Fight over Southampton City Council cuts just starting, say Labour rebels

Council leader Richard Williams walks through the protests on his way the the budget meeting on Wednesday

Council leader Richard Williams walks through the protests on his way the the budget meeting on Wednesday

First published in Politics Daily Echo: Photograph of the Author by , Reporter

“THE fight is just beginning.”

That is the message from rebel councillors taking a stand against savage cuts imposed in Southampton.

This week, the Labour-controlled city council rubber-stamped savings worth £16m – with the axe falling on 234 jobs, tax breaks for pensioners, youth services and children’s centres.

But Councillor Keith Morrell and Councillor Don Thomas, who have split from the Labour party in protest at the cuts, say the “dismantling”

of services in the city is only just beginning.

Councillor Morrell, who represents the Coxford ward, said: “Next year the council is going to have to find another £20m worth of cuts, the year after that another £20m.

“They’ll be making the same size cut out of a diminishing budget so the impact next year will be twice as bad as this year.

“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing.

“The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now.

“It’s central government that is responsible for cutting the funding to local authorities but as far as I’m concerned Labour councillors were elected in the expectation they were going to be different from the previous Conservatives.

“However, the new Labour administration is simply carrying on from where the Conservatives left off in cutting back on local public services and local jobs – so they bear a responsibility too.”

The pair are now working to form a local group so that they can field anti-cuts candidates across the city during the next election.

Councillor Morrell has also called on trade unions to do more to oppose the job losses and cutbacks.

He said: “A lot of union members want their unions to be doing more.

“The trade unions were instrumental in getting Labour elected and I think there’s a lot of disappointment among their members that Labour isn’t delivering.

“Labour promised to protect services, to protect jobs and to protect services and obviously they’re not.

“There’s a lot of union members who are angry, frustrated and probably unsure where to go – they put their faith in Labour.

“The trade unions should be doing more, if only to reflect what their members want from them.”

Meanwhile, Unite has told the Daily Echo it has no current plans for action but is consulting members.

Regional co-ordinator Ian Woodland said: “Any action is for our stewards to decide.

“We’ll always make our position clear to the Government that we’re opposed to the cuts in local government.”

More stories on the council cuts

Comments (77)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:59am Fri 15 Feb 13

George4th says...

Better get Harry Hill down here quick!!
Better get Harry Hill down here quick!! George4th
  • Score: 0

12:18pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

"Regional co-ordinator Ian Woodland said: “Any action is for our stewards to decide"

Ian this is a classic case we the TUSC told you so, Labour no longer represents the working class, All they want from the Unions is there money, put it to your members to stop supporting the Labour Party and support a party that do workers
"Regional co-ordinator Ian Woodland said: “Any action is for our stewards to decide" Ian this is a classic case we the TUSC told you so, Labour no longer represents the working class, All they want from the Unions is there money, put it to your members to stop supporting the Labour Party and support a party that do workers southy
  • Score: 0

12:19pm Fri 15 Feb 13

MGRA says...

Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton. MGRA
  • Score: 0

12:20pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Taskforce 141 says...

It just goes to show that the big three parties have failed us all!

Conservatives are too naive, and have no idea what it is like for most of the population on low wages and rely on services.

Lib Dems showed their true colours and sold out to the conservatives.

And Labour have lost their heritage - they were for the working man but now they have become a second conservative party!

When you speak with people they have lost faith in the big 3 and now it looks like the only answer is to vote for the outsiders and a lot of people have stated they would be voting UKIP to prove a point!

Broken Britain we are, and there appears to be no one willing to fix it both locally or nationally.
It just goes to show that the big three parties have failed us all! Conservatives are too naive, and have no idea what it is like for most of the population on low wages and rely on services. Lib Dems showed their true colours and sold out to the conservatives. And Labour have lost their heritage - they were for the working man but now they have become a second conservative party! When you speak with people they have lost faith in the big 3 and now it looks like the only answer is to vote for the outsiders and a lot of people have stated they would be voting UKIP to prove a point! Broken Britain we are, and there appears to be no one willing to fix it both locally or nationally. Taskforce 141
  • Score: 1

12:22pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
"Regional co-ordinator Ian Woodland said: “Any action is for our stewards to decide"

Ian this is a classic case we the TUSC told you so, Labour no longer represents the working class, All they want from the Unions is there money, put it to your members to stop supporting the Labour Party and support a party that do workers
'support a party that do workers'.

Sounds like they've already been 'done' to me.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: "Regional co-ordinator Ian Woodland said: “Any action is for our stewards to decide" Ian this is a classic case we the TUSC told you so, Labour no longer represents the working class, All they want from the Unions is there money, put it to your members to stop supporting the Labour Party and support a party that do workers[/p][/quote]'support a party that do workers'. Sounds like they've already been 'done' to me. Shoong
  • Score: 0

12:23pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Taskforce 141 says...

MGRA wrote:
Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston is the king of backstabbers and that gnome got exactly what he deserved. Had he not stabbed the workers in the back he may have stood a chance but again he is too far removed from the shop floor he hasn't a clue!
[quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston is the king of backstabbers and that gnome got exactly what he deserved. Had he not stabbed the workers in the back he may have stood a chance but again he is too far removed from the shop floor he hasn't a clue! Taskforce 141
  • Score: 0

12:23pm Fri 15 Feb 13

loosehead says...

So just blame the Government & the last council then?
if Labour hadn't restored pay there would be between £3-7million a year more to spend.
Why don't they mention the saving on Refuse collection costs?
Where's that money gone?
if this council had frozen council tax they would have had more money from central Government.
now it's going to cost them more to get money from the defaulters & every time Council tax goes up so do the amount of defaulters as the last Labour council found out.
But from what I've heard of these two's budget proposals I'm sorry but I thought Walt Disney was American & Fairytales were exactly that .
So just blame the Government & the last council then? if Labour hadn't restored pay there would be between £3-7million a year more to spend. Why don't they mention the saving on Refuse collection costs? Where's that money gone? if this council had frozen council tax they would have had more money from central Government. now it's going to cost them more to get money from the defaulters & every time Council tax goes up so do the amount of defaulters as the last Labour council found out. But from what I've heard of these two's budget proposals I'm sorry but I thought Walt Disney was American & Fairytales were exactly that . loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Fri 15 Feb 13

arthur dalyrimple says...

A audit of how much council tax money goes into gold plated pensions should be the first thing on the list ,see how much the piggies are taking.
A audit of how much council tax money goes into gold plated pensions should be the first thing on the list ,see how much the piggies are taking. arthur dalyrimple
  • Score: 0

12:31pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Mr Price says...

Lets kill all the poor, elderly and vulnerable people.Lets kick everyone out of their homes if they're on benefits and have a spare room. Close all the libraries ,Sure Starts remove all help to the youths then we wont be a burden on this cruel society anymore........Who really cares about us...shame on you all.
Lets kill all the poor, elderly and vulnerable people.Lets kick everyone out of their homes if they're on benefits and have a spare room. Close all the libraries ,Sure Starts remove all help to the youths then we wont be a burden on this cruel society anymore........Who really cares about us...shame on you all. Mr Price
  • Score: 1

12:33pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Taskforce 141 says...

loosehead wrote:
So just blame the Government & the last council then?
if Labour hadn't restored pay there would be between £3-7million a year more to spend.
Why don't they mention the saving on Refuse collection costs?
Where's that money gone?
if this council had frozen council tax they would have had more money from central Government.
now it's going to cost them more to get money from the defaulters & every time Council tax goes up so do the amount of defaulters as the last Labour council found out.
But from what I've heard of these two's budget proposals I'm sorry but I thought Walt Disney was American & Fairytales were exactly that .
the restoration of pay equates to 2% of money to find which i believed to be worked out at approx £400k, so where you got these mickey mouse figures of £3-7million is totally wrong.

I think you were led up the garden path sunshine!
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So just blame the Government & the last council then? if Labour hadn't restored pay there would be between £3-7million a year more to spend. Why don't they mention the saving on Refuse collection costs? Where's that money gone? if this council had frozen council tax they would have had more money from central Government. now it's going to cost them more to get money from the defaulters & every time Council tax goes up so do the amount of defaulters as the last Labour council found out. But from what I've heard of these two's budget proposals I'm sorry but I thought Walt Disney was American & Fairytales were exactly that .[/p][/quote]the restoration of pay equates to 2% of money to find which i believed to be worked out at approx £400k, so where you got these mickey mouse figures of £3-7million is totally wrong. I think you were led up the garden path sunshine! Taskforce 141
  • Score: 0

12:33pm Fri 15 Feb 13

loosehead says...

