£14m cuts for 2014 could become £30m next year, says Southampton City Council

£14m cuts this year could be £30m next, says council

£14m cuts this year could be £30m next, says council

First published in News
Last updated
Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Political reporter

“THERE is much worse to come.”

That was the message from politicians in Southampton as the Labour-run city council finalised its budget for 2014-15.

The budget, which will see the axe fall on £14.4million of services, has been described as the “calm before the storm”, with the cash-strapped council looking at having to make “in excess of £30million” in savings next year.

There are fears it could mean the end for services across the city, even though this year’s budget has already seen 100 jobs axed and council tax rise by 1.9 per cent.

Much of the savings through this year’s budget was made across all of the departments, cutting down on unnecessary costs including everything from photocopying to being more energy-efficient.

The council had originally had a savings target of more than £20million, but was able to use some Government grant funding to plug the gap.

But Labour council bosses say they will be unable to stave off some of the most severe cuts for another year, with council bosses having to find £47million extra by 2016/17.

City finance chief Stephen Barnes-Andrews said: “The next budget, there’s no point in pretending, is going to be in excess of £30million we will need to find if this Government continues with its current austerity programme.

“The council will have an immense challenge.”

He said much of the council’s financial struggle was down to continued funding cuts from central Government, while it also had to fork out £3.5million after the Government had now made it liable for all business rate appeal payouts, backdated to 2005.

And council leader Simon Letts added: “Obviously we have had a lot of time to prepare for that and we are already looking at options.

“We already have three or four more options we are looking at for next year, but obviously w i t h £30million we won’t be able to find that purely through efficiencies.

“But we will do everything we can to keep the impact on front line services to a minimum.”

Conservative opposition leader Royston Smith said: “This is the calm before the storm of next year’s budget. This is a standstill budget that hits residents but fails to take the initiative to get the city council's finances under control.

“If the Labour council do not find alternative funding streams or more efficiencies, then services to residents will degenerate still further.”

Rebel councillors Keith Morrell and Don Thomas, who quit Labour in 2012, have launched their new party, Putting People First. They said: “This Labour administration is being less than honest.

“It's trying to pretend that it is successfully managing the city's finances, but it should be shouting from the rooftops that there is a financial tsunami bearing down upon us which will devastate the city’s public services.”

And Liberal Democrat group leader Adrian Vinson said: “They have taken no notice of feedback from their consultation, and altered virtually nothing from their earlier, deeply-flawed draft.”

The 2014/15 Budget

ALMOST 100 jobs will be lost and council tax will increase as part of £14.4m cuts at Southampton City Council.

Labour council bosses have this evening put forward their final budget proposals, which will come into force from April if approved by the full council.

Among the proposals – which are likely to be formally adopted at a council meeting on February 12 – are raising council tax by 1.9 per cent.

Forty-eight jobs will be axed while another 43 will be cut through the streamlining of the authority’s children’s, public health, adult and housing departments into the new People Directorate.

The City Patrol service will be scrapped while Trading Standards will be scaled back.

 The Tudor House museum will have its hours reduced.

In response to consultation, which 3,600 residents took part in, Labour bosses have reversed plans to make two staff within the museums and galleries education team redundant.

And the pledge by council leader Simon Letts to freeze parking charges for the next three years is also included within the budget.

He has also announced he will work with opposition parties to look at the numbers of city wards and councillors, and how often elections take place, in a bid to cut further funding.

The authority met a £1.4milion shortfall by dipping into the council’s reserves and using Government grants.

Comments (36)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

8:05am Wed 29 Jan 14

kevinchandler100@talktalk.net says...

STOP WASTEING MONEY ON TRYING TO FIX THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKE. LIKE THE ROUND ABOUT AT THE FOOT OF THE ITCHEN BRIDGE .IT WAS WORKING FINE AS A ROUND ABOUT NOW IT IS COSTING £1000S TO INSTALL TRAFFIC LIGHTS. THIS COUNCIL IS LIKE A CHILD WITH ITS POCKET MONEY CAN'T WAIT TO SPEND IT AND WHEN ITS GONE THEY START CRYING WE NEED TO ROB THE POOR AGAIN, LETS CUT MORE JOBS AND IN CREASE THE UNEMPLOYMENT FIGERS.
STOP WASTEING MONEY ON TRYING TO FIX THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKE. LIKE THE ROUND ABOUT AT THE FOOT OF THE ITCHEN BRIDGE .IT WAS WORKING FINE AS A ROUND ABOUT NOW IT IS COSTING £1000S TO INSTALL TRAFFIC LIGHTS. THIS COUNCIL IS LIKE A CHILD WITH ITS POCKET MONEY CAN'T WAIT TO SPEND IT AND WHEN ITS GONE THEY START CRYING WE NEED TO ROB THE POOR AGAIN, LETS CUT MORE JOBS AND IN CREASE THE UNEMPLOYMENT FIGERS. kevinchandler100@talktalk.net
  • Score: 3

8:37am Wed 29 Jan 14

lordswood lady says...

