I think in all honesty we expected that. If Williams distances himself from the Unions, then he will prove to be a good leader as Royston was. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

10:00pm Wed 30 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them.
I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that
Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !!
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. .[/p][/quote]If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them. I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that[/p][/quote]Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !! Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

10:15pm Wed 30 Jan 13

IronLady2010 says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them.
I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that
Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !!
Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. .[/p][/quote]If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them. I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that[/p][/quote]Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !![/p][/quote]Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:55am Thu 31 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them.
I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that
Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !!
Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?
Yeah ... its just you and no its not
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. .[/p][/quote]If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them. I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that[/p][/quote]Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !![/p][/quote]Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?[/p][/quote]Yeah ... its just you and no its not Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

10:24am Thu 31 Jan 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them.
I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that
Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !!
Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?
Yeah ... its just you and no its not
Yeah you like to bully me? or exactly what are you saying?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. .[/p][/quote]If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them. I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that[/p][/quote]Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !![/p][/quote]Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?[/p][/quote]Yeah ... its just you and no its not[/p][/quote]Yeah you like to bully me? or exactly what are you saying? loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:00pm Thu 31 Jan 13

Lone Ranger. says...

loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them.
I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that
Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !!
Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?
Yeah ... its just you and no its not
Yeah you like to bully me? or exactly what are you saying?
Not quite loosehead.
.
Iron lady said "Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead?.
.
My answer was .... Yes! ... meaning it was just her thinking that.
.
I can catagorically state that i have never bullied or set out to bully you or anyone ......... If you. she/he are that sensitive then perhaps you, she/he should not be on a forum that provokes debate.
.
Hope that clears up the misunderstanding.
.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. .[/p][/quote]If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them. I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that[/p][/quote]Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !![/p][/quote]Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?[/p][/quote]Yeah ... its just you and no its not[/p][/quote]Yeah you like to bully me? or exactly what are you saying?[/p][/quote]Not quite loosehead. . Iron lady said "Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead?. . My answer was .... Yes! ... meaning it was just her thinking that. . I can catagorically state that i have never bullied or set out to bully you or anyone ......... If you. she/he are that sensitive then perhaps you, she/he should not be on a forum that provokes debate. . Hope that clears up the misunderstanding. . Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

3:33pm Thu 31 Jan 13

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes .
the blind leading the blind comes to mind.
here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter.
Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters
This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions.

If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that.

I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind!
Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs.
Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people?
What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it?
So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?
At the risk of being suspended from this site.
.
You are an absolute d!ckhead.
.
You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it.
.
You are totally blind to other posters views.
.
AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN
.
How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that?
Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl
so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area?
I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you?
You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth.
by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals.
I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big?
"Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?
For Gods sake what the hell are you on about.
.
You are posting total garbage.
.
You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings.
.
You replying to topics that are not there.
.
What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you.
.
I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand.
.
Your post is just complete and utter TOSH.
.
If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them.
I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that
Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !!
Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?
Yeah ... its just you and no its not
Yeah you like to bully me? or exactly what are you saying?
Not quite loosehead.
.
Iron lady said "Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead?.
.
My answer was .... Yes! ... meaning it was just her thinking that.
.
I can catagorically state that i have never bullied or set out to bully you or anyone ......... If you. she/he are that sensitive then perhaps you, she/he should not be on a forum that provokes debate.
.
Hope that clears up the misunderstanding.
.
thank You . I will apologise if I get it wrong or have been fed false information I will hold my hands up & say sorry but the reason I argue a lot with you is you never admit when your wrong so come on I know I can't be right 100% of the time so do you agree that some times you get it wrong?
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: You can't make the blind see & in the case of the Labour & Union supporters on here you can't make them see what's right in front of their eyes . the blind leading the blind comes to mind. here's a council that is stumbling around leading it's flock to the slaughter. Unions that maybe are waking up to the fact they were far better off negotiating with the Tories than they are with Unite Lap boys as it seems Williams has lied to his parties pay masters[/p][/quote]This additional £5 Million belongs to the City, not the workers or Unions. If Williams distances himself from the Unions and puts this money to good use in the best interests of the City then I will gladly thank him for that. I'm fed up with Council workers thinking they are the ones who deserve the most, they are supposed to work for us residents not rob us all blind![/p][/quote]Have you noticed Labour have suddenly found £190,000 to save some youth clubs. Another U-Turn & look how good we are we listen to the people? What utter bull.so the extra £5million from the Government had nothing to do with it? So the £3million to restore some of the Council workers pay had nothing to do with the cuts?[/p][/quote]At the risk of being suspended from this site. . You are an absolute d!ckhead. . You cant read other posters input .... without twisting it. . You are totally blind to other posters views. . AND virtually EVERY post that you do pays reference to BIN MEN .[/p][/quote]How would you react if some one walked up to you & called you that? Sorry old Blue Dinosaur ...... You are so out of touch ........Read about Lidl so that's not claiming it was Labour who brought Lidl to the area? I think you should get your head out from your A=s & stop talking sh+t is that good enough English for you? You are so blinkered & so into Cllr Williams lying Labour party you call people liars & D+ckheads rather than admit to the truth. by the way I had been offered to meet Labour supporters in their locals. I'dv rather read Southy's made up history than hear a MOUTH like you calling me names must really make you big? "Joking aside ....." you are a joke so how can it be joking aside?[/p][/quote]For Gods sake what the hell are you on about. . You are posting total garbage. . You have no idea of the context of my, or George4ths postings. . You replying to topics that are not there. . What comment i made to another poster is totally irrelevant to you. . I repeat I NEVER SUGGESTED THAT LABOUR BROUGHT LIDL TO SOUTHAMPTON ......... Do you understand. . Your post is just complete and utter TOSH. .[/p][/quote]If I got it wrong I'll say I'm sorry but any post on here is open to debate so if you don't want people to comment on posts you shouldn't post them. I resorted to a slagging match I will apologise for that & if as I've just said I got it wrong about Lidls I'll apologise for that[/p][/quote]Ok loose ..... lets move on to the next one !![/p][/quote]Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead? We all have an opinion, yet you seem to choose Loosehead for your replies, is it a personal issue?[/p][/quote]Yeah ... its just you and no its not[/p][/quote]Yeah you like to bully me? or exactly what are you saying?[/p][/quote]Not quite loosehead. . Iron lady said "Is it just me or do you just like to bully Loosehead?. . My answer was .... Yes! ... meaning it was just her thinking that. . I can catagorically state that i have never bullied or set out to bully you or anyone ......... If you. she/he are that sensitive then perhaps you, she/he should not be on a forum that provokes debate. . Hope that clears up the misunderstanding. .[/p][/quote]thank You . I will apologise if I get it wrong or have been fed false information I will hold my hands up & say sorry but the reason I argue a lot with you is you never admit when your wrong so come on I know I can't be right 100% of the time so do you agree that some times you get it wrong? loosehead
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree