Pool consultation branded 'a sham' (From Daily Echo)
When news happens, text SDE and your photos or videos to 80360. Or contact us by email and phone.
Oaklands pool consultation branded 'a sham'
4:20am Friday 20th July 2012 in Politics
By Matt Smith, Politics and business reporter
Pool consultation branded 'a sham'
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”.
It comes as opposition Conservatives claim it will cost taxpayers more money by keeping Oaklands Swimming Pool closed than reopening it for the rest of the year.
Labour has aborted urgent repairs to a leaky pipe that closed the pool in May and voted to withdraw a £235,000 subsidy from the pool next year, putting 33 jobs at risk.
Council leaders insist a final decision on the pool has not been made and have launched a public consultation on the impact of its closure and possible alternatives.
But Coxford ward councillors Keith Morrell and Don Thomas who are under party investigation after voting against the budget cuts to the pool said the consultation repeats misinformation about the cost of repairs needed, and a survey form offers no option to re-open it.
They also criticised the council for failing to properly advertise three two-hour “consultation events”, which they said was not enough.
Cllr Thomas called the consultation “feeble”, while Cllr Morrell added: “The council has a responsibility to treat citizens as grown-ups and consult them properly. This consultation is a sham.”
Fellow ward councillor Sally Spicer who vowed to move “heaven and earth” to save the pool, voted to cut pool funding.
The council reckons it will cost up to £500,000 to carry out a backlog of repairs to give the pool another five to ten years lifespan.
Deputy Tory group leader Jeremy Moulton said the pool could be reopened for as little as £10,000 by completing urgent repairs.
He said: “The closure decision this year is costing the public tens of thousands more than it would keeping it open this year.
“Had Labour spent the extra £10,000 and finished the works we would now be bringing in income from swimming visits.
“So the public purse loses tens of thousands of pounds and the public are missing out on 300 swims a day.”
Labour leisure boss councillor Warwick Payne said the Conservatives’ figures were based on a “best case scenario” and said the repairs could cost a lot more if the pipes were further gone than first thought and other problems arose.
He insisted Labour was keen to hear from community groups or other organisation interested in taking over the running of the pool.
He said the consultation event locations had been chosen to hear from a broad cross-section of pool users and those that don’t.
Comments(97)
Tottonion
says...
7:32am Fri 20 Jul 12
So the two councillors who voted against the closing of the pool are under party investigation. WHY? They represent the people of the area that want to keep the pool open, they are only doing the job they were voted in to do. Instead of wasting money on things like a Titanic museum, I have yet to find anyone I know in Southampton have been to or interested in going there, even with a free ticket. The money should have been used on more community projects like keeping the pool open. I used to live near to the pool and spent many hours in the pool and most times it was packed out so there is a need for it, unlike the museum.
peachy1
says...
7:34am Fri 20 Jul 12
Why don't they sell it to someone like Shirley pool or another leisure centre who I'm sure would turn it around ?
The Watcher
says...
7:50am Fri 20 Jul 12
Because it runs at a £250,000 a year loss and no private contractor would touch it with a barge pool (hence it was never included in the leisure outsourcing of a few years back).
.
Kick this political football about as much as people like but it is an old, inefficient and under utilised resource costing the taxpayer thousands of pounds every year.
.
With a subsidy of something in the region of £10 per swim, it is just an exorbitant waste of public money.
.
Of course the Council needs to provide facilities and services for the population it serves, but there is a limit to what can be resourced, and what is provided needs to be achieved in an efficient and cost effective manner.
.
Subsidies in this instance and of this magnitude amount to nothing more than inefficient socialist funding by the state.
.
Kick this political football about as much as people like but it is an old, inefficient and under utilised resource costing the taxpayer thousands of pounds every year.
.
With a subsidy of something in the region of £10 per swim, it is just an exorbitant waste of public money.
.
Of course the Council needs to provide facilities and services for the population it serves, but there is a limit to what can be resourced, and what is provided needs to be achieved in an efficient and cost effective manner.
.
Subsidies in this instance and of this magnitude amount to nothing more than inefficient socialist funding by the state.
aldermoorboy
says...
7:56am Fri 20 Jul 12
Reduce the cabinet members by 2, save £22,000 and re open the pool at a cost of £10,000.
Then you make a profit of £12,000.
Labour put themselves first and the public second.
Vote Tory next time, they care for the workers and the tax payers and they understand economics.
Then you make a profit of £12,000.
Labour put themselves first and the public second.
Vote Tory next time, they care for the workers and the tax payers and they understand economics.
SotonGreen
says...
8:11am Fri 20 Jul 12
Totttonion,
They are under investigation because every Labour council candidate is required to sign a "contract" promising to abide by collective responsibility if elected.
They will therefore have broken this contract by voting against the budget measure.
It is sad but true but as far as the major parties are concerned the first allegiance is to the party and second those who elect them.
They are under investigation because every Labour council candidate is required to sign a "contract" promising to abide by collective responsibility if elected.
They will therefore have broken this contract by voting against the budget measure.
It is sad but true but as far as the major parties are concerned the first allegiance is to the party and second those who elect them.
Datarater
says...
8:15am Fri 20 Jul 12
Keith Morrell the true Labour voice of Southampton.
The Watcher
says...
9:28am Fri 20 Jul 12
aldermoorboy wrote:Sadly your understanding of economics, along with Clrr Moulton's are not in the real world and are more in line with the last Labour Government who wrote the cheques, but forgot that at some point someone would cash them.
Reduce the cabinet members by 2, save £22,000 and re open the pool at a cost of £10,000. Then you make a profit of £12,000. Labour put themselves first and the public second. Vote Tory next time, they care for the workers and the tax payers and they understand economics.
.
Cllr Moulton seems to have forgotten his Conservative principles and is merely using this underused, inefficient and tax draining facility as a cheap political publicity stunt (in much the same way as his cheap plebiscite call).
.
Such a shame that my party, at a local level, seems intent on cheap and easy political soundbites rather than substance.
On the inside
says...
9:40am Fri 20 Jul 12
That's it boys, you've used up your last chance.
southy
says...
9:40am Fri 20 Jul 12
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
freefinker
says...
9:42am Fri 20 Jul 12
.. consultation branded 'a sham'.
No surprise there, then.
Having participated in numerous consultations over the last two decades I have reached the rather cynical (but realistic?) conclusion that they are always designed to give the very results the commissioning body require.
On the very rare occasions when this does not happen, the results are just ignored.
No surprise there, then.
Having participated in numerous consultations over the last two decades I have reached the rather cynical (but realistic?) conclusion that they are always designed to give the very results the commissioning body require.
On the very rare occasions when this does not happen, the results are just ignored.
UKIPsouthampton
says...
9:42am Fri 20 Jul 12
It's that classic example of knowing the cost everything but the value of nothing.
.
Some things just need to be subsidised. Will keeping the swimming pool open promote excercise and healthy living to the community that uses it? In my opinion that in itself is a reason to keep it open and in the long term will save money and strain on the NHS as hopefully these people wont be using the NHS for problems caused by obesity and unhealthy living. Maybe the swimming pool just needs a review of how it is currently being used and how they can promote its use better.
.
Some things just need to be subsidised. Will keeping the swimming pool open promote excercise and healthy living to the community that uses it? In my opinion that in itself is a reason to keep it open and in the long term will save money and strain on the NHS as hopefully these people wont be using the NHS for problems caused by obesity and unhealthy living. Maybe the swimming pool just needs a review of how it is currently being used and how they can promote its use better.
southy
says...
9:44am Fri 20 Jul 12
Tottonion wrote:I know 3 people that have used there free ticket and all 3 have said in there own words, they would of gone the once any way just to see if it was worth the money to go again in the future, but where glad that they did not pay the fee to get in because it was a worth the entry fee to see, it well over price.
So the two councillors who voted against the closing of the pool are under party investigation. WHY? They represent the people of the area that want to keep the pool open, they are only doing the job they were voted in to do. Instead of wasting money on things like a Titanic museum, I have yet to find anyone I know in Southampton have been to or interested in going there, even with a free ticket. The money should have been used on more community projects like keeping the pool open. I used to live near to the pool and spent many hours in the pool and most times it was packed out so there is a need for it, unlike the museum.
southy
says...
9:47am Fri 20 Jul 12
SotonGreen wrote:Very true thats why the TUSC have not inclued it into there rules, and are the only party that have not, People come first not last or even second.
Totttonion,
They are under investigation because every Labour council candidate is required to sign a "contract" promising to abide by collective responsibility if elected.
They will therefore have broken this contract by voting against the budget measure.
It is sad but true but as far as the major parties are concerned the first allegiance is to the party and second those who elect them.
southy
says...
9:51am Fri 20 Jul 12
freefinker wrote:Very true free they are, funny how the Socialist Party are able to beat them at there own game and have many good results. last one was the closing of NHS Crowlin House a reasonable result there in forcing the NHS to keep it open and now they trying to runn it down so they can close it down that way.
.. consultation branded 'a sham'.
No surprise there, then.
Having participated in numerous consultations over the last two decades I have reached the rather cynical (but realistic?) conclusion that they are always designed to give the very results the commissioning body require.
On the very rare occasions when this does not happen, the results are just ignored.
freefinker
says...
10:01am Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
southy
says...