I suppose they'll cut the Parks Department staff again, sack the people who actually get out and maintain our parks, woods and paths. But the managers will hold onto their office jobs, doing nothing and blaming the 'cuts' for why the pathways and woodlands aren't being maintained. Lordswood is looking very shabby at the moment. Is this the price Southampton City Council tax payers are paying for the Unions insisting the refuse collectors got their pay rises?
I suppose they'll cut the Parks Department staff again, sack the people who actually get out and maintain our parks, woods and paths. But the managers will hold onto their office jobs, doing nothing and blaming the 'cuts' for why the pathways and woodlands aren't being maintained. Lordswood is looking very shabby at the moment. Is this the price Southampton City Council tax payers are paying for the Unions insisting the refuse collectors got their pay rises? lordswood lady
  • Score: 7

8:46am Wed 29 Jan 14

WILLIAM HAGUES TWIN BROTHER. says...

is it not extracting the urine charging this council tax now?
is it not extracting the urine charging this council tax now? WILLIAM HAGUES TWIN BROTHER.
  • Score: -2

9:53am Wed 29 Jan 14

For pity sake says...

kevinchandler100@tal
ktalk.net
wrote:
STOP WASTEING MONEY ON TRYING TO FIX THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKE. LIKE THE ROUND ABOUT AT THE FOOT OF THE ITCHEN BRIDGE .IT WAS WORKING FINE AS A ROUND ABOUT NOW IT IS COSTING £1000S TO INSTALL TRAFFIC LIGHTS. THIS COUNCIL IS LIKE A CHILD WITH ITS POCKET MONEY CAN'T WAIT TO SPEND IT AND WHEN ITS GONE THEY START CRYING WE NEED TO ROB THE POOR AGAIN, LETS CUT MORE JOBS AND IN CREASE THE UNEMPLOYMENT FIGERS.
Stop shouting, learn how to spell and get ready for loads of spam now that you've advertised your email address to all and sundry.
[quote][p][bold]kevinchandler100@tal ktalk.net[/bold] wrote: STOP WASTEING MONEY ON TRYING TO FIX THINGS THAT ARE NOT BROKE. LIKE THE ROUND ABOUT AT THE FOOT OF THE ITCHEN BRIDGE .IT WAS WORKING FINE AS A ROUND ABOUT NOW IT IS COSTING £1000S TO INSTALL TRAFFIC LIGHTS. THIS COUNCIL IS LIKE A CHILD WITH ITS POCKET MONEY CAN'T WAIT TO SPEND IT AND WHEN ITS GONE THEY START CRYING WE NEED TO ROB THE POOR AGAIN, LETS CUT MORE JOBS AND IN CREASE THE UNEMPLOYMENT FIGERS.[/p][/quote]Stop shouting, learn how to spell and get ready for loads of spam now that you've advertised your email address to all and sundry. For pity sake
  • Score: 4

10:18am Wed 29 Jan 14

freefinker says...

.. how long will it be before southy comes on here with his 'No Cuts' slogan?
But he has yet to tell us how he will do it.
Income is being cut but southy will spend more.
.. how long will it be before southy comes on here with his 'No Cuts' slogan? But he has yet to tell us how he will do it. Income is being cut but southy will spend more. freefinker
  • Score: 1

10:21am Wed 29 Jan 14

good-gosh says...

I heard the queen was a bit hard up, too - and my wife, poor thing, is a bit short these days.
I heard the queen was a bit hard up, too - and my wife, poor thing, is a bit short these days. good-gosh
  • Score: 1

10:25am Wed 29 Jan 14

Lone Ranger. says...

good-gosh wrote:
I heard the queen was a bit hard up, too - and my wife, poor thing, is a bit short these days.
I wouldnt call 5'10" short ...
[quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I heard the queen was a bit hard up, too - and my wife, poor thing, is a bit short these days.[/p][/quote]I wouldnt call 5'10" short ... Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 1

11:23am Wed 29 Jan 14

good-gosh says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
I heard the queen was a bit hard up, too - and my wife, poor thing, is a bit short these days.
I wouldnt call 5'10" short ...
Ha-Ha – not really that tall, but still a delight – and who feels the pinch more often than not.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]good-gosh[/bold] wrote: I heard the queen was a bit hard up, too - and my wife, poor thing, is a bit short these days.[/p][/quote]I wouldnt call 5'10" short ...[/p][/quote]Ha-Ha – not really that tall, but still a delight – and who feels the pinch more often than not. good-gosh
  • Score: 0

12:04pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend.
Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers.

