Row over budget cuts at Southampton City Council

Council budget cuts: we reveal the facts

Labour council leader Richard Williams

Tory group leader Royston Smith

First published in Politics

THE release of Southampton council’s draft budget this week sparked a bitter war of words between the ruling Labour administration, their Conservative predecessors and the trade unions.

The plan for record jobs losses, service cuts and charge hikes, worth nearly £20m, to plug council’s biggest ever budget black hole, has descended into a blame game between the parties.

Finance officers are predicting even more pain to come in future years, with a chasm of up to £60m to fill over the next three years.

The Daily Echo today investigates the numbers behind the claims...

1. Unions this week claimed that “under Councillor Royston Smith’s [Tory] administration, the council’s capital programme was increased by £100m”. And they have repeatedly attacked the decision to spend money, building the £15m SeaCity museum and a new £21m arts complex, saying interest charges on borrowing have left the council less able to spend money on frontline services.

The capital budget includes money the council spends on improving or building new property, roads and other infrastructure, as well as what the council buys or sells in land, property or other assets.

The council has a four-year rolling spending programme which gets topped up twice a year with new commitments.

It is funded by grants, proceeds of asset sales and borrowing.

When the Tories came to power in May 2008 they inherited a budget set three months earlier by a Labour/ Liberal Democrat alliance. That budget hiked the capital spending programme by £70m to £206m.

It was revisited again in September 2008 when the Tories increased it by £24m, including £800,000 to demolish the Tyrrell and Green building for the new arts complex, £1.5m for a refurbishment of the Tudor House museum and £900,000 for the new arts complex.

In 2009 the programme was increased by £35m, including £10.4m for a new rubbish and recycling centre and £4.4m for a revamp of Guildhall Square.

The 2010 programme increased by £33m in February to include, among other things, £13.5m for the SeaCity museum. Later that year it was increased by £39m, including the purchase of a new office block, One Guildhall Square, for £26m and another £1.5m into the arts complex’s growing budget.

The following year £44m was added, included an extra £3m toward the £25m repairs of the Civic Centre.

In February the programme was increased by £9m, but with little spending planned in the fourth year, leaving Labour to inherit a £169m programme when they won power in May. Labour then increased it by £28.5m in September.

It all adds up, as the unions claim, to an increase under Cllr Smith of well over £100m, but given it is a rolling fouryear budget new spending commitments are always added each year.

The actual annual spending according to the council’s accounts was £79.9m in 2011/12, £93.2m in 2010/11, £54.4m in 2009/10, and £75.5m in 2008/9. There is little to support the union’s suggestion that Tories have been overly profligate.

The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising.

The council is also putting in £11m, including around £1m of borrowing, towards the £21m arts complex. The rest will come from grants (£7m) and fundraising (£2m). Yet for both the projects, the annual interest on borrowing, paid out of the annual general budget, will be hundreds of thousands of pounds rather than the missing millions implied.

2. Unions have criticised the previous Conservative administration for taking one-off Government grants to freeze council tax.

They say it has reduced “the ability of the council to raise revenue” and left the council with a larger budget gap.

The Conservatives have for each of the past two years taken grants equivalent to a 2.5 per cent rise in council tax, or £2m, to pay for the tax freeze.

But the Government has decided not to offer the same grant next year, leaving the council to start its budget planning with £2m budget gap compared to last year.

To freeze bills in future, the Government is instead offering funding worth a one per cent rise in council tax, or £800,000, for the next two years.

Southampton City Council has been budgeting for a two per cent council tax rise, which would leave the council with a budget gap of £1.6m over the next two years if it accepted the Government money to freeze council tax.

In opposition Labour accepted the council tax freeze grant in a shadow budget it put forward in February.

And the previous it year refused to publish any alternative plans out of protest at Government cuts.

Labour has decided to reject the grant offer for next year to avoid the council budget gap widening even further in future years.

3. The Conservatives have been accused by trade unions of spending the council’s reserves in the run-up to the 2012 elections in May. Labour’s finance boss Councillor Simon Letts told the Daily Echo they had been reduced to a minimum of £5m.

At the end of the last financial year, April 2012, the council reported it had total “usable reserves” – those that can legally be used to fund spending or reduce taxes, of £70m.

But the figures for truly “usable”

reserves for the council’s general budget – excluding those for schools, council housing, capital projects and other earmarked uses – were much lower at £23.5m. The same figure for last year was £17.4m. It was £19.8m in 2010.