Taskforce 141 wrote:
MGRA wrote:
Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston is the king of backstabbers and that gnome got exactly what he deserved. Had he not stabbed the workers in the back he may have stood a chance but again he is too far removed from the shop floor he hasn't a clue!
If he had stabbed you in the back sorry the workers in the back what do you call the Unions actions?
getting their members to accept a deal after they had heard the councils budget proposals.
dropping court action why?
taking lower redundancy pay?
taking lower pensions?
the Unions are there to negotiate with the employers the Unions refused to do this.
The Unions left the council with no option but to impose the last proposal & cut jobs.
before the last local election Williams said he was doing exactly this if elected but then said he didn't say it & said the Echo were lying?
Why aren't the Echo suing him?
the BEST DEAL the workers had & the city was the TORY DEAL it's a real travesty the workers didn't listen & were blinkered by the Union lies
[quote][p][bold]Taskforce 141[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston is the king of backstabbers and that gnome got exactly what he deserved. Had he not stabbed the workers in the back he may have stood a chance but again he is too far removed from the shop floor he hasn't a clue![/p][/quote]If he had stabbed you in the back sorry the workers in the back what do you call the Unions actions? getting their members to accept a deal after they had heard the councils budget proposals. dropping court action why? taking lower redundancy pay? taking lower pensions? the Unions are there to negotiate with the employers the Unions refused to do this. The Unions left the council with no option but to impose the last proposal & cut jobs. before the last local election Williams said he was doing exactly this if elected but then said he didn't say it & said the Echo were lying? Why aren't the Echo suing him? the BEST DEAL the workers had & the city was the TORY DEAL it's a real travesty the workers didn't listen & were blinkered by the Union lies loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:36pm Fri 15 Feb 13

loosehead says...

Taskforce 141 wrote:
loosehead wrote:
So just blame the Government & the last council then?
if Labour hadn't restored pay there would be between £3-7million a year more to spend.
Why don't they mention the saving on Refuse collection costs?
Where's that money gone?
if this council had frozen council tax they would have had more money from central Government.
now it's going to cost them more to get money from the defaulters & every time Council tax goes up so do the amount of defaulters as the last Labour council found out.
But from what I've heard of these two's budget proposals I'm sorry but I thought Walt Disney was American & Fairytales were exactly that .
the restoration of pay equates to 2% of money to find which i believed to be worked out at approx £400k, so where you got these mickey mouse figures of £3-7million is totally wrong.

I think you were led up the garden path sunshine!
So you can't t read then?
it was the figure saved by no court action & it was the figure Williams said would restore the bottom level of workers pay.
He also admitted it would be between £7-9million to restore all pay so where did you get your mickey mouse figures from?
or are you saying that he kept over £2million for himself?
[quote][p][bold]Taskforce 141[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So just blame the Government & the last council then? if Labour hadn't restored pay there would be between £3-7million a year more to spend. Why don't they mention the saving on Refuse collection costs? Where's that money gone? if this council had frozen council tax they would have had more money from central Government. now it's going to cost them more to get money from the defaulters & every time Council tax goes up so do the amount of defaulters as the last Labour council found out. But from what I've heard of these two's budget proposals I'm sorry but I thought Walt Disney was American & Fairytales were exactly that .[/p][/quote]the restoration of pay equates to 2% of money to find which i believed to be worked out at approx £400k, so where you got these mickey mouse figures of £3-7million is totally wrong. I think you were led up the garden path sunshine![/p][/quote]So you can't t read then? it was the figure saved by no court action & it was the figure Williams said would restore the bottom level of workers pay. He also admitted it would be between £7-9million to restore all pay so where did you get your mickey mouse figures from? or are you saying that he kept over £2million for himself? loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:40pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

The costs of local authority administration need to be cut radically. In the good times we allowed it to grow unchecked and now, completely unsurprisingly, it has shown itself to be totally unsustainable when times get tough. Charitable giving aside, a pound raised through taxation is the most precious pound anyone can spend. But you wouldn't think it looking at the way most local authorities waste millions every day. I'm not talking about spending on daft vanity projects, I'm talking about the hugely wasteful day-to-day running of the administration. That's why frontline staff such as social workers are facing redundancy, and that is a disgrace.
The costs of local authority administration need to be cut radically. In the good times we allowed it to grow unchecked and now, completely unsurprisingly, it has shown itself to be totally unsustainable when times get tough. Charitable giving aside, a pound raised through taxation is the most precious pound anyone can spend. But you wouldn't think it looking at the way most local authorities waste millions every day. I'm not talking about spending on daft vanity projects, I'm talking about the hugely wasteful day-to-day running of the administration. That's why frontline staff such as social workers are facing redundancy, and that is a disgrace. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

12:44pm Fri 15 Feb 13

waltons11 says...

Taskforce 141 wrote:
It just goes to show that the big three parties have failed us all! Conservatives are too naive, and have no idea what it is like for most of the population on low wages and rely on services. Lib Dems showed their true colours and sold out to the conservatives. And Labour have lost their heritage - they were for the working man but now they have become a second conservative party! When you speak with people they have lost faith in the big 3 and now it looks like the only answer is to vote for the outsiders and a lot of people have stated they would be voting UKIP to prove a point! Broken Britain we are, and there appears to be no one willing to fix it both locally or nationally.
You are so right, I think once there is another General election people will vote very differently to the way they have done in the past. I certainly will, the three big parties might as well be one large party for all the difference in them.
[quote][p][bold]Taskforce 141[/bold] wrote: It just goes to show that the big three parties have failed us all! Conservatives are too naive, and have no idea what it is like for most of the population on low wages and rely on services. Lib Dems showed their true colours and sold out to the conservatives. And Labour have lost their heritage - they were for the working man but now they have become a second conservative party! When you speak with people they have lost faith in the big 3 and now it looks like the only answer is to vote for the outsiders and a lot of people have stated they would be voting UKIP to prove a point! Broken Britain we are, and there appears to be no one willing to fix it both locally or nationally.[/p][/quote]You are so right, I think once there is another General election people will vote very differently to the way they have done in the past. I certainly will, the three big parties might as well be one large party for all the difference in them. waltons11
  • Score: 0

12:46pm Fri 15 Feb 13

StevenGalton says...

WOW!

"“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing.

“The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now."

Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us.

Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it.

When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved.

Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept?

All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude.

Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes.

More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour!
WOW! "“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing. “The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now." Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us. Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it. When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved. Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept? All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude. Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes. More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour! StevenGalton
  • Score: 0

12:48pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Ben Durutti says...

MGRA wrote:
Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
[quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving? Ben Durutti
  • Score: 0

12:50pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

StevenGalton wrote:
WOW!

"“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing.

“The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now."

Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us.

Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it.

When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved.

Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept?

All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude.

Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes.

More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour!
Make no mistake the Torys was going to do it as well, just that Labour was about the lost of 100 jobs less than the Torys
[quote][p][bold]StevenGalton[/bold] wrote: WOW! "“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing. “The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now." Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us. Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it. When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved. Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept? All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude. Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes. More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour![/p][/quote]Make no mistake the Torys was going to do it as well, just that Labour was about the lost of 100 jobs less than the Torys southy
  • Score: 0

12:51pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote:
Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
[quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce southy
  • Score: 0

12:54pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Ben Durutti says...

southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt... Ben Durutti
  • Score: 0

1:20pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.
[quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him. southy
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed
BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed southy
  • Score: 0

1:23pm Fri 15 Feb 13

rich the stitch says...

Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.
[quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it. rich the stitch
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Fri 15 Feb 13

mooky9 says...

southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.
And yet Labour take us into an illegal war but I don't hear you moaning about that. Or Lib Dems pervert the course of justice... Both more serious offences.
And then ALL 3 parties commit fraud to line their pockets and just come out with "it was a mistake guv honest"


Fact is ALL politicians are crooks.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.[/p][/quote]And yet Labour take us into an illegal war but I don't hear you moaning about that. Or Lib Dems pervert the course of justice... Both more serious offences. And then ALL 3 parties commit fraud to line their pockets and just come out with "it was a mistake guv honest" Fact is ALL politicians are crooks. mooky9
  • Score: 0

1:28pm Fri 15 Feb 13

rich the stitch says...

southy wrote:
BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed
You've just been informed, I take it you did not watch question time last night. They said it on there, you're 14 hours later than everyone else. You plank.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed[/p][/quote]You've just been informed, I take it you did not watch question time last night. They said it on there, you're 14 hours later than everyone else. You plank. rich the stitch
  • Score: 0

1:31pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

rich the stitch wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.
I still not sure I though it was tax
[quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.[/p][/quote]I still not sure I though it was tax southy
  • Score: 0

1:31pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

rich the stitch wrote:
southy wrote:
BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed
You've just been informed, I take it you did not watch question time last night. They said it on there, you're 14 hours later than everyone else. You plank.
No I missed it last night other things to do, was it any good
[quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed[/p][/quote]You've just been informed, I take it you did not watch question time last night. They said it on there, you're 14 hours later than everyone else. You plank.[/p][/quote]No I missed it last night other things to do, was it any good southy
  • Score: 0

1:34pm Fri 15 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.
I still not sure I though it was tax
Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever.
http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-ham
pshire-15864926
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.[/p][/quote]I still not sure I though it was tax[/p][/quote]Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-ham pshire-15864926 IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