Aneurin Bevan said

How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond.

Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years.
The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend. Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers. Aneurin Bevan said How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond. Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years. southy
  • Score: -1

12:07pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

freefinker wrote:
.. how long will it be before southy comes on here with his 'No Cuts' slogan?
But he has yet to tell us how he will do it.
Income is being cut but southy will spend more.
Southy may or may not express his sincerely held views, but rather than having a dig at him why don't you come off the fence and explain where you stand? Are you supporting throwing Counci workers out of their jobs and providing people with less services while charging more Council Tax?
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. how long will it be before southy comes on here with his 'No Cuts' slogan? But he has yet to tell us how he will do it. Income is being cut but southy will spend more.[/p][/quote]Southy may or may not express his sincerely held views, but rather than having a dig at him why don't you come off the fence and explain where you stand? Are you supporting throwing Counci workers out of their jobs and providing people with less services while charging more Council Tax? Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 4

12:09pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

How much goods can 1 person buy and use, how much goods can many people buy and use
How much goods can 1 person buy and use, how much goods can many people buy and use southy
  • Score: -5

12:10pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Linesman says...

Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit. Linesman
  • Score: 0

12:12pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
freefinker wrote:
.. how long will it be before southy comes on here with his 'No Cuts' slogan?
But he has yet to tell us how he will do it.
Income is being cut but southy will spend more.
Southy may or may not express his sincerely held views, but rather than having a dig at him why don't you come off the fence and explain where you stand? Are you supporting throwing Counci workers out of their jobs and providing people with less services while charging more Council Tax?
He supports what the Green party done in Brighton, Paramjit. Make cuts put old ladys on the streets
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. how long will it be before southy comes on here with his 'No Cuts' slogan? But he has yet to tell us how he will do it. Income is being cut but southy will spend more.[/p][/quote]Southy may or may not express his sincerely held views, but rather than having a dig at him why don't you come off the fence and explain where you stand? Are you supporting throwing Counci workers out of their jobs and providing people with less services while charging more Council Tax?[/p][/quote]He supports what the Green party done in Brighton, Paramjit. Make cuts put old ladys on the streets southy
  • Score: -1

12:14pm Wed 29 Jan 14

redsnapper says...

I would put jaqui raiment top of the list to fire and save ££££££

This woman has done nothing to sort out the city transport issues and has no vision for the future.

send her to Liverpool where she will be mighty popular due to them recievng more cruise business courtesy of the transport shambles in Soton.
I would put jaqui raiment top of the list to fire and save ££££££ This woman has done nothing to sort out the city transport issues and has no vision for the future. send her to Liverpool where she will be mighty popular due to them recievng more cruise business courtesy of the transport shambles in Soton. redsnapper
  • Score: 4

12:18pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Yes I agree but Lines what as the Labour council done they have sat back and implement government policy, they are not fighting the government no Labour control council is, which is opposite to what Councilor Letts said "we will make a stand against the Tory government cuts with other Labour Councils" at a TUSC meeting, it never happen and why is that i wonder, thats because Labour is run by the same sort of people that run the Torys
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Yes I agree but Lines what as the Labour council done they have sat back and implement government policy, they are not fighting the government no Labour control council is, which is opposite to what Councilor Letts said "we will make a stand against the Tory government cuts with other Labour Councils" at a TUSC meeting, it never happen and why is that i wonder, thats because Labour is run by the same sort of people that run the Torys southy
  • Score: -2

12:29pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend.
Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers.

Aneurin Bevan said

How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond.

Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years.
Well said Peter.

I am sure you are fully aware that when the great socialist Bevan was alive many right wingers in Labour were not exactly keen on him, so don't expectect the NuLabourites of today to have any time for Bevan.

At least Labour's right wingers used to be little bit left of centre but the NuLabourites have shifted so much that NuLabour has become the unofficial right wing of the Conservative Party. The speed at which they are moving towards right may soon put them somewhere right of UKIP and on the left of fascists.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend. Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers. Aneurin Bevan said How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond. Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years.[/p][/quote]Well said Peter. I am sure you are fully aware that when the great socialist Bevan was alive many right wingers in Labour were not exactly keen on him, so don't expectect the NuLabourites of today to have any time for Bevan. At least Labour's right wingers used to be little bit left of centre but the NuLabourites have shifted so much that NuLabour has become the unofficial right wing of the Conservative Party. The speed at which they are moving towards right may soon put them somewhere right of UKIP and on the left of fascists. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: -2

12:36pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Shoong says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend.
Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers.