Further budget planning, started by the Tories, will see the reserves drawn down this year to £7.5m by next April, and down to £5.3m by the end of the following financial year, April 2014.

4. Both Labour and the trade unions have blamed Government funding cuts for the council’s financial plight.

In October 2010 the Government set out a plan to cut council funding by 28 per cent over four years to help bring down the national deficit.

Cllr Letts has said a proposed 0.6 per cent cut for 2013/14, the third year of the cuts, is now forecast to become as much as 12 per for Southampton – or £12m.

The council will have to wait until next month to get the final figures but the huge increase in the funding cut cited by Cllr Letts compares two different figures.

The 0.6 per cent was a headline figure for all local authorities not the impact of the Government funding cuts on individual authorities such as Southampton, which varies widely.

Indeed a council briefing paper warns “a headline reduction figure of 0.6 per cent for 2013/14 would not translate into that level of reduction for (Southampton) council”.

Southampton saw its grant cut by 10.1 and 6.6 per cent in the first two years of the Government funding cuts.

Finance officers at the council had been planning for a seven per cent cut across each of the four years but recent Government announcements have led officers to assume an eight per cent cut next year, around £9.2m.

5. Tories argue that the cost of Labour restoring controversial pay cuts they brought in last July has cost jobs and money. The Tories said the full package of cuts to terms and conditions, around £6m, would have protected 400 jobs in coming years.

The unions and Labour have questioned that and point out that the cost of partially restoring staff pay next year, at £660,000, is the same as the Tories had set aside in annual compensation for a legal action that has now been dropped.

Redundancy costs at the council for the 238 staff who left during 2011/12, 61 of whom were sacked, ran to £6.7m, according to council accounts.

The previous year, 2010/11, 213 staff left the council with pay-offs totalling £4.5m.

Labour is planning to axe up to 327 staff next year with provision for £4m in redundancies.

It is clear that the pay cuts would have saved the council money, both in wages and redundancy costs, but that does not account for the other side of the coin.

A potential legal bill of £12m over the Tories’ pay cuts plan, an unhappy workforce and possibly higher staff turnover could have wiped out those savings. And the level of jobs the Tories claim they would have protected remains only a prediction.

6. Conservative group leader Cllr Royston Smith says his party had left Labour with a “£6.9m revenue underspend which has been used to help balance this year’s budget”.

That under-spend was carried over to balance the budget that the Conservatives themselves set in February this year, not the budget that Labour is now planning for in 2013/14.

Comments (32)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:35am Sun 18 Nov 12

southy says...

Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city.
But the Torys will not do that.
Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that. southy
  • Score: 0

11:58am Sun 18 Nov 12

debs1909 says...

Why is it always front line staff and services that are hit, surely if middle and higher managers agreed to a small pay cut/redundancy it would save almost as much money, but that is too much like common sense
Why is it always front line staff and services that are hit, surely if middle and higher managers agreed to a small pay cut/redundancy it would save almost as much money, but that is too much like common sense debs1909
  • Score: 0

12:00pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Xgipper says...

Thanks for this detailed analysis, Echo.
Thanks for this detailed analysis, Echo. Xgipper
  • Score: 0

12:35pm Sun 18 Nov 12

good-gosh says...

Xgipper wrote:
Thanks for this detailed analysis, Echo.
Agreed – diligent summary
[quote][p][bold]Xgipper[/bold] wrote: Thanks for this detailed analysis, Echo.[/p][/quote]Agreed – diligent summary good-gosh
  • Score: 0

12:39pm Sun 18 Nov 12

skin2000 says...

With all the in fighting between all 3 parties plus the unions, it might be time to think of another one to run local services. Most people pay a hefty chunk of their earnings in council tax, and all they can visually see, are their bins being emptied, potholes in the roads, plus a lot of artist impressions on possibles projects.The whole format of Local Government needs to be looked at, to stop this, what appears to me, a waste of the public's money.
With all the in fighting between all 3 parties plus the unions, it might be time to think of another one to run local services. Most people pay a hefty chunk of their earnings in council tax, and all they can visually see, are their bins being emptied, potholes in the roads, plus a lot of artist impressions on possibles projects.The whole format of Local Government needs to be looked at, to stop this, what appears to me, a waste of the public's money. skin2000
  • Score: 0

12:46pm Sun 18 Nov 12

andysaints007 says...