10:11am Fri 20 Jul 12
freefinker wrote:They are the largest is right and they control the cabinet, they are the ones that put forward the budget.
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
And like most else where oposition have voted with the ruling party, just like Labour did when the Torys was incontrol of the City.
At lest those on the real left have an economic plan unlike the greens, its just a shame where ever the allternative economics plan had been put forward its been rejected, even when they nod in agreement, they still went ahead and voted in masive cuts programs.
peachy1
says...
10:16am Fri 20 Jul 12
The Watcher wrote:A private company could re market it and turn it into a profitable business your verbal rant may be intimidating to some but you my friend are wrong on this it's not a lot of money to turn it around a private firm old easily make money and pay rent to the council you clearly haven't got a clue have you ?
Because it runs at a £250,000 a year loss and no private contractor would touch it with a barge pool (hence it was never included in the leisure outsourcing of a few years back).
.
Kick this political football about as much as people like but it is an old, inefficient and under utilised resource costing the taxpayer thousands of pounds every year.
.
With a subsidy of something in the region of £10 per swim, it is just an exorbitant waste of public money.
.
Of course the Council needs to provide facilities and services for the population it serves, but there is a limit to what can be resourced, and what is provided needs to be achieved in an efficient and cost effective manner.
.
Subsidies in this instance and of this magnitude amount to nothing more than inefficient socialist funding by the state.
southy
says...
10:16am Fri 20 Jul 12
Free your number 2 reply is not fully telling the truth.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
Some of the Torys and Labour combined force to vote no to greens cuts, but then again they can they are not in office the greens are, Some labour and Torys voted with the Greens, If you do not believe me go and check with you Slough area Greens who went to Brighton for that budge day and came away discusted in Brighton Greens Budget.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
Some of the Torys and Labour combined force to vote no to greens cuts, but then again they can they are not in office the greens are, Some labour and Torys voted with the Greens, If you do not believe me go and check with you Slough area Greens who went to Brighton for that budge day and came away discusted in Brighton Greens Budget.
good-gosh
says...
10:32am Fri 20 Jul 12
It's the council's job to manage amenities, not to close them. They are supposed to be guardians.
freefinker
says...
10:49am Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:.. no southy, the ‘real left’, as you call them, do NOT have an ‘economic plan’.
freefinker wrote:They are the largest is right and they control the cabinet, they are the ones that put forward the budget.
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
And like most else where oposition have voted with the ruling party, just like Labour did when the Torys was incontrol of the City.
At lest those on the real left have an economic plan unlike the greens, its just a shame where ever the allternative economics plan had been put forward its been rejected, even when they nod in agreement, they still went ahead and voted in masive cuts programs.
All you Trotskyists have is a rather silly slogan – ‘No cuts’. And, of course, you can continue to shout this slogan at every available opportunity as it makes not one iota of difference to anything.
Fortunately, the rest of the political spectrum actually live in the real world – and that is why they receive 95% plus of the votes at elections and you Trotskyists are mere also runs.
Now, back to your blunder – are you prepared to admit your mistake over Rahit Maryada? Come on, as you say ‘i tend not to google search i uses an older one that gives the full search hits’. So, you must have found the answer by now with your incredible search facilities – everybody else has.
southy
says...
11:17am Fri 20 Jul 12
freefinker wrote:Freefinker Think will you why are the Green candidates are keeping quiet about what happen in brighto Council with the Budget, and leaving it to you one of there followers to do all the sound biting, it because they know it to be true of what there party done in Brighton and will happen any where else where they get control, they even lost a few members in there party because of it.
southy wrote:.. no southy, the ‘real left’, as you call them, do NOT have an ‘economic plan’.
freefinker wrote:They are the largest is right and they control the cabinet, they are the ones that put forward the budget.
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
And like most else where oposition have voted with the ruling party, just like Labour did when the Torys was incontrol of the City.
At lest those on the real left have an economic plan unlike the greens, its just a shame where ever the allternative economics plan had been put forward its been rejected, even when they nod in agreement, they still went ahead and voted in masive cuts programs.
All you Trotskyists have is a rather silly slogan – ‘No cuts’. And, of course, you can continue to shout this slogan at every available opportunity as it makes not one iota of difference to anything.
Fortunately, the rest of the political spectrum actually live in the real world – and that is why they receive 95% plus of the votes at elections and you Trotskyists are mere also runs.
Now, back to your blunder – are you prepared to admit your mistake over Rahit Maryada? Come on, as you say ‘i tend not to google search i uses an older one that gives the full search hits’. So, you must have found the answer by now with your incredible search facilities – everybody else has.