Aneurin Bevan said

How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond.

Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years.
Well said Peter.

I am sure you are fully aware that when the great socialist Bevan was alive many right wingers in Labour were not exactly keen on him, so don't expectect the NuLabourites of today to have any time for Bevan.

At least Labour's right wingers used to be little bit left of centre but the NuLabourites have shifted so much that NuLabour has become the unofficial right wing of the Conservative Party. The speed at which they are moving towards right may soon put them somewhere right of UKIP and on the left of fascists.
The last sentence of this comment is complete ball ****.

For shame!
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend. Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers. Aneurin Bevan said How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond. Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years.[/p][/quote]Well said Peter. I am sure you are fully aware that when the great socialist Bevan was alive many right wingers in Labour were not exactly keen on him, so don't expectect the NuLabourites of today to have any time for Bevan. At least Labour's right wingers used to be little bit left of centre but the NuLabourites have shifted so much that NuLabour has become the unofficial right wing of the Conservative Party. The speed at which they are moving towards right may soon put them somewhere right of UKIP and on the left of fascists.[/p][/quote]The last sentence of this comment is complete ball ****. For shame! Shoong
  • Score: 1

12:36pm Wed 29 Jan 14

sotonboy84 says...

This will be building up again with Lett's trying to find ways to sell some of the city's art collection rather than doing their job and making the council more efficient and stop wasting money.

More staff are being made redundent, the very few museums's we have left are being cut and the parks are riddled with rats (Actionline are aware of the increase in rats) amongst many things so why are the council still selling council properties to community groups for 50% of their market value and replacing walls, paths and gardens on council estates that are still in adequate condition?? You can't complain that you have no money and are forced to dip into reserves when they're selling off council assets at a 50% loss.
This will be building up again with Lett's trying to find ways to sell some of the city's art collection rather than doing their job and making the council more efficient and stop wasting money. More staff are being made redundent, the very few museums's we have left are being cut and the parks are riddled with rats (Actionline are aware of the increase in rats) amongst many things so why are the council still selling council properties to community groups for 50% of their market value and replacing walls, paths and gardens on council estates that are still in adequate condition?? You can't complain that you have no money and are forced to dip into reserves when they're selling off council assets at a 50% loss. sotonboy84
  • Score: 3

12:38pm Wed 29 Jan 14

sotonboy84 says...

Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
But the difference is that the council are not properly adapting to the changes as individuals have to. They hike taxes and increase charges therefore making many of the city residents in an even worse situation.
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]But the difference is that the council are not properly adapting to the changes as individuals have to. They hike taxes and increase charges therefore making many of the city residents in an even worse situation. sotonboy84
  • Score: 2

12:47pm Wed 29 Jan 14

03alpe01 says...

Quick question: Why, if the Tudor House Museum is Council run is it having it's opening hours cut and the Sea City Museum isn't?
Quick question: Why, if the Tudor House Museum is Council run is it having it's opening hours cut and the Sea City Museum isn't? 03alpe01
  • Score: 0

12:49pm Wed 29 Jan 14

sotonboy84 says...

03alpe01 wrote:
Quick question: Why, if the Tudor House Museum is Council run is it having it's opening hours cut and the Sea City Museum isn't?
Because Letts and his bunch of goons are culturally inept.
[quote][p][bold]03alpe01[/bold] wrote: Quick question: Why, if the Tudor House Museum is Council run is it having it's opening hours cut and the Sea City Museum isn't?[/p][/quote]Because Letts and his bunch of goons are culturally inept. sotonboy84
  • Score: 3

1:04pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: -1

1:31pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Torchie1 says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk. Torchie1
  • Score: 2

1:37pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend.
Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers.

Aneurin Bevan said

How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond.

Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years.
Well said Peter.

I am sure you are fully aware that when the great socialist Bevan was alive many right wingers in Labour were not exactly keen on him, so don't expectect the NuLabourites of today to have any time for Bevan.