southy wrote:
Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city.
But the Torys will not do that.
None of them will!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.[/p][/quote]None of them will! andysaints007
  • Score: 0

12:51pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Rockhopper says...

debs1909 wrote:
Why is it always front line staff and services that are hit, surely if middle and higher managers agreed to a small pay cut/redundancy it would save almost as much money, but that is too much like common sense
SCC have over many years created a culture of creating more supervisor/ middle-manager grades at the expense
of frontline staff.
In addition once SCC signed up to the Capita contract each department had to have an expensively assembled section consisting of highly paid managers/supervisors to monitor Capita's work.
Thus the claimed savings made by the Council in outsourcing to Capita are highly dubious to say the least.
When will Simon Letts and his colleagues take action on an overhaul of this supervisor/managemen
t structure?
Ask any Council Tax Payer what would you prefer a case worker employed to protect children or a manager sat in a back office coming up with another business performance plan?
It's not hard to guess what the answer would be...
[quote][p][bold]debs1909[/bold] wrote: Why is it always front line staff and services that are hit, surely if middle and higher managers agreed to a small pay cut/redundancy it would save almost as much money, but that is too much like common sense[/p][/quote]SCC have over many years created a culture of creating more supervisor/ middle-manager grades at the expense of frontline staff. In addition once SCC signed up to the Capita contract each department had to have an expensively assembled section consisting of highly paid managers/supervisors to monitor Capita's work. Thus the claimed savings made by the Council in outsourcing to Capita are highly dubious to say the least. When will Simon Letts and his colleagues take action on an overhaul of this supervisor/managemen t structure? Ask any Council Tax Payer what would you prefer a case worker employed to protect children or a manager sat in a back office coming up with another business performance plan? It's not hard to guess what the answer would be... Rockhopper
  • Score: 0

2:07pm Sun 18 Nov 12

loosehead says...

The council is also putting in £11m, including around £1m of borrowing, towards the £21m arts complex. The rest will come from grants (£7m) and fundraising (£2m). Yet for both the projects, the annual interest on borrowing, paid out of the annual general budget, will be hundreds of thousands of pounds rather than the missing millions implied.
It is clear that the pay cuts would have saved the council money, both in wages and redundancy costs, but that does not account for the other side of the coin.
both these statements prove that Royston was indeed telling the truth & was trying to save jobs as well as cut the budget.
We've had people come on here non stop go on about Sea City Museum & the Art complex & how it was being paid for by pay cuts?
This really proves those allegations to be a lie & no matter what your politics are the facts are there less redundancies less cuts all planned for by the Tories so Why were/are the Unions so against the Tory proposals?
The council is also putting in £11m, including around £1m of borrowing, towards the £21m arts complex. The rest will come from grants (£7m) and fundraising (£2m). Yet for both the projects, the annual interest on borrowing, paid out of the annual general budget, will be hundreds of thousands of pounds rather than the missing millions implied. It is clear that the pay cuts would have saved the council money, both in wages and redundancy costs, but that does not account for the other side of the coin. both these statements prove that Royston was indeed telling the truth & was trying to save jobs as well as cut the budget. We've had people come on here non stop go on about Sea City Museum & the Art complex & how it was being paid for by pay cuts? This really proves those allegations to be a lie & no matter what your politics are the facts are there less redundancies less cuts all planned for by the Tories so Why were/are the Unions so against the Tory proposals? loosehead
  • Score: 0

2:11pm Sun 18 Nov 12

southy says...

andysaints007 wrote:
southy wrote:
Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city.
But the Torys will not do that.
None of them will!
I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.[/p][/quote]None of them will![/p][/quote]I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years. southy
  • Score: 0

2:42pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Mark fan for ever says...

Have we not all been brought up to believe you can't have what you can't afford, why does everyone think services are a right to have,yes in good times that's all very well but now times are hard time to wake up and live with in are means,so why do our councils/governments still keep borrowing to provide what we can not afford.time for a reality check yes it will be hard to give up a lot of things,Ask the ones losing there jobs they have to cut back and can not have all the things they are used to.Any one that believes that the services should not be cut please write to the civic and let them know that that they will make up the short fall,I bet they won't get many letters.TIME TO LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD.
Have we not all been brought up to believe you can't have what you can't afford, why does everyone think services are a right to have,yes in good times that's all very well but now times are hard time to wake up and live with in are means,so why do our councils/governments still keep borrowing to provide what we can not afford.time for a reality check yes it will be hard to give up a lot of things,Ask the ones losing there jobs they have to cut back and can not have all the things they are used to.Any one that believes that the services should not be cut please write to the civic and let them know that that they will make up the short fall,I bet they won't get many letters.TIME TO LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD. Mark fan for ever
  • Score: 0

3:18pm Sun 18 Nov 12

southy says...