1:37pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

mooky9 wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.
And yet Labour take us into an illegal war but I don't hear you moaning about that. Or Lib Dems pervert the course of justice... Both more serious offences.
And then ALL 3 parties commit fraud to line their pockets and just come out with "it was a mistake guv honest"


Fact is ALL politicians are crooks.
Mooky9 The TUSC wants to take Blair to court over that matter, and Thatcher for there part in trying to over throw a government.
But first we will need to be in control of Government so we can strip away that protection that they got for being in government, no MP or Lord should be above the law like they are now. And that is another TUSC policy
[quote][p][bold]mooky9[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.[/p][/quote]And yet Labour take us into an illegal war but I don't hear you moaning about that. Or Lib Dems pervert the course of justice... Both more serious offences. And then ALL 3 parties commit fraud to line their pockets and just come out with "it was a mistake guv honest" Fact is ALL politicians are crooks.[/p][/quote]Mooky9 The TUSC wants to take Blair to court over that matter, and Thatcher for there part in trying to over throw a government. But first we will need to be in control of Government so we can strip away that protection that they got for being in government, no MP or Lord should be above the law like they are now. And that is another TUSC policy southy
  • Score: 0

1:38pm Fri 15 Feb 13

chunky_lover says...

hopefully the council with implode with all the staff.
hopefully the council with implode with all the staff. chunky_lover
  • Score: 0

1:42pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

1:48pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.
I still not sure I though it was tax
Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever.
http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-england-ham

pshire-15864926
Will give you that one, have that one wrong.
I like his excuses like changing internet providers, did it not acure to him to check BT mail, or diverting mail to the new address
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.[/p][/quote]I still not sure I though it was tax[/p][/quote]Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-ham pshire-15864926[/p][/quote]Will give you that one, have that one wrong. I like his excuses like changing internet providers, did it not acure to him to check BT mail, or diverting mail to the new address southy
  • Score: 0

2:04pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run. southy
  • Score: 0

2:20pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail? Stephen J
  • Score: 0

2:34pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
And using phrases like "on the dole" is so demeaning to those who have to claim benefit. Makes you sound like an unreconstructed political dinosaur with nothing relevant to say in terms of today's issues.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]And using phrases like "on the dole" is so demeaning to those who have to claim benefit. Makes you sound like an unreconstructed political dinosaur with nothing relevant to say in terms of today's issues. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

2:46pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
And using phrases like "on the dole" is so demeaning to those who have to claim benefit. Makes you sound like an unreconstructed political dinosaur with nothing relevant to say in terms of today's issues.
Its not demeaning at all, i just not going mix words meaning the same thing.
I am not a capitalist who likes to keep changing words meaning the same thing, just because the public started to under stand what they mean.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]And using phrases like "on the dole" is so demeaning to those who have to claim benefit. Makes you sound like an unreconstructed political dinosaur with nothing relevant to say in terms of today's issues.[/p][/quote]Its not demeaning at all, i just not going mix words meaning the same thing. I am not a capitalist who likes to keep changing words meaning the same thing, just because the public started to under stand what they mean. southy
  • Score: 0

3:03pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so. southy
  • Score: 0

3:19pm Fri 15 Feb 13

one in a million says...

smiles and shakes her head....
smiles and shakes her head.... one in a million
  • Score: 0

3:20pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed
David Dimbleby also confided in the several million viewers who watched Question Time last night but keep it under your hat.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: BBC Question Time is comig to Eastleigh a week after next I been informed[/p][/quote]David Dimbleby also confided in the several million viewers who watched Question Time last night but keep it under your hat. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

3:20pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
Yes, I know that's what you think, you keep saying it, but without demonstrably showing that it would work, why should I or anyone else agree with you?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote]Yes, I know that's what you think, you keep saying it, but without demonstrably showing that it would work, why should I or anyone else agree with you? Stephen J
  • Score: 0

3:29pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Torchie1 says...

southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
Unfortunately the law will require changing in order to carry out most of your pipe dreams and that will never happen. As for holding up Iceland as a shining example, why not also mention that the population isn't much greater than Southampton and the GNP is smaller than some of the UK Metropolitan Boroughs. It's liking telling Tesco to use the same financial plan as your local corner shop.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately the law will require changing in order to carry out most of your pipe dreams and that will never happen. As for holding up Iceland as a shining example, why not also mention that the population isn't much greater than Southampton and the GNP is smaller than some of the UK Metropolitan Boroughs. It's liking telling Tesco to use the same financial plan as your local corner shop. Torchie1
  • Score: 0

3:41pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

Torchie1 wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
Unfortunately the law will require changing in order to carry out most of your pipe dreams and that will never happen. As for holding up Iceland as a shining example, why not also mention that the population isn't much greater than Southampton and the GNP is smaller than some of the UK Metropolitan Boroughs. It's liking telling Tesco to use the same financial plan as your local corner shop.
Though they did come up with quite a nifty way of dealing with debt. Just don't pay! Double fermented herring all round!
[quote][p][bold]Torchie1[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote]Unfortunately the law will require changing in order to carry out most of your pipe dreams and that will never happen. As for holding up Iceland as a shining example, why not also mention that the population isn't much greater than Southampton and the GNP is smaller than some of the UK Metropolitan Boroughs. It's liking telling Tesco to use the same financial plan as your local corner shop.[/p][/quote]Though they did come up with quite a nifty way of dealing with debt. Just don't pay! Double fermented herring all round! Stephen J
  • Score: 0

4:02pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Might SS says...

R these the rebels who formed their own party then got higher expenses?
R these the rebels who formed their own party then got higher expenses? Might SS
  • Score: 0

4:28pm Fri 15 Feb 13

George4th says...

The Unions run Southampton City Council and we, the good citizens, pay the price of total incompetence!
>
We've had one Labour Council after another and all controlled by the Unions - where has it got us? Absolutely up a creek without a paddle!
>
Wake up good folk of Southampton! Why is Southampton the ONLY Labour council in the South?!

(Harold Wilson tried to control the Unions back in the late 60s and HE failed!! They were/are, out of control!)
The Unions run Southampton City Council and we, the good citizens, pay the price of total incompetence! > We've had one Labour Council after another and all controlled by the Unions - where has it got us? Absolutely up a creek without a paddle! > Wake up good folk of Southampton! Why is Southampton the ONLY Labour council in the South?! (Harold Wilson tried to control the Unions back in the late 60s and HE failed!! They were/are, out of control!) George4th
  • Score: 0

4:48pm Fri 15 Feb 13

loosehead says...

StevenGalton wrote:
WOW!

"“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing.

“The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now."

Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us.

Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it.

When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved.

Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept?

All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude.

Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes.

More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour!
Steve could you find out & print the actual figure it would be to restore all council workers pay?
Steve this council got an £8million grant to keep Weekly Collections thanks to the previous Tory administration so where's the money set aside to run this service gone to?
I know I've disagreed with you over Bio Mass but could you please find out exactly where taskforce can see the exact amount for pay restoration as the figures I've printed came from a councillor on the right & from what I've read from Williams Thank You
[quote][p][bold]StevenGalton[/bold] wrote: WOW! "“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing. “The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now." Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us. Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it. When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved. Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept? All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude. Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes. More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour![/p][/quote]Steve could you find out & print the actual figure it would be to restore all council workers pay? Steve this council got an £8million grant to keep Weekly Collections thanks to the previous Tory administration so where's the money set aside to run this service gone to? I know I've disagreed with you over Bio Mass but could you please find out exactly where taskforce can see the exact amount for pay restoration as the figures I've printed came from a councillor on the right & from what I've read from Williams Thank You loosehead
  • Score: 0

4:51pm Fri 15 Feb 13

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
There's a song can't remember if it was the Temptations,detroit spinners or the Drifters but it was called cloud Nine until I started reading your's & the TUSC's ideas & now Morrel & Thomas's idea's I thought it was a fantasy & no one actually lived on cloud Nine well now I know different Thank You
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote]There's a song can't remember if it was the Temptations,detroit spinners or the Drifters but it was called cloud Nine until I started reading your's & the TUSC's ideas & now Morrel & Thomas's idea's I thought it was a fantasy & no one actually lived on cloud Nine well now I know different Thank You loosehead
  • Score: 0

5:21pm Fri 15 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
.. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams.

Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council.

You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote].. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams. Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council. You STILL don’t have an answer, do you? freefinker
  • Score: 0

5:48pm Fri 15 Feb 13

bigfella777 says...