At least Labour's right wingers used to be little bit left of centre but the NuLabourites have shifted so much that NuLabour has become the unofficial right wing of the Conservative Party. The speed at which they are moving towards right may soon put them somewhere right of UKIP and on the left of fascists.
Very true Paramjit, but Labour as all ways had center to right wing members and held the majority with in Labour party in Bevan times the left only had 46% hold on the Labour party and that was at the best, since the days of Kinnock and his left wing witch hunt to remove all left from the party a witch hunt that is still going on today as 2 of the best city councilors have found out recently, Labour as been moving more to the right wing ever since, even the Tory's have been moving more to the right, and we all know that right wing economy and politics is only suited for the few and never for the many.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The only way out of recession is to spend to create more jobs at reasonable pay and at reasonable hours, but people like freefinker who just don't think, they believe making cuts and more job losses will improve the economy, and don't take into account that every cut and job lose means less money being spent in the economy. When in reality you need more people spending and they need time to be able to spend. Its about time all Councils said enough is enough to this government and start fighting the government over there cuts, refuse to obey government, even if the government steps in and disbands local council, the councilors should fight for what is right and not sit back and let others suffers. Aneurin Bevan said How can wealth persuade poverty to use its political power to keep wealth in power, here lies the whole art of Conservative politics in the twentieth century and beyond. Think about it what those words really means, and what as been going on in the last 30 years.[/p][/quote]Well said Peter. I am sure you are fully aware that when the great socialist Bevan was alive many right wingers in Labour were not exactly keen on him, so don't expectect the NuLabourites of today to have any time for Bevan. At least Labour's right wingers used to be little bit left of centre but the NuLabourites have shifted so much that NuLabour has become the unofficial right wing of the Conservative Party. The speed at which they are moving towards right may soon put them somewhere right of UKIP and on the left of fascists.[/p][/quote]Very true Paramjit, but Labour as all ways had center to right wing members and held the majority with in Labour party in Bevan times the left only had 46% hold on the Labour party and that was at the best, since the days of Kinnock and his left wing witch hunt to remove all left from the party a witch hunt that is still going on today as 2 of the best city councilors have found out recently, Labour as been moving more to the right wing ever since, even the Tory's have been moving more to the right, and we all know that right wing economy and politics is only suited for the few and never for the many. southy
  • Score: -3

1:42pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's southy
  • Score: -3

2:09pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's
Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's[/p][/quote]Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead. Torchie1
  • Score: 2

2:23pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's
Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.
Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's

And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism

The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's[/p][/quote]Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.[/p][/quote]Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while southy
  • Score: -3

2:28pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's
Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.
Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's

And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism

The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while
Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's[/p][/quote]Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.[/p][/quote]Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while[/p][/quote]Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby. Torchie1
  • Score: 4

3:17pm Wed 29 Jan 14

southy says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's
Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.
Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's

And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism

The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while
Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby.
No such thing as parish councils as such as old, they have change a lot over the years.
Think about it all party,s took part in that election but only 2 could manage to get the 10 names that was needed to get past the first stage of an election. the rest was rejected totally. and there well more than enough people living that area to have all the party,s to stand in.
You mean you hope no one is interested sad for you they are the TUSC is here to stay and that scares people like you. best if you keep to the country that you are living in.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's[/p][/quote]Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.[/p][/quote]Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while[/p][/quote]Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby.[/p][/quote]No such thing as parish councils as such as old, they have change a lot over the years. Think about it all party,s took part in that election but only 2 could manage to get the 10 names that was needed to get past the first stage of an election. the rest was rejected totally. and there well more than enough people living that area to have all the party,s to stand in. You mean you hope no one is interested sad for you they are the TUSC is here to stay and that scares people like you. best if you keep to the country that you are living in. southy
  • Score: -4

4:53pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
In democracy people get what majority votes for, but that does not mean others can't have different views. Thankfully we don't live under Maggie Thatcher's mate Gen. Pinochet's dictatorship, which people of his country have now thrown into heap of evil history, nor Britain has become North Korea.

Regarding local govt financial situation even some Tories believe that central govt policy is unfair. I remember some of them openly expressing their concerns in Hampshire County Council even during that creature Thatcher's time, one of those later became Leader of HCC till dad of certain MP did to him what NuLabour's Brown had done to TORY Blair.

Linesman has very rightly pointed out that the real problem is policy of central govt, and I agree with him so have suggested the solution, which I have always believed in. But unfortunately you have opted for turning it into left Vs right argument, because you want to enjoy political ping pong.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]In democracy people get what majority votes for, but that does not mean others can't have different views. Thankfully we don't live under Maggie Thatcher's mate Gen. Pinochet's dictatorship, which people of his country have now thrown into heap of evil history, nor Britain has become North Korea. Regarding local govt financial situation even some Tories believe that central govt policy is unfair. I remember some of them openly expressing their concerns in Hampshire County Council even during that creature Thatcher's time, one of those later became Leader of HCC till dad of certain MP did to him what NuLabour's Brown had done to TORY Blair. Linesman has very rightly pointed out that the real problem is policy of central govt, and I agree with him so have suggested the solution, which I have always believed in. But unfortunately you have opted for turning it into left Vs right argument, because you want to enjoy political ping pong. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: -2