Mark fan for ever wrote:
Have we not all been brought up to believe you can't have what you can't afford, why does everyone think services are a right to have,yes in good times that's all very well but now times are hard time to wake up and live with in are means,so why do our councils/governments still keep borrowing to provide what we can not afford.time for a reality check yes it will be hard to give up a lot of things,Ask the ones losing there jobs they have to cut back and can not have all the things they are used to.Any one that believes that the services should not be cut please write to the civic and let them know that that they will make up the short fall,I bet they won't get many letters.TIME TO LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD.
What is the basics that are needed to keep an economy running.
And why is it when you lose jobs there is a slump in the economy
[quote][p][bold]Mark fan for ever[/bold] wrote: Have we not all been brought up to believe you can't have what you can't afford, why does everyone think services are a right to have,yes in good times that's all very well but now times are hard time to wake up and live with in are means,so why do our councils/governments still keep borrowing to provide what we can not afford.time for a reality check yes it will be hard to give up a lot of things,Ask the ones losing there jobs they have to cut back and can not have all the things they are used to.Any one that believes that the services should not be cut please write to the civic and let them know that that they will make up the short fall,I bet they won't get many letters.TIME TO LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD.[/p][/quote]What is the basics that are needed to keep an economy running. And why is it when you lose jobs there is a slump in the economy southy
  • Score: 0

3:24pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
andysaints007 wrote:
southy wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.
None of them will!
I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.
Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided.

I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all.

Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.[/p][/quote]None of them will![/p][/quote]I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.[/p][/quote]Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided. I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all. Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream! Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

3:31pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Woolston woman Jane says...

mr nobody wrote:
I think all Councillors should get paid on results so in the case of many of our city Councillors we would save a lot of money , money that could be spent better off else where , to many are getting away with pure laziness and not doing what their job is asks from them asked or by us the the people who pay their wages many should have received they P45 a long time ago , its about time that Government brought in a ruling that people could sack a Councillor if found not to be doing their job properly and lot leave it to be covered up by inside help , the people should be given more power not just on the day of elections. 1 example for this case is Miss G Lambing of the greedy Labour party who won in may to stand in Millbrook the young lady spends more time away from the city doing her own personal things then being a Councillor for the city i would like to see results of any work she has achieved as a Councillor i doubt the piece of paper would need to be very big , this is a classic example of waste of council tax payers money some of which has been earn t with blood and sweat. Its time now to get rid of lazy Councillors who feel it ok to rip the city off to the tune of £44,000 over 4 years, its time Councillors were made to show the people and i mean the people monthly reports on work they have done' this would then give us more knowledge of who to vote for in election time and would also not allow people to remain as Councillors and carry on ripping off the council tax payers and the city , to much is done behind closed doors an hidden from the people of the city, i say to all the leaders and Councillors its time to be up front and honest with the people of Southampton i know for some this would be very hard ' but would gain you a lot more respect and trust from us. We are all in this mess together .
You've made wild allegations against Councillor Laming before. I think you should either stop it or come up with some genuine examples of her failure to perform to your satisfaction. OR better still, stand yourself as a councillor and stop picking on people who are not ideally placed to stick up for themselves, as being a councillor would seem to be a no-win situation. It would also be interesting to see exactly how one would go about paying a city councillor "by results" and who would be the arbitrator of such results? Would you even know what a councillor does? Perhaps you could spell it out for us and outline your potential payment system, predicated on "results".
[quote][p][bold]mr nobody[/bold] wrote: I think all Councillors should get paid on results so in the case of many of our city Councillors we would save a lot of money , money that could be spent better off else where , to many are getting away with pure laziness and not doing what their job is asks from them asked or by us the the people who pay their wages many should have received they P45 a long time ago , its about time that Government brought in a ruling that people could sack a Councillor if found not to be doing their job properly and lot leave it to be covered up by inside help , the people should be given more power not just on the day of elections. 1 example for this case is Miss G Lambing of the greedy Labour party who won in may to stand in Millbrook the young lady spends more time away from the city doing her own personal things then being a Councillor for the city i would like to see results of any work she has achieved as a Councillor i doubt the piece of paper would need to be very big , this is a classic example of waste of council tax payers money some of which has been earn t with blood and sweat. Its time now to get rid of lazy Councillors who feel it ok to rip the city off to the tune of £44,000 over 4 years, its time Councillors were made to show the people and i mean the people monthly reports on work they have done' this would then give us more knowledge of who to vote for in election time and would also not allow people to remain as Councillors and carry on ripping off the council tax payers and the city , to much is done behind closed doors an hidden from the people of the city, i say to all the leaders and Councillors its time to be up front and honest with the people of Southampton i know for some this would be very hard ' but would gain you a lot more respect and trust from us. We are all in this mess together .[/p][/quote]You've made wild allegations against Councillor Laming before. I think you should either stop it or come up with some genuine examples of her failure to perform to your satisfaction. OR better still, stand yourself as a councillor and stop picking on people who are not ideally placed to stick up for themselves, as being a councillor would seem to be a no-win situation. It would also be interesting to see exactly how one would go about paying a city councillor "by results" and who would be the arbitrator of such results? Would you even know what a councillor does? Perhaps you could spell it out for us and outline your potential payment system, predicated on "results". Woolston woman Jane
  • Score: 0