And yes the Real Left do have an Economic Plan, maybe if you attended the Councils Budget meetings which the Public are allowed to watch the presentation, an Alternitive Budget have been put forward by the real Left the TUSC and the Socialist party up and down the Country, (which is a lot more than the Greens do. Greens only put a Budget forward if they have contol of the Cabinet), We get a nod off approval from the Labour party, but do they vote for it no, they will do what any other right wing party will do and vote for cuts.
Shoong
says...
11:41am Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:A 'nod of approval' doesn't mean 'yes' though does it?
freefinker wrote:Freefinker Think will you why are the Green candidates are keeping quiet about what happen in brighto Council with the Budget, and leaving it to you one of there followers to do all the sound biting, it because they know it to be true of what there party done in Brighton and will happen any where else where they get control, they even lost a few members in there party because of it.
southy wrote:.. no southy, the ‘real left’, as you call them, do NOT have an ‘economic plan’.
freefinker wrote:They are the largest is right and they control the cabinet, they are the ones that put forward the budget.
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
And like most else where oposition have voted with the ruling party, just like Labour did when the Torys was incontrol of the City.
At lest those on the real left have an economic plan unlike the greens, its just a shame where ever the allternative economics plan had been put forward its been rejected, even when they nod in agreement, they still went ahead and voted in masive cuts programs.
All you Trotskyists have is a rather silly slogan – ‘No cuts’. And, of course, you can continue to shout this slogan at every available opportunity as it makes not one iota of difference to anything.
Fortunately, the rest of the political spectrum actually live in the real world – and that is why they receive 95% plus of the votes at elections and you Trotskyists are mere also runs.
Now, back to your blunder – are you prepared to admit your mistake over Rahit Maryada? Come on, as you say ‘i tend not to google search i uses an older one that gives the full search hits’. So, you must have found the answer by now with your incredible search facilities – everybody else has.
And yes the Real Left do have an Economic Plan, maybe if you attended the Councils Budget meetings which the Public are allowed to watch the presentation, an Alternitive Budget have been put forward by the real Left the TUSC and the Socialist party up and down the Country, (which is a lot more than the Greens do. Greens only put a Budget forward if they have contol of the Cabinet), We get a nod off approval from the Labour party, but do they vote for it no, they will do what any other right wing party will do and vote for cuts.
I suspect it's as simple as they want nothing to do with you or they might just have plans of their own maybe..?
The other difference is probably they have at least a sliver economical nous, if your ideas on how to run an economy are representative of the TUSC, it's no wonder you get laughed off.
Shoong
says...
11:41am Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:A 'nod of approval' doesn't mean 'yes' though does it?
freefinker wrote:Freefinker Think will you why are the Green candidates are keeping quiet about what happen in brighto Council with the Budget, and leaving it to you one of there followers to do all the sound biting, it because they know it to be true of what there party done in Brighton and will happen any where else where they get control, they even lost a few members in there party because of it.
southy wrote:.. no southy, the ‘real left’, as you call them, do NOT have an ‘economic plan’.
freefinker wrote:They are the largest is right and they control the cabinet, they are the ones that put forward the budget.
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
And like most else where oposition have voted with the ruling party, just like Labour did when the Torys was incontrol of the City.
At lest those on the real left have an economic plan unlike the greens, its just a shame where ever the allternative economics plan had been put forward its been rejected, even when they nod in agreement, they still went ahead and voted in masive cuts programs.
All you Trotskyists have is a rather silly slogan – ‘No cuts’. And, of course, you can continue to shout this slogan at every available opportunity as it makes not one iota of difference to anything.
Fortunately, the rest of the political spectrum actually live in the real world – and that is why they receive 95% plus of the votes at elections and you Trotskyists are mere also runs.
Now, back to your blunder – are you prepared to admit your mistake over Rahit Maryada? Come on, as you say ‘i tend not to google search i uses an older one that gives the full search hits’. So, you must have found the answer by now with your incredible search facilities – everybody else has.
And yes the Real Left do have an Economic Plan, maybe if you attended the Councils Budget meetings which the Public are allowed to watch the presentation, an Alternitive Budget have been put forward by the real Left the TUSC and the Socialist party up and down the Country, (which is a lot more than the Greens do. Greens only put a Budget forward if they have contol of the Cabinet), We get a nod off approval from the Labour party, but do they vote for it no, they will do what any other right wing party will do and vote for cuts.
I suspect it's as simple as they want nothing to do with you or they might just have plans of their own maybe..?
The other difference is probably they have at least a sliver economical nous, if your ideas on how to run an economy are representative of the TUSC, it's no wonder you get laughed off.
The Watcher
says...
11:41am Fri 20 Jul 12
peachy1 wrote:So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
The Watcher wrote:A private company could re market it and turn it into a profitable business your verbal rant may be intimidating to some but you my friend are wrong on this it's not a lot of money to turn it around a private firm old easily make money and pay rent to the council you clearly haven't got a clue have you ?