I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil.
I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil. bigfella777
  • Score: 0

6:27pm Fri 15 Feb 13

bazzeroz says...

southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote:
Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No tax NO insurance!
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No tax NO insurance! bazzeroz
  • Score: 0

6:45pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

mooky9 wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.
And yet Labour take us into an illegal war but I don't hear you moaning about that. Or Lib Dems pervert the course of justice... Both more serious offences.
And then ALL 3 parties commit fraud to line their pockets and just come out with "it was a mistake guv honest"


Fact is ALL politicians are crooks.
Not all but most are
[quote][p][bold]mooky9[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.[/p][/quote]And yet Labour take us into an illegal war but I don't hear you moaning about that. Or Lib Dems pervert the course of justice... Both more serious offences. And then ALL 3 parties commit fraud to line their pockets and just come out with "it was a mistake guv honest" Fact is ALL politicians are crooks.[/p][/quote]Not all but most are Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

7:13pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
Stephen it is not only the right that is against EU, in fact it was the Labour Party which was against even the mother of EU the EEC (or whatever it was called) when Tory Ted Heath signed the suicide not in Paris.

You may remember that few years ago confidential papers, which got released, confirmed that Heath even told officials not to make real agenda of that exercise known, because that was political union.

With plenty of rich people behind them and helpful media impression has been created that only some Tories and parties on their right like UKIP are against the EU.

Do they tell the people that likes of Tony Benn and Arthur Scargill and many others have never changed our position of opposition to the EU?....... No

Yes we may disagree whether EU is good or bad for UK. But opposition to it is from both left and right.

Few years ago Arthur Scargill even played with the idea of us on the left and anti EU Tories, with bit of humanity in them (big ask obviously!!!). But it never took off because of massive UKIP type xenophobic reasons of many Conservatives for opposition to EU.

So called austarity being pushed by likes of German Chancellor if fully implemented will make the lives of local Councils evevn more difficult, as has happened in Greece and Spain already. Only bungler Browns some of the good deeds of keeping UK out of the Euro Zone is saving us from that kind of disaster.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]Stephen it is not only the right that is against EU, in fact it was the Labour Party which was against even the mother of EU the EEC (or whatever it was called) when Tory Ted Heath signed the suicide not in Paris. You may remember that few years ago confidential papers, which got released, confirmed that Heath even told officials not to make real agenda of that exercise known, because that was political union. With plenty of rich people behind them and helpful media impression has been created that only some Tories and parties on their right like UKIP are against the EU. Do they tell the people that likes of Tony Benn and Arthur Scargill and many others have never changed our position of opposition to the EU?....... No Yes we may disagree whether EU is good or bad for UK. But opposition to it is from both left and right. Few years ago Arthur Scargill even played with the idea of us on the left and anti EU Tories, with bit of humanity in them (big ask obviously!!!). But it never took off because of massive UKIP type xenophobic reasons of many Conservatives for opposition to EU. So called austarity being pushed by likes of German Chancellor if fully implemented will make the lives of local Councils evevn more difficult, as has happened in Greece and Spain already. Only bungler Browns some of the good deeds of keeping UK out of the Euro Zone is saving us from that kind of disaster. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

7:56pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference.

Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed.

Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping.

Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc)

Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him.

Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people.

Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining.

Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils.

So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign.

Will it happen? I can only hope so.
As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference. Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed. Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping. Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc) Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him. Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people. Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining. Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils. So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign. Will it happen? I can only hope so. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:02pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

StevenGalton wrote:
WOW!

"“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing.

“The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now."

Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us.

Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it.

When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved.

Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept?

All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude.

Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes.

More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour!
Steve, as likely Tory or LibDem (?) supporter you are right in pointing that Nulabour misled people during last local election, but your try for tarnishing Councillors Thomas and Morrell with same tar as rest of NuLabourites in Council is unfair.

I can understand why you only want to pick holes in NuLabour and from that point it is good effort.

You sat in the public gallery during Council meeting and listened to Cllr. Thomas reading out the promises which NuLabour made during elections and confirm that he is not willing to break those, why have you not mentioned that?

Obviously Don was talking on behalf of both himself and Keith.

Don and Keith do not deserve such criticism but in my opinion admiration for standing by their promises and putting their political future on line.

These days many people rightly complain about politicians saying one thing and doing another. But when Don Thomas and Keith Morrell are doing exactly what they said, putting their monies where there mouths are, how could you and others possibly start blaming them?
[quote][p][bold]StevenGalton[/bold] wrote: WOW! "“Next year, probably libraries will be closing, Sure Start Centres will be closing, more youth services will be closing. “The campaign to try and stop that happening starts now." Is this not what Southampton Conservatives were saying Labour would do as early as 2011 and the campaign started then for us. Southampton Conservatives were honest and made very clear promises on what a continued Conservative administration would mean. Unlike Labour, when Southampton Conservatives made a promise, we kept it. When Labour set their pre-election manifesto they ridiculed us for "Scaremongering" for suggesting libraries and SureStart were at risk from Labour - the reality, despite Labour's promise to increase service provision to both, massive cuts to both library and SureStart services have just been approved. Both Cllr Thomas & Morrell were part of the joint Labour group effort for their manifesto creation - is this now an admission that Labour members knew back then they were making promises that could not be kept? All parties knew the forthcoming financial situation of the Council pre May 2012, it is not good enough to try and shift blame now - Labour controlled Southampton have put us in this worse situation purely due to their ineptitude and spendthrift attitude. Unfortunately true to form Labour Southampton are proliferate with spending - truly shocking that half a million can be put into a leaders "slush fund" and the amount that has been wasted on consultations to date, especially when residents are hit with the bill to pay for it through increased taxes. More charges and less services - welcome to Southampton Labour![/p][/quote]Steve, as likely Tory or LibDem (?) supporter you are right in pointing that Nulabour misled people during last local election, but your try for tarnishing Councillors Thomas and Morrell with same tar as rest of NuLabourites in Council is unfair. I can understand why you only want to pick holes in NuLabour and from that point it is good effort. You sat in the public gallery during Council meeting and listened to Cllr. Thomas reading out the promises which NuLabour made during elections and confirm that he is not willing to break those, why have you not mentioned that? Obviously Don was talking on behalf of both himself and Keith. Don and Keith do not deserve such criticism but in my opinion admiration for standing by their promises and putting their political future on line. These days many people rightly complain about politicians saying one thing and doing another. But when Don Thomas and Keith Morrell are doing exactly what they said, putting their monies where there mouths are, how could you and others possibly start blaming them? Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:07pm Fri 15 Feb 13

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
.. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams.

Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council.

You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?
And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years.
And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote].. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams. Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council. You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?[/p][/quote]And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years. And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think. southy
  • Score: 0

8:22pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
Stephen it is not only the right that is against EU, in fact it was the Labour Party which was against even the mother of EU the EEC (or whatever it was called) when Tory Ted Heath signed the suicide not in Paris.

You may remember that few years ago confidential papers, which got released, confirmed that Heath even told officials not to make real agenda of that exercise known, because that was political union.

With plenty of rich people behind them and helpful media impression has been created that only some Tories and parties on their right like UKIP are against the EU.

Do they tell the people that likes of Tony Benn and Arthur Scargill and many others have never changed our position of opposition to the EU?....... No

Yes we may disagree whether EU is good or bad for UK. But opposition to it is from both left and right.

Few years ago Arthur Scargill even played with the idea of us on the left and anti EU Tories, with bit of humanity in them (big ask obviously!!!). But it never took off because of massive UKIP type xenophobic reasons of many Conservatives for opposition to EU.

So called austarity being pushed by likes of German Chancellor if fully implemented will make the lives of local Councils evevn more difficult, as has happened in Greece and Spain already. Only bungler Browns some of the good deeds of keeping UK out of the Euro Zone is saving us from that kind of disaster.
I think most people are aware that EU membership isn't a clear Left/Right issue. I simply picked a couple of the more predictable arguments, one from each 'side'.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]Stephen it is not only the right that is against EU, in fact it was the Labour Party which was against even the mother of EU the EEC (or whatever it was called) when Tory Ted Heath signed the suicide not in Paris. You may remember that few years ago confidential papers, which got released, confirmed that Heath even told officials not to make real agenda of that exercise known, because that was political union. With plenty of rich people behind them and helpful media impression has been created that only some Tories and parties on their right like UKIP are against the EU. Do they tell the people that likes of Tony Benn and Arthur Scargill and many others have never changed our position of opposition to the EU?....... No Yes we may disagree whether EU is good or bad for UK. But opposition to it is from both left and right. Few years ago Arthur Scargill even played with the idea of us on the left and anti EU Tories, with bit of humanity in them (big ask obviously!!!). But it never took off because of massive UKIP type xenophobic reasons of many Conservatives for opposition to EU. So called austarity being pushed by likes of German Chancellor if fully implemented will make the lives of local Councils evevn more difficult, as has happened in Greece and Spain already. Only bungler Browns some of the good deeds of keeping UK out of the Euro Zone is saving us from that kind of disaster.[/p][/quote]I think most people are aware that EU membership isn't a clear Left/Right issue. I simply picked a couple of the more predictable arguments, one from each 'side'. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

8:26pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.
Could you PLEASE stop being pedantic, Cllr. Smith was involved in something to do with his car and in fairness he accepted the offence and did not lie, like Huhne.

I got fined for Parking, my own mistake should not have spent time with a mate eating pony burgers, will you be hounding me for that for the rest of my life?