4:12pm Sun 18 Nov 12

southy says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
andysaints007 wrote:
southy wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.
None of them will!
I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.
Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided.

I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all.

Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream!
Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members.
and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses.
Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.[/p][/quote]None of them will![/p][/quote]I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.[/p][/quote]Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided. I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all. Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream![/p][/quote]Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members. and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses. Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions southy
  • Score: 0

4:15pm Sun 18 Nov 12

southy says...

southy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
andysaints007 wrote:
southy wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.
None of them will!
I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.
Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided.

I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all.

Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream!
Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members.
and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses.
Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions
Do you also remember those Councillors that cross the picket lines and those that did not on the day of the public services day of action, 3 councillors did not cross.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.[/p][/quote]None of them will![/p][/quote]I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.[/p][/quote]Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided. I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all. Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream![/p][/quote]Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members. and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses. Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions[/p][/quote]Do you also remember those Councillors that cross the picket lines and those that did not on the day of the public services day of action, 3 councillors did not cross. southy
  • Score: 0

4:34pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Lone Ranger. says...

Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money.
.
Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising.
.
Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer)
.
Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money Lone Ranger.
  • Score: 0

5:37pm Sun 18 Nov 12

andysaints007 says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money.
.
Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising.
.
Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer)
.
Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
YAWN with a capital YAWN
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]YAWN with a capital YAWN andysaints007
  • Score: 0

5:41pm Sun 18 Nov 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
andysaints007 wrote:
southy wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.
None of them will!
I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.
Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided.

I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all.

Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream!
Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members.
and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses.
Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions
.. oh dear oh dear.

1) We are back again to southy's made-up little phrase - the 'needs budget program'. How come extensive searches by me and others fail to find any mention whatsoever of such an entity? You have been challenged to produce a URL, but as usual you have failed to do so.

2) As for your original comment "fight the government to get all the money this government receives from this city", are you daft? That would result in even less income than the council has now. While Business Rates are redistributed by central government (and Southampton does lose out by a very small amount) ALL local authorities receive a considerable proportion of their income by way of Block Grants. In other words, all local government is subsidised by central government.

You just don’t live in the real world, do you? And you have not the faintest idea how local government finances are derived – as you proved not so long ago by insisting that Council Tax all went to Westminster for redistribution. Thank goodness you are also unelectable.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.[/p][/quote]None of them will![/p][/quote]I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.[/p][/quote]Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided. I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all. Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream![/p][/quote]Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members. and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses. Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions[/p][/quote].. oh dear oh dear. 1) We are back again to southy's made-up little phrase - the 'needs budget program'. How come extensive searches by me and others fail to find any mention whatsoever of such an entity? You have been challenged to produce a URL, but as usual you have failed to do so. 2) As for your original comment "fight the government to get all the money this government receives from this city", are you daft? That would result in even less income than the council has now. While Business Rates are redistributed by central government (and Southampton does lose out by a very small amount) ALL local authorities receive a considerable proportion of their income by way of Block Grants. In other words, all local government is subsidised by central government. You just don’t live in the real world, do you? And you have not the faintest idea how local government finances are derived – as you proved not so long ago by insisting that Council Tax all went to Westminster for redistribution. Thank goodness you are also unelectable. freefinker
  • Score: 0

5:42pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Linesman says...

andysaints007 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money.
.
Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising.
.
Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer)
.
Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
YAWN with a capital YAWN
Description of a yawn.