Because it runs at a £250,000 a year loss and no private contractor would touch it with a barge pool (hence it was never included in the leisure outsourcing of a few years back).
.
Kick this political football about as much as people like but it is an old, inefficient and under utilised resource costing the taxpayer thousands of pounds every year.
.
With a subsidy of something in the region of £10 per swim, it is just an exorbitant waste of public money.
.
Of course the Council needs to provide facilities and services for the population it serves, but there is a limit to what can be resourced, and what is provided needs to be achieved in an efficient and cost effective manner.
.
Subsidies in this instance and of this magnitude amount to nothing more than inefficient socialist funding by the state.
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
Shoong
says...
11:41am Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:A 'nod of approval' doesn't mean 'yes' though does it?
freefinker wrote:Freefinker Think will you why are the Green candidates are keeping quiet about what happen in brighto Council with the Budget, and leaving it to you one of there followers to do all the sound biting, it because they know it to be true of what there party done in Brighton and will happen any where else where they get control, they even lost a few members in there party because of it.
southy wrote:.. no southy, the ‘real left’, as you call them, do NOT have an ‘economic plan’.
freefinker wrote:They are the largest is right and they control the cabinet, they are the ones that put forward the budget.
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
And like most else where oposition have voted with the ruling party, just like Labour did when the Torys was incontrol of the City.
At lest those on the real left have an economic plan unlike the greens, its just a shame where ever the allternative economics plan had been put forward its been rejected, even when they nod in agreement, they still went ahead and voted in masive cuts programs.
All you Trotskyists have is a rather silly slogan – ‘No cuts’. And, of course, you can continue to shout this slogan at every available opportunity as it makes not one iota of difference to anything.
Fortunately, the rest of the political spectrum actually live in the real world – and that is why they receive 95% plus of the votes at elections and you Trotskyists are mere also runs.
Now, back to your blunder – are you prepared to admit your mistake over Rahit Maryada? Come on, as you say ‘i tend not to google search i uses an older one that gives the full search hits’. So, you must have found the answer by now with your incredible search facilities – everybody else has.
And yes the Real Left do have an Economic Plan, maybe if you attended the Councils Budget meetings which the Public are allowed to watch the presentation, an Alternitive Budget have been put forward by the real Left the TUSC and the Socialist party up and down the Country, (which is a lot more than the Greens do. Greens only put a Budget forward if they have contol of the Cabinet), We get a nod off approval from the Labour party, but do they vote for it no, they will do what any other right wing party will do and vote for cuts.
I suspect it's as simple as they want nothing to do with you or they might just have plans of their own maybe..?
The other difference is probably they have at least a sliver economical nous, if your ideas on how to run an economy are representative of the TUSC, it's no wonder you get laughed off.
The Watcher
says...
11:42am Fri 20 Jul 12
So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
The Watcher
says...
11:42am Fri 20 Jul 12
So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
The Watcher
says...
11:42am Fri 20 Jul 12
So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
owen_thesaints
says...
11:43am Fri 20 Jul 12
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
southy
says...
12:02pm Fri 20 Jul 12
The Watcher wrote:Good on you Watcher
So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
Shoong you do not give nod of aproval unless you been told which way to vote, under stand the rules on how they play then you might get to learn how it all works.
And I don't see you in the council chambers at council meetings giving any ideas forward or even in the gallery to find out what is going on.
Paramjit Bahia
says...
12:12pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:Hi you both good guys, one of you being an active Trotskyist and the other being Ex-Trotskyist are not likely to agree on Brighton. So why can't you just agree to disagree.
freefinker wrote:Freefinker Think will you why are the Green candidates are keeping quiet about what happen in brighto Council with the Budget, and leaving it to you one of there followers to do all the sound biting, it because they know it to be true of what there party done in Brighton and will happen any where else where they get control, they even lost a few members in there party because of it.
southy wrote:.. no southy, the ‘real left’, as you call them, do NOT have an ‘economic plan’.
freefinker wrote:They are the largest is right and they control the cabinet, they are the ones that put forward the budget.
southy wrote:.. we've been through all this before southy.
SotonGreen wrote:You mean like in Brighton where the Greens put a budget in for massive cuts.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
1) The Greens are only the largest party in Brighton - they have to work with the other parties to get their proposals through.
2) Labour and Tories combined to force through the budget cuts and stop the Greens proposed 3.5% Council Tax rise.
3) Like all other responsible political parties, the Greens do actually appreciate the financial mess this country is in.
4) Trotskyist slogans are no substitute for sound economics.
And like most else where oposition have voted with the ruling party, just like Labour did when the Torys was incontrol of the City.