5:27pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's
Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.
Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's

And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism

The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while
Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby.
No such thing as parish councils as such as old, they have change a lot over the years.
Think about it all party,s took part in that election but only 2 could manage to get the 10 names that was needed to get past the first stage of an election. the rest was rejected totally. and there well more than enough people living that area to have all the party,s to stand in.
You mean you hope no one is interested sad for you they are the TUSC is here to stay and that scares people like you. best if you keep to the country that you are living in.
I think I can safely speak for all humans (and politicians) when I say no-one is losing any sleep over the TUSC.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's[/p][/quote]Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.[/p][/quote]Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while[/p][/quote]Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby.[/p][/quote]No such thing as parish councils as such as old, they have change a lot over the years. Think about it all party,s took part in that election but only 2 could manage to get the 10 names that was needed to get past the first stage of an election. the rest was rejected totally. and there well more than enough people living that area to have all the party,s to stand in. You mean you hope no one is interested sad for you they are the TUSC is here to stay and that scares people like you. best if you keep to the country that you are living in.[/p][/quote]I think I can safely speak for all humans (and politicians) when I say no-one is losing any sleep over the TUSC. Shoong
  • Score: 3

6:28pm Wed 29 Jan 14

WILLIAM HAGUES TWIN BROTHER. says...

next government will be a labour -lib dem coalition and onwards into the european super state ,all stitched up.
next government will be a labour -lib dem coalition and onwards into the european super state ,all stitched up. WILLIAM HAGUES TWIN BROTHER.
  • Score: -1

6:29pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Torchie1 says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
In democracy people get what majority votes for, but that does not mean others can't have different views. Thankfully we don't live under Maggie Thatcher's mate Gen. Pinochet's dictatorship, which people of his country have now thrown into heap of evil history, nor Britain has become North Korea.

Regarding local govt financial situation even some Tories believe that central govt policy is unfair. I remember some of them openly expressing their concerns in Hampshire County Council even during that creature Thatcher's time, one of those later became Leader of HCC till dad of certain MP did to him what NuLabour's Brown had done to TORY Blair.

Linesman has very rightly pointed out that the real problem is policy of central govt, and I agree with him so have suggested the solution, which I have always believed in. But unfortunately you have opted for turning it into left Vs right argument, because you want to enjoy political ping pong.
I rather think it's the exclusive preserve of your daft socialist bedfellow when it comes to starting a right versus left argument and I also think he's the most effective millstone that the local left will ever have.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]In democracy people get what majority votes for, but that does not mean others can't have different views. Thankfully we don't live under Maggie Thatcher's mate Gen. Pinochet's dictatorship, which people of his country have now thrown into heap of evil history, nor Britain has become North Korea. Regarding local govt financial situation even some Tories believe that central govt policy is unfair. I remember some of them openly expressing their concerns in Hampshire County Council even during that creature Thatcher's time, one of those later became Leader of HCC till dad of certain MP did to him what NuLabour's Brown had done to TORY Blair. Linesman has very rightly pointed out that the real problem is policy of central govt, and I agree with him so have suggested the solution, which I have always believed in. But unfortunately you have opted for turning it into left Vs right argument, because you want to enjoy political ping pong.[/p][/quote]I rather think it's the exclusive preserve of your daft socialist bedfellow when it comes to starting a right versus left argument and I also think he's the most effective millstone that the local left will ever have. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

6:44pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's
Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.
Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's