Mouth open.

Nothing intelligent comes out, just hot air.

At least you are consistent.
[quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]YAWN with a capital YAWN[/p][/quote]Description of a yawn. Mouth open. Nothing intelligent comes out, just hot air. At least you are consistent. Linesman
  • Score: 0

5:51pm Sun 18 Nov 12

loosehead says...

Linesman wrote:
andysaints007 wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote:
Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money.
.
Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising.
.
Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer)
.
Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
YAWN with a capital YAWN
Description of a yawn.

Mouth open.

Nothing intelligent comes out, just hot air.

At least you are consistent.
So linesman the pay cuts were good for jobs?
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]YAWN with a capital YAWN[/p][/quote]Description of a yawn. Mouth open. Nothing intelligent comes out, just hot air. At least you are consistent.[/p][/quote]So linesman the pay cuts were good for jobs? loosehead
  • Score: 0

6:21pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
southy wrote:
andysaints007 wrote:
southy wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.
None of them will!
I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.
Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided.

I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all.

Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream!
Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members.
and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses.
Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions
Dear Comrade Southy,

Thanks for confirming that I was in the public gallery at last budget meeting, when Tories were in power.

Which means my earlier bit of doubt that I may simply have imagined in my dream was not correct!!!

For me the most important component of socialism is not to make false accusations against even your worse enemies. And in politics I may strongly oppose the views of opponents but do not see the personalities as enemies, as long as they are not fascists.

It does not give me any pleasure to say that as usual you do not listen to sincere advice from a fellow socialist but keep on repeating your own line, without checking, what may be a mistake in the first place. By keep on insisting that your's was the only fact you tend to dig not only your own but a mass-grave for all of us on the left.

I wish you'd taken my request seriously and at least checked with Nick Chaffy if not anybody else.

My friend for your info, last time NuLabour DID propose alternative budget, in the shape of amendments to Tory budget. They also hinted that if they get in power after May elections they may introduce a mid term budget, which they have done.

Some including me, may have concerns about their proposals, but that cannot change the fact that they proposed their own budget which was voted down. It was budget meeting before that when Labour Group made no proposals. As far as my humble and limited knowledge goes, that was the only time Labour or Nulabour did not move their own budget proposals at Council’s budget meeting.

By the way I do practice what I preach, so have checked out my information with Cllr. Don Thomas.

Southy please change your attitude/approach, your stubbornness undermines lots of hard work you put in for socialism and your Socialist Party.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]andysaints007[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Time this council come together on all sides and fight the government to get all the money this government recieves from this city. But the Torys will not do that.[/p][/quote]None of them will![/p][/quote]I would not say that, while the Torys was in power for 4 years, the Labour Party voted with the Torys, in the Budget and never once put up and alternitive budget, they voted with the Torys in the cuts also. The Torys had a very easy time in the council chambers while they was in power, the only alternative budget that was ever put forward was by the TUSC and Socialist Party "A Needs Budget" at the Budget council meetings for the last 2 years.[/p][/quote]Southy please correct your fiction before Freefinker pins you down, or somebody else starts taking pot shots at target you have provided. I am under the impression that last year NuLabour Group proposed their budget, but it was only year before that when they suggested nothing at all. Anyway please check the facts with somebody like Nick or give ring to some councillor or do a search on the Internet as a precaution, in case my humble view in your well informed view may be the product of some dream![/p][/quote]Like you I was there at that budget council meeting, nick did present a needs budget, but nothing came from the Labour party, and if you remember there was only 4 votes against the Torys Budget form the council members. and for four years Labour did nothing to stop the Torys, If you also remember it was last year when Willians slip up about what Labour would do when they control the council 1,500 job loses. Labour did not present any type of budget till the mini budge after the council ward elelctions[/p][/quote]Dear Comrade Southy, Thanks for confirming that I was in the public gallery at last budget meeting, when Tories were in power. Which means my earlier bit of doubt that I may simply have imagined in my dream was not correct!!! For me the most important component of socialism is not to make false accusations against even your worse enemies. And in politics I may strongly oppose the views of opponents but do not see the personalities as enemies, as long as they are not fascists. It does not give me any pleasure to say that as usual you do not listen to sincere advice from a fellow socialist but keep on repeating your own line, without checking, what may be a mistake in the first place. By keep on insisting that your's was the only fact you tend to dig not only your own but a mass-grave for all of us on the left. I wish you'd taken my request seriously and at least checked with Nick Chaffy if not anybody else. My friend for your info, last time NuLabour DID propose alternative budget, in the shape of amendments to Tory budget. They also hinted that if they get in power after May elections they may introduce a mid term budget, which they have done. Some including me, may have concerns about their proposals, but that cannot change the fact that they proposed their own budget which was voted down. It was budget meeting before that when Labour Group made no proposals. As far as my humble and limited knowledge goes, that was the only time Labour or Nulabour did not move their own budget proposals at Council’s budget meeting. By the way I do practice what I preach, so have checked out my information with Cllr. Don Thomas. Southy please change your attitude/approach, your stubbornness undermines lots of hard work you put in for socialism and your Socialist Party. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