At lest those on the real left have an economic plan unlike the greens, its just a shame where ever the allternative economics plan had been put forward its been rejected, even when they nod in agreement, they still went ahead and voted in masive cuts programs.
All you Trotskyists have is a rather silly slogan – ‘No cuts’. And, of course, you can continue to shout this slogan at every available opportunity as it makes not one iota of difference to anything.
Fortunately, the rest of the political spectrum actually live in the real world – and that is why they receive 95% plus of the votes at elections and you Trotskyists are mere also runs.
Now, back to your blunder – are you prepared to admit your mistake over Rahit Maryada? Come on, as you say ‘i tend not to google search i uses an older one that gives the full search hits’. So, you must have found the answer by now with your incredible search facilities – everybody else has.
And yes the Real Left do have an Economic Plan, maybe if you attended the Councils Budget meetings which the Public are allowed to watch the presentation, an Alternitive Budget have been put forward by the real Left the TUSC and the Socialist party up and down the Country, (which is a lot more than the Greens do. Greens only put a Budget forward if they have contol of the Cabinet), We get a nod off approval from the Labour party, but do they vote for it no, they will do what any other right wing party will do and vote for cuts.
Here we are the victims of cuts being implemented by NuLabour run Council.
Two councillors who have actually stood against 'cuts' and for the people they represent are being most unfairly harrassed by their party, which has betrayed the principles on which it was originally based.
A facility for the public, created by another Labour run Council, that managed to survive even slashing of services under Tory Smith, is under serious threat from the NuLabourites led by Williams, their Dear Leader.
It could be nice if you kindly stick to expressing support to Cllrs Don Thomas and Keith Morrell and start defending Oaklands Pool.
southy
says...
12:15pm Fri 20 Jul 12
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
Inform Al
says...
12:15pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:I used my free ticket, so glad it was free. Too much Titanic and not enouigh about Southamptons maritime history. Need a mortgage to visit the shop. Interesting that Jeremy Moulton is so keen now to keep the pool open as he was a leading light in the decision to sell off the Flower Roads community centre to a housing company. I think it would be great if the Conservatives instead of sulking over their rather predictable election defeat, decided to try to work with the opposition for the benefit of the city, and not to continue to make stupid political claims just for the party's benefit.
Tottonion wrote:I know 3 people that have used there free ticket and all 3 have said in there own words, they would of gone the once any way just to see if it was worth the money to go again in the future, but where glad that they did not pay the fee to get in because it was a worth the entry fee to see, it well over price.
So the two councillors who voted against the closing of the pool are under party investigation. WHY? They represent the people of the area that want to keep the pool open, they are only doing the job they were voted in to do. Instead of wasting money on things like a Titanic museum, I have yet to find anyone I know in Southampton have been to or interested in going there, even with a free ticket. The money should have been used on more community projects like keeping the pool open. I used to live near to the pool and spent many hours in the pool and most times it was packed out so there is a need for it, unlike the museum.
Shoong
says...
12:21pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:Unfortunately not Peter, I think I'd get better ideas from the zoo and a great many of my days are spent working so I don't have lots of free time to spout crud and wallpaper my house with tin foil.
The Watcher wrote:Good on you Watcher
So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
Shoong you do not give nod of aproval unless you been told which way to vote, under stand the rules on how they play then you might get to learn how it all works.
And I don't see you in the council chambers at council meetings giving any ideas forward or even in the gallery to find out what is going on.
southy
says...
12:36pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Shoong wrote:You just have not got the guts to stand by what you beleive in, most of the coucillors we got in southampton are working people some have there own business some work for others and some have familys to think about also, but they manage to put a little bit of time to one side to stand for what they believe in, but you have none, you spend most of your time on here throwing insults to other who you do not agree with.
southy wrote:Unfortunately not Peter, I think I'd get better ideas from the zoo and a great many of my days are spent working so I don't have lots of free time to spout crud and wallpaper my house with tin foil.
The Watcher wrote:Good on you Watcher
So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
Shoong you do not give nod of aproval unless you been told which way to vote, under stand the rules on how they play then you might get to learn how it all works.
And I don't see you in the council chambers at council meetings giving any ideas forward or even in the gallery to find out what is going on.
Tin foil a house sounds some like you would do because you do not want to hear the truth of reality for the many others.
Paramjit Bahia
says...
12:39pm Fri 20 Jul 12
SotonGreen wrote:At the last Council meeting they'd made it clear that Swimming Pool will be in the way of any housing development, which was NuLabour's way of writing on the wall that any consultation will basically amount to listening to people with stone deaf ears.
This trend towards consultation periods really does drive a lot of people mad, I think. These are legalistic niceties without any kind of meaningful possibility even of impacting on the outcome, I was subjected to one about taking away my pension scheme at work.
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !
You are spot on about how these NuLabourites exploit people. Take their votes then kick them in their teeth.
In reality NuLabour has shifted so much to the right that even many Tories appear to be on their left.
Real socialists, in small groups and those still stranded within NuLabour along with progressive people in environmental camps like Greens should be uniting to fill the gap on real left created by treachery of NuLabourites.
So united campaign in support of Cllr Thomas and Keith along with high profile agitation to save Oaklands could be a step in right direction.
Smilzo
says...
12:54pm Fri 20 Jul 12
"Vote Tory next time, they care for the workers and the tax payers and they understand economics."
LOL :o)
*wipes tears from eyes*
Good one, on all three counts.
LOL :o)
*wipes tears from eyes*
Good one, on all three counts.
southy
says...
1:20pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Smilzo wrote:nice one you get a thumbs up for that bit of humour
"Vote Tory next time, they care for the workers and the tax payers and they understand economics."
LOL :o)
*wipes tears from eyes*
Good one, on all three counts.
Shoong
says...
1:54pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:Hilarious, who needs the Comedy Channel...
Smilzo wrote:nice one you get a thumbs up for that bit of humour
"Vote Tory next time, they care for the workers and the tax payers and they understand economics."
LOL :o)
*wipes tears from eyes*
Good one, on all three counts.
Georgem
says...
1:55pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:That may or may not be true, southy, but you have to concede that a vast number of people automatically assume that someone who can't spell is less intelligent than someone who can. To re-iterate, I'm not saying that's actually the case, just that to most people, it appears to be. That matters. If you're trying to convince people you're up to a job that requires a reasonable amount of intelligence, but you can't express your ideas well, you're at an immediate disadvantage. That's not to insult you at all, it's a fact of which I'm sure you're well aware.
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
If everything was all about actual ability, and not perception, the world would be a much different place than it is. But it isn't, so it isn't. If you see what I mean.
PS, we haven't forgotten Maryada-gate. Next week: looking forward to your comments.
owen_thesaints
says...
2:26pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:English is important, if you present your ideas, spoken or written, in a rambling incoherent manner you will not be taken seriously
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
Georgem
says...
2:32pm Fri 20 Jul 12
owen_thesaints wrote:Thanks for making my post look like the rambling and overly wordy monster it is!
southy wrote:English is important, if you present your ideas, spoken or written, in a rambling incoherent manner you will not be taken seriously
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
southy
says...
2:39pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:I know they do Georgem but as normal they are often wrong and its normally the other way round. Read what Einstein said about him self and many others said the same thing about him, his spelling and gramar was very poor, like mine is, but he was very intelligent was he not, the poor guy could not even tie his own shoe laces and is the reason why you see him mainly with slip on shoes on his feet (he was even willing to amit that).
southy wrote:That may or may not be true, southy, but you have to concede that a vast number of people automatically assume that someone who can't spell is less intelligent than someone who can. To re-iterate, I'm not saying that's actually the case, just that to most people, it appears to be. That matters. If you're trying to convince people you're up to a job that requires a reasonable amount of intelligence, but you can't express your ideas well, you're at an immediate disadvantage. That's not to insult you at all, it's a fact of which I'm sure you're well aware.
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
If everything was all about actual ability, and not perception, the world would be a much different place than it is. But it isn't, so it isn't. If you see what I mean.
PS, we haven't forgotten Maryada-gate. Next week: looking forward to your comments.
I know you don't go on about it but those that do are often covering up for there own faults in life, most common for those that put there mind on to perfect English and Grammar generally lack in common knowledge or so the say.
I might be see him tomorrow he text me this morning saying he will be at the same location as me tomorrow
southy
says...
2:51pm Fri 20 Jul 12
owen_thesaints wrote:Whats the point of good english if you dont have any good workable ideas, which is what you normal find in such people, just look at our government best education money can buy, but rubbish at having ideas that can work and just carry on with what being going on in the last 32 years.
southy wrote:English is important, if you present your ideas, spoken or written, in a rambling incoherent manner you will not be taken seriously
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
Georgem
says...
2:57pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:Yep, I know they're wrong southy. My point - as made much more eloquently by Owen above, thanks Owen - is that like it or not, the presentation matters. Why do you think there's so much incompetence at upper levels of government, or commerce? Did Blair get into power because he was the best man for the job? Or was it because he understood the importance of presentation? It's tragic, but presentation wins pretty much every time.