And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism

The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while
Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby.
No such thing as parish councils as such as old, they have change a lot over the years.
Think about it all party,s took part in that election but only 2 could manage to get the 10 names that was needed to get past the first stage of an election. the rest was rejected totally. and there well more than enough people living that area to have all the party,s to stand in.
You mean you hope no one is interested sad for you they are the TUSC is here to stay and that scares people like you. best if you keep to the country that you are living in.
When you fielded a candidate in the Eastleigh By-Election, your man came behind other candidates that had taken part for a joke. While you may take comfort from the fact that you soundly thrashed the Wessex Regionalist candidate by 62 to 30 votes, your failure to beat the English Democrats, Elvis Loves Pets, the Peace Party, the Monster Raving Loony Party, the Christian Party, the Beer,Baccy & Crumpet Party, the National Health candidate, the Independent candidate and finally UKIP and the other main party's is hardly a ringing endorsement of your success. A bit more research shows that Elvis Loves Pets amongst other fruit loop groups has regularly beaten a Tusc candidate in other elections around the country so please tel me what is there to worry about other than from splitting my sides laughing?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]Lets also not forget that this government are in on the minority vote, were to many people have given up on the big 3 party's. Socialism is for the majority, Capitalism is for the few, and this where you should under stand what Bevan was saying, the control of the wealthy few over all political party's[/p][/quote]Labour tried to woo the Lib-Dems after the last election so that they could use exactly the same rules used by the Conservatives to form a Coalition government as no-one had an outright majority. No-one is coerced in to casting a vote at a General Election and you naturally assume that they are demonstrating total support for socialism by staying at home instead of making the effort to prove your popularity by turning out and voting for you. Your argument belongs in the playground, you've seen time and time again that the accepted system for changing government has returned a centre ground party instead of your beloved socialism. I keep telling you that you've put your money on the donkey when it always loses the Derby, learn from it. One thing that you are impossible to beat though is your skill at providing excuses for why you and Tusc keep losing every election you stand in. Take up gardening instead.[/p][/quote]Labour who are just another right wing party and the lesser of the evils, tried to woo the Lib/Dems after the first refusal offer from the Tory's to the Lib/Dems, it was the third offer that Tory's made that the Lib/Dems took after the they had said that they would give the Tory's time to think and look what happen the Lib/Dems got stitch up by the Tory's And that is whats wrong the Right wing have put off that many people now from voting that the wealthy can not lose election even if the people choose to vote for the lesser of the evils, and the kind of people that are not voting are people that will vote for Socialism and never Capitalism The TUSC as won a by-election, in which only 2 party's could get the 10 names to qualify all other party's failed big time in getting that far where the people totally rejected them, bit of a red face Tory's, Lib/Dems, Greens and UKIP of not able to get the 10 names needed to be able to take part in an local election. think about that for a while[/p][/quote]Big on excuses for failure as usual and I'm not sure that Parish Council elections are in the same league as General Elections and neither is voting on 'Big Brother'. You gave it a shot, no-one is interested so look for another hobby.[/p][/quote]No such thing as parish councils as such as old, they have change a lot over the years. Think about it all party,s took part in that election but only 2 could manage to get the 10 names that was needed to get past the first stage of an election. the rest was rejected totally. and there well more than enough people living that area to have all the party,s to stand in. You mean you hope no one is interested sad for you they are the TUSC is here to stay and that scares people like you. best if you keep to the country that you are living in.[/p][/quote]When you fielded a candidate in the Eastleigh By-Election, your man came behind other candidates that had taken part for a joke. While you may take comfort from the fact that you soundly thrashed the Wessex Regionalist candidate by 62 to 30 votes, your failure to beat the English Democrats, Elvis Loves Pets, the Peace Party, the Monster Raving Loony Party, the Christian Party, the Beer,Baccy & Crumpet Party, the National Health candidate, the Independent candidate and finally UKIP and the other main party's is hardly a ringing endorsement of your success. A bit more research shows that Elvis Loves Pets amongst other fruit loop groups has regularly beaten a Tusc candidate in other elections around the country so please tel me what is there to worry about other than from splitting my sides laughing? Torchie1
  • Score: 1

6:58pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Paramjit Bahia says...

Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Torchie1 wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Why are we in this situation?

1) Central government reduces the council grant.

2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made.

3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc.

Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made.

The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.
Very true.

Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services.

To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance.

This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher.

Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help.

But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs.

We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest
Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.
In democracy people get what majority votes for, but that does not mean others can't have different views. Thankfully we don't live under Maggie Thatcher's mate Gen. Pinochet's dictatorship, which people of his country have now thrown into heap of evil history, nor Britain has become North Korea.

Regarding local govt financial situation even some Tories believe that central govt policy is unfair. I remember some of them openly expressing their concerns in Hampshire County Council even during that creature Thatcher's time, one of those later became Leader of HCC till dad of certain MP did to him what NuLabour's Brown had done to TORY Blair.

Linesman has very rightly pointed out that the real problem is policy of central govt, and I agree with him so have suggested the solution, which I have always believed in. But unfortunately you have opted for turning it into left Vs right argument, because you want to enjoy political ping pong.
I rather think it's the exclusive preserve of your daft socialist bedfellow when it comes to starting a right versus left argument and I also think he's the most effective millstone that the local left will ever have.
I do not belong to any political party, so have no bedfellow.