Please try not to make that stale news become yet one vehicle for sidetracking the real serious issue of local government finance like we did on Commonwealth yesterday.

I put my hands up for being culprit in that as well, so can only say sorry to person who pointed that out on other thread, but if I may mitigate I had some personal reason why I took it so seriously. Some of my loved ones not alive anymore were involved in Commonwealth, in which I still believe. At least it is some of the good things which came out of many bad ones out of thankfully now finished Empire.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]If it was insurence then he deserves to have his licence taking away from him.[/p][/quote]Could you PLEASE stop being pedantic, Cllr. Smith was involved in something to do with his car and in fairness he accepted the offence and did not lie, like Huhne. I got fined for Parking, my own mistake should not have spent time with a mate eating pony burgers, will you be hounding me for that for the rest of my life? Please try not to make that stale news become yet one vehicle for sidetracking the real serious issue of local government finance like we did on Commonwealth yesterday. I put my hands up for being culprit in that as well, so can only say sorry to person who pointed that out on other thread, but if I may mitigate I had some personal reason why I took it so seriously. Some of my loved ones not alive anymore were involved in Commonwealth, in which I still believe. At least it is some of the good things which came out of many bad ones out of thankfully now finished Empire. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:29pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference.

Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed.

Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping.

Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc)

Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him.

Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people.

Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining.

Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils.

So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign.

Will it happen? I can only hope so.
"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference. Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed. Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping. Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc) Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him. Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people. Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining. Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils. So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign. Will it happen? I can only hope so.[/p][/quote]"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

8:43pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

bigfella777 wrote:
I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil.
My human instinct is to repond to this comment, but I better ignore it with the contempt it deserves.

Hope others including many decent people from Shirley will also do the same.
[quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil.[/p][/quote]My human instinct is to repond to this comment, but I better ignore it with the contempt it deserves. Hope others including many decent people from Shirley will also do the same. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

8:59pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Stephen J says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
bigfella777 wrote:
I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil.
My human instinct is to repond to this comment, but I better ignore it with the contempt it deserves.

Hope others including many decent people from Shirley will also do the same.
Or you could see it for what it is.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil.[/p][/quote]My human instinct is to repond to this comment, but I better ignore it with the contempt it deserves. Hope others including many decent people from Shirley will also do the same.[/p][/quote]Or you could see it for what it is. Stephen J
  • Score: 0

9:10pm Fri 15 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
.. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams.

Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council.

You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?
And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years.
And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.
.. no southy, that again is wishful thinking.

The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world.

Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money.

Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote].. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams. Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council. You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?[/p][/quote]And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years. And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.[/p][/quote].. no southy, that again is wishful thinking. The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world. Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money. Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from? freefinker
  • Score: 0

9:23pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

Stephen J wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference.

Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed.

Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping.

Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc)

Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him.

Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people.

Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining.

Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils.

So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign.

Will it happen? I can only hope so.
"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.
Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost.

Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others.

I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good.

On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke.

If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money.

Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government.

My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference. Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed. Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping. Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc) Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him. Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people. Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining. Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils. So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign. Will it happen? I can only hope so.[/p][/quote]"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.[/p][/quote]Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost. Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others. I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good. On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke. If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money. Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government. My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

9:24pm Fri 15 Feb 13

loosehead says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
.. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams.

Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council.

You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?
And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years.
And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.
Why oh why do the left bang on about the super rich?
If it's not them it's the bankers which if they hadn't forgotten that means all of us as we own banks.
now we could have let those banks close putting thousands out of work cutting our export/import balance( city of London makes billions) 7 dropping us deeper into the dirt than we already are.
we bailed them out but until the world comes out of this recession we are just mounting up debt & the longer we have that debt the more interest we'll pay.
so saying hit the banks isn't helping anyone as we need to make them as profitable as soon as we can to get our money back but I guess Thomas,Morrell & the TUSC & by the Looks of it Paramjit can't work that one out.
China was running Nationalised Industries but it's not now & look at their booming economy yet Southy say's Nationalise that's the solution?
Unlike a few of the left on here I've been talking to Labour supporters or should I say ex supporters & they aren't going to vote for Thomas & his mates party & they're not going to vote for the TUSC & no it's not Tory or liberal but they're all saying they will vote for UKIP.
so it's no longer the Tory vote that's been lost to UKIP it's now very much Labours vote that's being hit by UKIP so I guess we'll hear more accusations of Racism thrown at UKIP?
I will vote Tory but if I thought I could oust Whitehead I'll vote UKIP
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote].. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams. Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council. You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?[/p][/quote]And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years. And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.[/p][/quote]Why oh why do the left bang on about the super rich? If it's not them it's the bankers which if they hadn't forgotten that means all of us as we own banks. now we could have let those banks close putting thousands out of work cutting our export/import balance( city of London makes billions) 7 dropping us deeper into the dirt than we already are. we bailed them out but until the world comes out of this recession we are just mounting up debt & the longer we have that debt the more interest we'll pay. so saying hit the banks isn't helping anyone as we need to make them as profitable as soon as we can to get our money back but I guess Thomas,Morrell & the TUSC & by the Looks of it Paramjit can't work that one out. China was running Nationalised Industries but it's not now & look at their booming economy yet Southy say's Nationalise that's the solution? Unlike a few of the left on here I've been talking to Labour supporters or should I say ex supporters & they aren't going to vote for Thomas & his mates party & they're not going to vote for the TUSC & no it's not Tory or liberal but they're all saying they will vote for UKIP. so it's no longer the Tory vote that's been lost to UKIP it's now very much Labours vote that's being hit by UKIP so I guess we'll hear more accusations of Racism thrown at UKIP? I will vote Tory but if I thought I could oust Whitehead I'll vote UKIP loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:29pm Fri 15 Feb 13

loosehead says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference.

Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed.

Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping.

Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc)

Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him.

Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people.

Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining.

Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils.

So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign.

Will it happen? I can only hope so.
"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.
Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost.

Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others.

I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good.

On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke.

If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money.

Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government.

My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine.
You dare quote that tyrants name on here?
the same King Arthur who dragged us all down the same KING ARTHUR that lost countless jobs in the three day weeks the same KING ARTHUR that tried running the country through strikes when Labour were in power & had to go to the IMF now if that's the type of persons financial policies you want to follow & Thomas & Morrell are following please shout it out loud as that's that party finished with & if that's the TUSC's policy Southy you might as well quit now
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference. Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed. Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping. Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc) Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him. Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people. Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining. Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils. So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign. Will it happen? I can only hope so.[/p][/quote]"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.[/p][/quote]Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost. Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others. I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good. On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke. If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money. Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government. My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine.[/p][/quote]You dare quote that tyrants name on here? the same King Arthur who dragged us all down the same KING ARTHUR that lost countless jobs in the three day weeks the same KING ARTHUR that tried running the country through strikes when Labour were in power & had to go to the IMF now if that's the type of persons financial policies you want to follow & Thomas & Morrell are following please shout it out loud as that's that party finished with & if that's the TUSC's policy Southy you might as well quit now loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:39pm Fri 15 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
.. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams.

Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council.

You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?
And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years.
And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.
.. no southy, that again is wishful thinking.

The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world.

Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money.

Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from?
Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day.

He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out!

To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot!
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote].. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams. Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council. You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?[/p][/quote]And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years. And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.[/p][/quote].. no southy, that again is wishful thinking. The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world. Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money. Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from?[/p][/quote]Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day. He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out! To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot! IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:44pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

Stephen J wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
bigfella777 wrote:
I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil.
My human instinct is to repond to this comment, but I better ignore it with the contempt it deserves.

Hope others including many decent people from Shirley will also do the same.
Or you could see it for what it is.
Thanks for suggestion, actually I have some close friends who live in Shirley, apart from one who is now 82 and retired they all have full time jobs. Some even do lot of community service in their spare time, one who is like sister to me was even given some honour by the queen something she appreciates, but I am agnostic on such things.

Do you really want to join likes of other contributors on this site and start spewing venom about people like that, and prove even the head of the state wrong, that she and her whole lot of advisors have honoured person from Shirley?

There are good and bad people in all societies and neighbourhoods. Even Chilworth is no exception

Please don't expect anymore response for me on this subject. I do not believe in looking down upon people because of what they look like or where they live.
[quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bigfella777[/bold] wrote: I think they should just stop all services for any areas of the city where there is 60% unemployment or more. I am sick of seeing my hard earned cash being wasted on hairbrained improvement schemes around the city council estates. They just throw money away on those who cannot appreciate it, now a huge sum is going to be spent in Shirley to improve the area, what is the point? Have you not seen the inhabitants, it makes my blood boil.[/p][/quote]My human instinct is to repond to this comment, but I better ignore it with the contempt it deserves. Hope others including many decent people from Shirley will also do the same.[/p][/quote]Or you could see it for what it is.[/p][/quote]Thanks for suggestion, actually I have some close friends who live in Shirley, apart from one who is now 82 and retired they all have full time jobs. Some even do lot of community service in their spare time, one who is like sister to me was even given some honour by the queen something she appreciates, but I am agnostic on such things. Do you really want to join likes of other contributors on this site and start spewing venom about people like that, and prove even the head of the state wrong, that she and her whole lot of advisors have honoured person from Shirley? There are good and bad people in all societies and neighbourhoods. Even Chilworth is no exception Please don't expect anymore response for me on this subject. I do not believe in looking down upon people because of what they look like or where they live. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

9:57pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

loosehead wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference.

Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed.

Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping.

Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc)

Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him.

Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people.

Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining.

Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils.

So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign.

Will it happen? I can only hope so.
"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.
Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost.

Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others.

I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good.

On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke.

If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money.

Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government.

My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine.
You dare quote that tyrants name on here?
the same King Arthur who dragged us all down the same KING ARTHUR that lost countless jobs in the three day weeks the same KING ARTHUR that tried running the country through strikes when Labour were in power & had to go to the IMF now if that's the type of persons financial policies you want to follow & Thomas & Morrell are following please shout it out loud as that's that party finished with & if that's the TUSC's policy Southy you might as well quit now
I have no right to speak on behalf of Don and Keith, you better ask them yourself.

Yes I have great respect for Arthur Scargill and Tony Benn, it has never been any secret, most of your Tory masters are fully aware of that.

I have every right to respect whoever I admire just like you have the right to express your views and keep on changing political affiliations, is it still UKIP or now it is something else yet again?

Good bye
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference. Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed. Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping. Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc) Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him. Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people. Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining. Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils. So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign. Will it happen? I can only hope so.[/p][/quote]"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.[/p][/quote]Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost. Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others. I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good. On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke. If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money. Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government. My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine.[/p][/quote]You dare quote that tyrants name on here? the same King Arthur who dragged us all down the same KING ARTHUR that lost countless jobs in the three day weeks the same KING ARTHUR that tried running the country through strikes when Labour were in power & had to go to the IMF now if that's the type of persons financial policies you want to follow & Thomas & Morrell are following please shout it out loud as that's that party finished with & if that's the TUSC's policy Southy you might as well quit now[/p][/quote]I have no right to speak on behalf of Don and Keith, you better ask them yourself. Yes I have great respect for Arthur Scargill and Tony Benn, it has never been any secret, most of your Tory masters are fully aware of that. I have every right to respect whoever I admire just like you have the right to express your views and keep on changing political affiliations, is it still UKIP or now it is something else yet again? Good bye Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

10:02pm Fri 15 Feb 13

Paramjit Bahia says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
.. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams.

Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council.

You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?
And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years.
And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.
.. no southy, that again is wishful thinking.

The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world.

Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money.

Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from?
Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day.

He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out!

To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot!
Iron Lady,

weren't you going to be in India today?
I am glad if you have aborted the trip. Or are you passing time on the plane?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote].. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams. Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council. You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?[/p][/quote]And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years. And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.[/p][/quote].. no southy, that again is wishful thinking. The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world. Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money. Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from?[/p][/quote]Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day. He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out! To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot![/p][/quote]Iron Lady, weren't you going to be in India today? I am glad if you have aborted the trip. Or are you passing time on the plane? Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

10:03pm Fri 15 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
southy wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.
The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do.
To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.
Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?
One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs.
Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do.
It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office.
And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in.
Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.
.. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams.

Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council.

You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?
And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years.
And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.
.. no southy, that again is wishful thinking.

The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world.

Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money.

Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from?
Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day.

He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out!

To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot!
Iron Lady,

weren't you going to be in India today?
I am glad if you have aborted the trip. Or are you passing time on the plane?
No, not going until end of March, I applied for my visa hence my post about Visa Cost ;-)
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: Ok, so we're all fed up with the main parties and we're going to look elsewhere come the next general. If we look to the Right, we get out of Europe and for a start that will save us our annual £5.85bn a year net EU contribution. There might also be some tinkering with the NHS which might make save a billion or two more. Sounds good, until we realise that government costs nearly £677bn a year. Or, we could look to the "No Cuts" Left to reprioritise government spending, which might stop some cuts, but it won't be anything like enough to cover all of the actual and proposed cuts. So they would have to borrow massively in order to achieve their aim, thereby increasing the cost of our current borrowing to a crippling level. Serious suggestions welcome from any of the 'alternative' parties as to how they're going to get us out of this.[/p][/quote]The TUSC offer the vote on the EU also, but one thing we not do and that is to sell any part of the NHS to private hands like ukip will do. To save an Economy you need people working so they are able to spend in the economy, putting on the dole means that more money will be going out than in, so even if you make cuts you will be ending up having to borrow a lot more in the long run.[/p][/quote]Without putting numbers on it to show how TUSC policy could stop further cuts and reverse those that have been made without increasing debt, your answer is mere political chatter. How about some detail?[/p][/quote]One of the early things to do is make sure the wealthy are paying the full amount of taxes, close all the loop holes that was created to make the rich richer at the expense of the less well off, Renationalise Water, Gas, Electric, Coal and Oil (if the private sector wants to compeat they can do), then rebuild a new state industarys so the profits go to the state once again, to compeat with the private sector, doing this will create millions of jobs. Put the NHS back into the Doc & nurses hands again as it was before Thatcher mess it up, The NHS is not a business and never should be run like one, get rid off all those trust boards they cost to much for the tiny amount that they do. It don't matter what you do that debt is going to grow, at lest with our way it will slow down and start dropping, not at first but it will happen, because your exports will start to be larger than your imports like it was before Thatchers days in office. And i talking about real money and not like it is now just down on paper. for nearly 30 years more money as gone out than what is coming in. Put back the finance restrictions, like Iceland did and are a lot better off for doing so.[/p][/quote].. so, still no actual answer to the question I keep asking you. Just a load more waffle and pie in the sky pipe dreams. Absolutely nothing of what you have said above would bridge the budget deficit between the TUSC slogan of 'No Cuts' and the sum of money that the coalition government will actually provide for our local council. You STILL don’t have an answer, do you?[/p][/quote]And your about as bright as they come. how much do the super elite rich get away each year in Tax avoidence, making them pay the tax that they should be paying woulf clear the uk debt in 10 years. And you had your answer you just don't wish to let people know that the left are right in they way they think.[/p][/quote].. no southy, that again is wishful thinking. The REALITY is that local government income IS being cut. That's actually happening, in the real world. Now, tell us how TUSC would fill the fiscal deficit between income and expenditure. You told us 'No Cuts', but you knew central government would be giving out less money. Surely TUSC was aware of this? So where is the extra money coming from?[/p][/quote]Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day. He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out! To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot![/p][/quote]Iron Lady, weren't you going to be in India today? I am glad if you have aborted the trip. Or are you passing time on the plane?[/p][/quote]No, not going until end of March, I applied for my visa hence my post about Visa Cost ;-) IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

1:56am Sat 16 Feb 13

southy says...

Ironlady said
Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day.
He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out!
To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot!

Now put the rest in, the city would benefit because they would get a lot more money back from the government, any Councillor or MP should put the people first, even if means losing your post in government.
If they don't then all they are doing is thinking about them selfs and no one else.
Ironlady said Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day. He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out! To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot! Now put the rest in, the city would benefit because they would get a lot more money back from the government, any Councillor or MP should put the people first, even if means losing your post in government. If they don't then all they are doing is thinking about them selfs and no one else. southy
  • Score: 0

1:56am Sat 16 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.
I still not sure I though it was tax
Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever.
http://www.bbc.co.uk


/news/uk-england-ham


pshire-15864926
Will give you that one, have that one wrong.
I like his excuses like changing internet providers, did it not acure to him to check BT mail, or diverting mail to the new address
Southy, I am really pleased you have chosen to own up to a simple mistake.

I respect you for being honest on this occasion, let's hope you will continue this trend and we'll all be happy!

Sometimes we all make mistakes, a simple 'yes I got it wrong' stops you making a fool of yourself.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.[/p][/quote]I still not sure I though it was tax[/p][/quote]Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-ham pshire-15864926[/p][/quote]Will give you that one, have that one wrong. I like his excuses like changing internet providers, did it not acure to him to check BT mail, or diverting mail to the new address[/p][/quote]Southy, I am really pleased you have chosen to own up to a simple mistake. I respect you for being honest on this occasion, let's hope you will continue this trend and we'll all be happy! Sometimes we all make mistakes, a simple 'yes I got it wrong' stops you making a fool of yourself. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

8:12am Sat 16 Feb 13

FoysCornerBoy says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
Stephen J wrote:
Paramjit Bahia wrote:
As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference.

Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed.

Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping.

Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc)

Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him.

Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people.

Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining.

Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils.

So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign.

Will it happen? I can only hope so.
"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.
Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost.

Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others.

I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good.

On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke.

If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money.

Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government.

My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine.
Unison's Pete Challis has produced some useful analysis on local government finance which you might helpful.