6:38pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money.
.
Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising.
.
Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer)
.
Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
Lone Ranger,

Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks.

Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off.

Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

6:56pm Sun 18 Nov 12

lovetheladies says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.
John Denham = Useless MP
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.[/p][/quote]John Denham = Useless MP lovetheladies
  • Score: 0

7:08pm Sun 18 Nov 12

lovetheladies says...

Paramjit your such a drama queen!!
Paramjit your such a drama queen!! lovetheladies
  • Score: 0

10:30pm Sun 18 Nov 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

lovetheladies wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.
John Denham = Useless MP
You are entitled to your views. But I did not ask you. My message was for Lone Ranger, can't understand why you are sticking your nose in.
[quote][p][bold]lovetheladies[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.[/p][/quote]John Denham = Useless MP[/p][/quote]You are entitled to your views. But I did not ask you. My message was for Lone Ranger, can't understand why you are sticking your nose in. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

6:39am Mon 19 Nov 12

aldermoorboy says...

Echo shows Tories told the truth.
Well done Echo.
Sea Museum to make a profit and educate the children.
Echo shows Tories told the truth. Well done Echo. Sea Museum to make a profit and educate the children. aldermoorboy
  • Score: 0

7:11am Mon 19 Nov 12

loosehead says...

Lone Ranger. wrote:
Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money.
.
Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising.
.
Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer)
.
Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
So let's get this right! Asset sold to pay debt on Sea City & pay towards Art complex?
Asset meaning Millbrook Industrial Estate, this estate was run down & needed Millions spent on it.
this estate was losing companies not attracting them.
we sell it a new company attracts another one to build a new facility on trhe estate then move in so giving us their business rates & every new company on that estate will bring in revenue through business rates so we saved millions re-modernising the Estate we earn money from the estate .
we paid off Sea City Museum with out a penny of council tax or workers wages being used & in your eyes this was wrong?
so you'd preferred us to spend the Millions on re-modernising this estate would you?
we
[quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]So let's get this right! Asset sold to pay debt on Sea City & pay towards Art complex? Asset meaning Millbrook Industrial Estate, this estate was run down & needed Millions spent on it. this estate was losing companies not attracting them. we sell it a new company attracts another one to build a new facility on trhe estate then move in so giving us their business rates & every new company on that estate will bring in revenue through business rates so we saved millions re-modernising the Estate we earn money from the estate . we paid off Sea City Museum with out a penny of council tax or workers wages being used & in your eyes this was wrong? so you'd preferred us to spend the Millions on re-modernising this estate would you? we loosehead
  • Score: 0

10:22am Mon 19 Nov 12

Datarater says...

Pretty poorly constructed article of a bunch of facts. How about using some tables or graphs?
Pretty poorly constructed article of a bunch of facts. How about using some tables or graphs? Datarater
  • Score: 0

10:42am Mon 19 Nov 12

allison.luella says...