If you are referring to Southy, because on this site the he keeps the red flag flying, Yes I admire his comittment to the cause he believes in. He is a decent guy who cares for fellow members of the human race.
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Why are we in this situation? 1) Central government reduces the council grant. 2) Central government does not allow councils to raise money by increasing their council tax by 2% or more. If they do, the government reduces its grant by a similar amount, so no gain is made. 3) Some costs have risen by considerably more than 2%, fuel being an example of this, be it fuel to run the council run transport, like dust-carts, meals on wheels, or electricity and gas used to heat council owned properties or run facilities like computers etc. Anyone who has the same income, or smaller income than they had two years ago, would be well aware of the fact that the cost of living has risen, and that cut-back had to be made. The city council is facing that same problem, and it is services, that we once considered essential, that are being hit.[/p][/quote]Very true. Root cause of current problem lies in the policies of Thatcher led government that tinkered with RSG, central government's contribution for providing local services. To their shame for 13 years the NuLabour government also kept on implement the same policies. In in many areas they increased the responsibilities of local government but did not provide sufficient finance. This ConDem Coalition is no different, in fact it's approach is even more harsher. Only way to resolve the real problem of local government finance is to create a unity of local authorities, which should confront the central government and demand proper financial help. But rather than doing that most of the gutless self serving and unprincipled so called councillors keep on complying to whims of London and making us the people pay the price through ever increasing council tax, loss of services and workers losing their jobs. We need many more councillors like Don Thomas and Keith Morrell who are willing to get counted not Mickey Mouses NuLabourites and the rest[/p][/quote]Let's not forget that the voters of the UK put theses governments in place and when faced with the option of socialism have consistently decided that the danger isn't worth the risk.[/p][/quote]In democracy people get what majority votes for, but that does not mean others can't have different views. Thankfully we don't live under Maggie Thatcher's mate Gen. Pinochet's dictatorship, which people of his country have now thrown into heap of evil history, nor Britain has become North Korea. Regarding local govt financial situation even some Tories believe that central govt policy is unfair. I remember some of them openly expressing their concerns in Hampshire County Council even during that creature Thatcher's time, one of those later became Leader of HCC till dad of certain MP did to him what NuLabour's Brown had done to TORY Blair. Linesman has very rightly pointed out that the real problem is policy of central govt, and I agree with him so have suggested the solution, which I have always believed in. But unfortunately you have opted for turning it into left Vs right argument, because you want to enjoy political ping pong.[/p][/quote]I rather think it's the exclusive preserve of your daft socialist bedfellow when it comes to starting a right versus left argument and I also think he's the most effective millstone that the local left will ever have.[/p][/quote]I do not belong to any political party, so have no bedfellow. If you are referring to Southy, because on this site the he keeps the red flag flying, Yes I admire his comittment to the cause he believes in. He is a decent guy who cares for fellow members of the human race. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: -1

7:50pm Wed 29 Jan 14

Lone Ranger. says...

sotonboy84 wrote:
This will be building up again with Lett's trying to find ways to sell some of the city's art collection rather than doing their job and making the council more efficient and stop wasting money.

More staff are being made redundent, the very few museums's we have left are being cut and the parks are riddled with rats (Actionline are aware of the increase in rats) amongst many things so why are the council still selling council properties to community groups for 50% of their market value and replacing walls, paths and gardens on council estates that are still in adequate condition?? You can't complain that you have no money and are forced to dip into reserves when they're selling off council assets at a 50% loss.
Do you just have a short memory or is it very selective as well.
.
Just to help you out ..... it was your Tory chums, and in particular Cllr Hanidides, that started the ball rolling when they were so disasteriously in power.
.
When they were kicked out for failing this City both Hanidides and Smith continued their campaign to sell some of the art ........ although knowing how sensitive the issue was never had the b@lls to attempt to see it through themselves ....... They just kept up the usual Tory whinge.
.
I expect its beginning to come back to you now isnt it.
[quote][p][bold]sotonboy84[/bold] wrote: This will be building up again with Lett's trying to find ways to sell some of the city's art collection rather than doing their job and making the council more efficient and stop wasting money. More staff are being made redundent, the very few museums's we have left are being cut and the parks are riddled with rats (Actionline are aware of the increase in rats) amongst many things so why are the council still selling council properties to community groups for 50% of their market value and replacing walls, paths and gardens on council estates that are still in adequate condition?? You can't complain that you have no money and are forced to dip into reserves when they're selling off council assets at a 50% loss.[/p][/quote]Do you just have a short memory or is it very selective as well. . Just to help you out ..... it was your Tory chums, and in particular Cllr Hanidides, that started the ball rolling when they were so disasteriously in power. . When they were kicked out for failing this City both Hanidides and Smith continued their campaign to sell some of the art ........ although knowing how sensitive the issue was never had the b@lls to attempt to see it through themselves ....... They just kept up the usual Tory whinge. . I expect its beginning to come back to you now isnt it. Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 1

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