I'm sure Labour councillors in Unison (none of whom are in the pockets of the unions) would be happy to share this with the less informed
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Stephen J[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: As I have many times posted on this site before, it can’t be denied that virtually all the local councils have very serious financial problems. Whichever political party controls a council makes no difference. Main cause of the problem is how local government is financed. Under Thatcher the central government interfered with what used to be Rate Support Grant (RSG). And started not only decreasing the central government’s share of contribution to local authorities but also dictating how much money they could raise through rates/Council Tax. With instrument called capping. Although while in opposition the Labour Party made plenty of noises against those policies, but after coming into power the NuLabour under both Blair and Brown enforced the same policy with even more enthusiasm than the Tories. (As they did on many other matters as well i.e. part privatisation of NHS, introduction of fees for higher education, trying to pick upon disabled and insulting old age pensioners with 75p per week pension rise that was even less than the price of loaf etc etc) Now ConDem Coalition of unprincipled opportunists, (Which they keep on telling us is in ‘National Interest’ but in reality is for the Ego of leaders of Tories and LibDem) is also not only implementing the same problematic policies but the big beast of Tories former councillor himself Pickle, who should know better, is even more ruthless about forcing councils against the wall than others before him. Only way to sort this rot out is for local councils to get together and demand that Central Government (HMG) should start giving them sufficient money so they may deliver decent services to for the people. Excuses of all the national leaders, Tories, NuLabour or LibDem etc, that money is short needs examining. Yes there will always be only certain amount available, but how it is spent is political decision. Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils. So from that point of view Southampton Councillors Don Thomas and Keith Morrell have started the ball rolling, now it is up to us the people and those councillors who are interested in serving the people who vote for them to build Don and Keith’s start into a massive campaign. Will it happen? I can only hope so.[/p][/quote]"Either the money can be wasted on wars, bailing out bankers big businesses or Euro Zone economies and for slush funds dressed as foreign aid, but in reality virtual bribes for trying to sell weapons that kill to nations like India, and waste on the EU contributions OR the same money could be spent on providing decent services for people through local councils." All highly emotive, but the point is that many people are becoming increasingly fed up with exactly this kind of rhetoric. Simply repeating it without showing how the numbers stack up does nothing to make your case. Otherwise, all anyone can say in response is "Yeah!" or "Rubbish!" And that gets us nowhere.[/p][/quote]Stephen in 2000 Arthur Scargill led Socialist Labour Party did exactly that. They produced fully costed budget, which unfortunately I have since lost. Yes now it is 2013, but basic argument is the same, so I believe it can be done, all it needs is somebody with accounting skills to dig through the available figures. Sadly that is not my field. Please believe me for somebody who studied economics I am really really bad on math, so even I could I dare not because I may make mistakes, which could mislead others. I remember talking to some journalist from Times when Arthur produced that document, after going through the details for couple of days even he'd said that people should know this, but he can't get his editor to follow that, because it will make Scargill look good. On Wednesday Cllr. Morrell, who is accountant, actually produced detailed alternative local budget proving the fact that if there is political will things can be done differently, but he was not even allowed to formally move his budget by the Mayor Cllr. Burke. If you have the time, try finding total shortfall in all local councils budgets, add it up, then through freedom of information get costs of items I have mentioned, I am convinced there will be more than sufficient money. Few weeks ago at a meeting in Solent Uni's building in Above Bar a speaker from Socialist Party also mentioned total shortfall of local councils. Approaching them may also provide you with at least one set of figures, then in your position I would request a friendly MP to find figures on other items from the government. My attitude to life is that I write in good faith, and try to tell the truth, if somebody does not believe that it is his/her problem not mine.[/p][/quote]Unison's Pete Challis has produced some useful analysis on local government finance which you might helpful. I'm sure Labour councillors in Unison (none of whom are in the pockets of the unions) would be happy to share this with the less informed FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 0

10:02am Sat 16 Feb 13

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
Ironlady said
Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day.
He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out!
To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot!

Now put the rest in, the city would benefit because they would get a lot more money back from the government, any Councillor or MP should put the people first, even if means losing your post in government.
If they don't then all they are doing is thinking about them selfs and no one else.
.. no southy, if councillors 'did a Liverpool', as you keep suggesting, it would not result in more money. Nor did it really in Liverpool. Apart from the extra £20 million (a drop in the ocean) allocated specifically for housing all the extra spending that HMG funded was a result of taking over the council, dealing with the debt, sorting out the employment status of the entire council staff the Trots made redundant, etc, ad infinitum. If you actually think that driving a council to bankruptcy is painless and free of expense then you are a bigger fool than even I thought you were. The people of Liverpool did not see extra expenditure on services; they gained nothing from this pointless exercise.

What did the electorate have to say about all this? They removed Militant Tendency (which subsequently morphed into southy’s Socialist Party) from power at the first available opportunity and they have never, ever had even the tiniest whiff of power since.

So much for southy’s mantra about the working class being unable to see the benefits of a true socialist system because of the evil right wing press. In Liverpool they tried it; it was a total and utter failure. So much for trying to run the world by utopian theories; unfortunately the model they use fails to take account of the real world and real people; and is thus doomed to failure every time.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: Ironlady said Southy explained how TUSC would handle the 'No Cuts' policy the other day. He stated they would refuse to implement the cuts and allow Central Government to take control of the City and have TUSC booted out! To me, it seems a bit of a waste voting TUSC as they'll only be in control for 5 minutes before they get the boot! Now put the rest in, the city would benefit because they would get a lot more money back from the government, any Councillor or MP should put the people first, even if means losing your post in government. If they don't then all they are doing is thinking about them selfs and no one else.[/p][/quote].. no southy, if councillors 'did a Liverpool', as you keep suggesting, it would not result in more money. Nor did it really in Liverpool. Apart from the extra £20 million (a drop in the ocean) allocated specifically for housing all the extra spending that HMG funded was a result of taking over the council, dealing with the debt, sorting out the employment status of the entire council staff the Trots made redundant, etc, ad infinitum. If you actually think that driving a council to bankruptcy is painless and free of expense then you are a bigger fool than even I thought you were. The people of Liverpool did not see extra expenditure on services; they gained nothing from this pointless exercise. What did the electorate have to say about all this? They removed Militant Tendency (which subsequently morphed into southy’s Socialist Party) from power at the first available opportunity and they have never, ever had even the tiniest whiff of power since. So much for southy’s mantra about the working class being unable to see the benefits of a true socialist system because of the evil right wing press. In Liverpool they tried it; it was a total and utter failure. So much for trying to run the world by utopian theories; unfortunately the model they use fails to take account of the real world and real people; and is thus doomed to failure every time. freefinker
  • Score: 0

10:31am Sat 16 Feb 13

freefinker says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
southy wrote:
rich the stitch wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
southy wrote:
Ben Durutti wrote:
MGRA wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.
Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?
tax not insurenxce
No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...
Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.
I still not sure I though it was tax
Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever.
http://www.bbc.co.uk



/news/uk-england-ham



pshire-15864926
Will give you that one, have that one wrong.
I like his excuses like changing internet providers, did it not acure to him to check BT mail, or diverting mail to the new address
Southy, I am really pleased you have chosen to own up to a simple mistake.

I respect you for being honest on this occasion, let's hope you will continue this trend and we'll all be happy!

Sometimes we all make mistakes, a simple 'yes I got it wrong' stops you making a fool of yourself.
.. yes, that is a rare sight; first time I’ve seen southy say he got something wrong in my over three years of posting on this website.

But even then he was initially insistent that his memory was correct: ‘No it was definitely his insurance’ he said, when he could easily have done what other did and actually check it out on the internet.

Unfortunately, his politics also suffer from this ‘I am always right’ pig-headedness. Who can take politically seriously a chap how insists that Council Tax all goes to central government and only a small percentage comes back; that Council Tax is levied as an extra percentage on every adult in a dwelling; that the Bedroom Tax ‘will be the first real major change to the Council tax’ since its introduction?

It’s just incredible that someone with pretentions of becoming a serious politician and local councillor doesn’t know even simple facts about the system he hopes to one day rule over. And it’s not that other don’t try to help him. Oh no, there are plenty on here who point him to accurate factual information on his incredible goofs; but he still will not back down despite overwhelming evidence that he is wrong.

Still this tax/insurance business of Royston may be the new leaf he needs to turn over. He’s done it once now so it shouldn’t be quite so difficult in future.