If we have to pay £50 everytime we wanted our green waste picked up!! there will be alot of flytipping!! i for one do not want to spend £50 everytime we do the garden!! this is what we pay our council tax for........isnt it?? x
If we have to pay £50 everytime we wanted our green waste picked up!! there will be alot of flytipping!! i for one do not want to spend £50 everytime we do the garden!! this is what we pay our council tax for........isnt it?? x allison.luella
  • Score: 0

12:47pm Mon 19 Nov 12

loosehead says...

allison.luella wrote:
If we have to pay £50 everytime we wanted our green waste picked up!! there will be alot of flytipping!! i for one do not want to spend £50 everytime we do the garden!! this is what we pay our council tax for........isnt it?? x
aliiison where do you live?
Burn the weeds but Grass,Leaves can be composted & any one with an allotment who lives near you & has a compost pile on site would be grateful of that waste?
I live in Lordshill so if you can keep just your grass cuttings & you live near me I'd be happy to take it from you at no cost.
If you know of anyone who wants to get rid of a decent shed/greenhouse for free give me a shout please?
[quote][p][bold]allison.luella[/bold] wrote: If we have to pay £50 everytime we wanted our green waste picked up!! there will be alot of flytipping!! i for one do not want to spend £50 everytime we do the garden!! this is what we pay our council tax for........isnt it?? x[/p][/quote]aliiison where do you live? Burn the weeds but Grass,Leaves can be composted & any one with an allotment who lives near you & has a compost pile on site would be grateful of that waste? I live in Lordshill so if you can keep just your grass cuttings & you live near me I'd be happy to take it from you at no cost. If you know of anyone who wants to get rid of a decent shed/greenhouse for free give me a shout please? loosehead
  • Score: 0

2:31pm Wed 21 Nov 12

lovetheladies says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
lovetheladies wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.
John Denham = Useless MP
You are entitled to your views. But I did not ask you. My message was for Lone Ranger, can't understand why you are sticking your nose in.
Cause i think Lone Ranger is right and your arguement is pathetic!! quite honestly...
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lovetheladies[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.[/p][/quote]John Denham = Useless MP[/p][/quote]You are entitled to your views. But I did not ask you. My message was for Lone Ranger, can't understand why you are sticking your nose in.[/p][/quote]Cause i think Lone Ranger is right and your arguement is pathetic!! quite honestly... lovetheladies
  • Score: 0

3:59pm Wed 21 Nov 12

loosehead says...

lovetheladies wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
lovetheladies wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Lone Ranger. wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money
Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.
John Denham = Useless MP
You are entitled to your views. But I did not ask you. My message was for Lone Ranger, can't understand why you are sticking your nose in.
Cause i think Lone Ranger is right and your arguement is pathetic!! quite honestly...
So you think Lone Ranger is right calling people GAY?
exactly what is Lone Ranger right about?
he said the council workers pay went to pay for the Sea City Museum?
It has now been proven to be a lie.
he brings up the Cultural/art quarter saying the same type of thing again it's a lie so if you can read the facts by cutting pay the last council were actually saving jobs & services yet he begs to differ so how's he telling the truth?
I'd like to hear you answer not Lone Ranger
[quote][p][bold]lovetheladies[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]lovetheladies[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lone Ranger.[/bold] wrote: Thank you Echo .. again .. for confirming .... again..... that the Sea Museum was part fincanced by taxpayers money. . Quote:- The unions single out the £15m SeaCity museum for criticism. It was built to mark the 100th anniversary of the sinking of the sinking of Titanic and funded by the council to the tune of around £9m through asset sales and short-term borrowing – although the council hopes up to £5m will be clawed back through fundraising. . Asset sales ...... Selling off Council owned property ( owned by the Southamon taxpayer) . Short term borrowing ........ Using money that we did not have ..... thus paying interest out of taxpayers money[/p][/quote]Lone Ranger, Points regarding Hannidies Horror House well made. Thanks. Please get on the item regarding John Denham’s meeting with Ford, which the company is alleged to have called off. Some person (Skipper..) has posted serious allegation about John, which I find more than difficult to believe. Do you know anything like that? I will check this site later tonight.[/p][/quote]John Denham = Useless MP[/p][/quote]You are entitled to your views. But I did not ask you. My message was for Lone Ranger, can't understand why you are sticking your nose in.[/p][/quote]Cause i think Lone Ranger is right and your arguement is pathetic!! quite honestly...[/p][/quote]So you think Lone Ranger is right calling people GAY? exactly what is Lone Ranger right about? he said the council workers pay went to pay for the Sea City Museum? It has now been proven to be a lie. he brings up the Cultural/art quarter saying the same type of thing again it's a lie so if you can read the facts by cutting pay the last council were actually saving jobs & services yet he begs to differ so how's he telling the truth? I'd like to hear you answer not Lone Ranger loosehead
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

About cookies

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

I agree