Well done southy.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rich the stitch[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ben Durutti[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]MGRA[/bold] wrote: Royston wanted to save jobs and services, and the workers stabbed him in the back as did the voters, so the turkeys of southampton have voted for christmas. Jobs-for-the-boys labour will cream off money whilst laughing at the residents of southampton.[/p][/quote]Royston couldn't even be trusted to sort out his car insurance. What if he had seriously injured a child whilst driving?[/p][/quote]tax not insurenxce[/p][/quote]No it was definitely his insurance he disgracefully didn't have & as for not wearing a seatbelt...[/p][/quote]Ha ha Southy, you really can't get anything right can you. Are you going to admit you got it wrong? I doubt it.[/p][/quote]I still not sure I though it was tax[/p][/quote]Here you go Southy, now let's see you admit your mistake for the first time ever. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-ham pshire-15864926[/p][/quote]Will give you that one, have that one wrong. I like his excuses like changing internet providers, did it not acure to him to check BT mail, or diverting mail to the new address[/p][/quote]Southy, I am really pleased you have chosen to own up to a simple mistake. I respect you for being honest on this occasion, let's hope you will continue this trend and we'll all be happy! Sometimes we all make mistakes, a simple 'yes I got it wrong' stops you making a fool of yourself.[/p][/quote].. yes, that is a rare sight; first time I’ve seen southy say he got something wrong in my over three years of posting on this website. But even then he was initially insistent that his memory was correct: ‘No it was definitely his insurance’ he said, when he could easily have done what other did and actually check it out on the internet. Unfortunately, his politics also suffer from this ‘I am always right’ pig-headedness. Who can take politically seriously a chap how insists that Council Tax all goes to central government and only a small percentage comes back; that Council Tax is levied as an extra percentage on every adult in a dwelling; that the Bedroom Tax ‘will be the first real major change to the Council tax’ since its introduction? It’s just incredible that someone with pretentions of becoming a serious politician and local councillor doesn’t know even simple facts about the system he hopes to one day rule over. And it’s not that other don’t try to help him. Oh no, there are plenty on here who point him to accurate factual information on his incredible goofs; but he still will not back down despite overwhelming evidence that he is wrong. Still this tax/insurance business of Royston may be the new leaf he needs to turn over. He’s done it once now so it shouldn’t be quite so difficult in future. Well done southy. freefinker
  • Score: 0

9:55pm Sat 16 Feb 13

IronLady2010 says...

I was hoping Southy would follow up on his mistake and be honest in saying he'll be more honest in future. I guess I was wrong in thinking that, he's gone awol again.
I was hoping Southy would follow up on his mistake and be honest in saying he'll be more honest in future. I guess I was wrong in thinking that, he's gone awol again. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

8:00am Sun 17 Feb 13

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
I was hoping Southy would follow up on his mistake and be honest in saying he'll be more honest in future. I guess I was wrong in thinking that, he's gone awol again.
So let me get this right we don't make cuts we borrow money & then borrow more to pay off the first loan & keep doing this?
then when we can borrow no more what?
we sack all council workers as in Liverpool?
Surely this isn't/can't be the TUSC & Thomas & Morells policy can it?
Ironlady I use to think Paramjit was not to bad but to hear what he thinks of Scargill makes me realise he's just as confused as Southy.
Many of my friends lost their jobs thanks to King Arthur,many companies either fled this country or just went bankrupt thanks to King Arthur
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I was hoping Southy would follow up on his mistake and be honest in saying he'll be more honest in future. I guess I was wrong in thinking that, he's gone awol again.[/p][/quote]So let me get this right we don't make cuts we borrow money & then borrow more to pay off the first loan & keep doing this? then when we can borrow no more what? we sack all council workers as in Liverpool? Surely this isn't/can't be the TUSC & Thomas & Morells policy can it? Ironlady I use to think Paramjit was not to bad but to hear what he thinks of Scargill makes me realise he's just as confused as Southy. Many of my friends lost their jobs thanks to King Arthur,many companies either fled this country or just went bankrupt thanks to King Arthur loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:53am Sun 17 Feb 13

freefinker says...

loosehead wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
I was hoping Southy would follow up on his mistake and be honest in saying he'll be more honest in future. I guess I was wrong in thinking that, he's gone awol again.
So let me get this right we don't make cuts we borrow money & then borrow more to pay off the first loan & keep doing this?
then when we can borrow no more what?
we sack all council workers as in Liverpool?
Surely this isn't/can't be the TUSC & Thomas & Morells policy can it?
Ironlady I use to think Paramjit was not to bad but to hear what he thinks of Scargill makes me realise he's just as confused as Southy.
Many of my friends lost their jobs thanks to King Arthur,many companies either fled this country or just went bankrupt thanks to King Arthur
.. although southy has never admitted it, despite my continual prompting, you are right that borrowing cash is the only way to bridge the gap between a 'No Cuts' policy and the money central government provides.

But then, who in their right mind would actually lend money to a Trotskyist council hell bent on setting an illegal budget with the sole aim of driving the council into bankruptcy? Er, the obvious answer is no one, not even Wonga.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I was hoping Southy would follow up on his mistake and be honest in saying he'll be more honest in future. I guess I was wrong in thinking that, he's gone awol again.[/p][/quote]So let me get this right we don't make cuts we borrow money & then borrow more to pay off the first loan & keep doing this? then when we can borrow no more what? we sack all council workers as in Liverpool? Surely this isn't/can't be the TUSC & Thomas & Morells policy can it? Ironlady I use to think Paramjit was not to bad but to hear what he thinks of Scargill makes me realise he's just as confused as Southy. Many of my friends lost their jobs thanks to King Arthur,many companies either fled this country or just went bankrupt thanks to King Arthur[/p][/quote].. although southy has never admitted it, despite my continual prompting, you are right that borrowing cash is the only way to bridge the gap between a 'No Cuts' policy and the money central government provides. But then, who in their right mind would actually lend money to a Trotskyist council hell bent on setting an illegal budget with the sole aim of driving the council into bankruptcy? Er, the obvious answer is no one, not even Wonga. freefinker
  • Score: 0

9:45am Thu 21 Feb 13

allison.luella says...

I think its disgraceful!! the governement gave the council some money to stop the Council tax increases for another year, BUT STILL its going up!! plus we have to now pay £30 pound a year just to park outside our own houses!! I live in a 37 year old council house, and we have never had anything done to it from the council, we were supposed to get new kitchens, but that has not materialised. we pay full RENT AND COUNCIL TAX and get nothing out of it!! THANK YOU LABOUR!! BRING BACK THE TORIES!!
I think its disgraceful!! the governement gave the council some money to stop the Council tax increases for another year, BUT STILL its going up!! plus we have to now pay £30 pound a year just to park outside our own houses!! I live in a 37 year old council house, and we have never had anything done to it from the council, we were supposed to get new kitchens, but that has not materialised. we pay full RENT AND COUNCIL TAX and get nothing out of it!! THANK YOU LABOUR!! BRING BACK THE TORIES!! allison.luella
  • Score: 0

10:37am Thu 21 Feb 13

loosehead says...

allison.luella wrote:
I think its disgraceful!! the governement gave the council some money to stop the Council tax increases for another year, BUT STILL its going up!! plus we have to now pay £30 pound a year just to park outside our own houses!! I live in a 37 year old council house, and we have never had anything done to it from the council, we were supposed to get new kitchens, but that has not materialised. we pay full RENT AND COUNCIL TAX and get nothing out of it!! THANK YOU LABOUR!! BRING BACK THE TORIES!!
allison Southampton Council never applied for the money as they would have had to freeze council tax & they'd rather hit council tax payers.
do you remember the residents in Woolston in those flats?
they were promised double glazing & modernisation by two Labour Councillors if Labour won the local elections.
One of those councillors was Williams has this work been done?
Townhill Park a scheme put forward by the Tory Council approved by the Residents called in by Labour altered Woodland ( copse) going £50million more being spent & no one asked the residents what they wanted or indeed told them their rents would rocket up.
then the residents kick up & instead of admitting they got it wrong a few meetings & we know best attitude from Labour.
Parking charges before the Tories won power this was Labour policy it looked like a vote loser so they dropped it but did say if we get to power we might look at it again?
they lied back then they lied to get to power with Unions help & they'll lie to keep power it's a pity the residents of this city are only just waking up to that fact
[quote][p][bold]allison.luella[/bold] wrote: I think its disgraceful!! the governement gave the council some money to stop the Council tax increases for another year, BUT STILL its going up!! plus we have to now pay £30 pound a year just to park outside our own houses!! I live in a 37 year old council house, and we have never had anything done to it from the council, we were supposed to get new kitchens, but that has not materialised. we pay full RENT AND COUNCIL TAX and get nothing out of it!! THANK YOU LABOUR!! BRING BACK THE TORIES!![/p][/quote]allison Southampton Council never applied for the money as they would have had to freeze council tax & they'd rather hit council tax payers. do you remember the residents in Woolston in those flats? they were promised double glazing & modernisation by two Labour Councillors if Labour won the local elections. One of those councillors was Williams has this work been done? Townhill Park a scheme put forward by the Tory Council approved by the Residents called in by Labour altered Woodland ( copse) going £50million more being spent & no one asked the residents what they wanted or indeed told them their rents would rocket up. then the residents kick up & instead of admitting they got it wrong a few meetings & we know best attitude from Labour. Parking charges before the Tories won power this was Labour policy it looked like a vote loser so they dropped it but did say if we get to power we might look at it again? they lied back then they lied to get to power with Unions help & they'll lie to keep power it's a pity the residents of this city are only just waking up to that fact 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