Georgem wrote:I know they do Georgem but as normal they are often wrong and its normally the other way round. Read what Einstein said about him self and many others said the same thing about him, his spelling and gramar was very poor, like mine is, but he was very intelligent was he not, the poor guy could not even tie his own shoe laces and is the reason why you see him mainly with slip on shoes on his feet (he was even willing to amit that).
southy wrote:That may or may not be true, southy, but you have to concede that a vast number of people automatically assume that someone who can't spell is less intelligent than someone who can. To re-iterate, I'm not saying that's actually the case, just that to most people, it appears to be. That matters. If you're trying to convince people you're up to a job that requires a reasonable amount of intelligence, but you can't express your ideas well, you're at an immediate disadvantage. That's not to insult you at all, it's a fact of which I'm sure you're well aware.
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
If everything was all about actual ability, and not perception, the world would be a much different place than it is. But it isn't, so it isn't. If you see what I mean.
PS, we haven't forgotten Maryada-gate. Next week: looking forward to your comments.
I know you don't go on about it but those that do are often covering up for there own faults in life, most common for those that put there mind on to perfect English and Grammar generally lack in common knowledge or so the say.
I might be see him tomorrow he text me this morning saying he will be at the same location as me tomorrow
Here's an interesting article that touches on the subject. It's aimed at my industry, specifically, but holds true for pretty much anything:
http://headrush.type
pad.com/creating_pas
sionate_users/2006/0
4/when_only_the_g.ht
ml
Georgem
says...
3:07pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:Exactly the point, southy. Look at what you're saying: the people IN POWER are largely useless. How did they get there? Smooth talking eloquence seduces the masses, every time.
owen_thesaints wrote:Whats the point of good english if you dont have any good workable ideas, which is what you normal find in such people, just look at our government best education money can buy, but rubbish at having ideas that can work and just carry on with what being going on in the last 32 years.
southy wrote:English is important, if you present your ideas, spoken or written, in a rambling incoherent manner you will not be taken seriously
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
Why do people wear suits to job interviews? Why don't we see members in The Commons wearing jeans? Why do even highly intelligent, ultra-powerful women that can easily out-perform their male counterparts still wear makeup? Why are business letters typed, not hand-written? Why do people clean their cars before trying to sell them? Why do we tidy our houses before we have visitors? Why do salesmen polish their shoes? What do any of these superficial acts have to do with the underlying causes? We all know that wearing a suit doesn't make you an honest, skilful hard worker. We still wear suits to job interviews.
The list of examples is endless, the ways presentation makes a huge difference. Arguing that it's wrong is a waste of time. It is the way it is, and that's that.
Lone Ranger.
says...
3:09pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:Well Southy as you and your party TUSC allegedly put people first and you feel so agrieved about the pool ......
SotonGreen wrote:Very true thats why the TUSC have not inclued it into there rules, and are the only party that have not, People come first not last or even second.
Totttonion,
They are under investigation because every Labour council candidate is required to sign a "contract" promising to abide by collective responsibility if elected.
They will therefore have broken this contract by voting against the budget measure.
It is sad but true but as far as the major parties are concerned the first allegiance is to the party and second those who elect them.
.
Why dont your party and its supporters ..along with the usual Tory posters all club together .. Get the £10k to get the pool up and running ....... and then run it as a co-operative.
.
Just think of how many more TUSC Members you would have.
.
Perhaps looshead and aldemoorboy along with PB would unite ... FOR THE PEOPLE of course
owen_thesaints
says...
3:11pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:...and Georgem has made my next point: todays Politicians now get votes based on style over substance, its not just about the 'ideas' but how the 'ideas' are packaged.
southy wrote:Yep, I know they're wrong southy. My point - as made much more eloquently by Owen above, thanks Owen - is that like it or not, the presentation matters. Why do you think there's so much incompetence at upper levels of government, or commerce? Did Blair get into power because he was the best man for the job? Or was it because he understood the importance of presentation? It's tragic, but presentation wins pretty much every time.
Georgem wrote:I know they do Georgem but as normal they are often wrong and its normally the other way round. Read what Einstein said about him self and many others said the same thing about him, his spelling and gramar was very poor, like mine is, but he was very intelligent was he not, the poor guy could not even tie his own shoe laces and is the reason why you see him mainly with slip on shoes on his feet (he was even willing to amit that).
southy wrote:That may or may not be true, southy, but you have to concede that a vast number of people automatically assume that someone who can't spell is less intelligent than someone who can. To re-iterate, I'm not saying that's actually the case, just that to most people, it appears to be. That matters. If you're trying to convince people you're up to a job that requires a reasonable amount of intelligence, but you can't express your ideas well, you're at an immediate disadvantage. That's not to insult you at all, it's a fact of which I'm sure you're well aware.
owen_thesaints wrote:Owen for one English is not important when it comes to good workable ideas, plus its not my budget but i do get to read it before it is presented to the council and public, and just like any other political party its not left to one man to deal with, And the TUSC are not a bunch of yes people to the leader if we think it is wrong we will say so and have a debate on the matter just so it gets right way to do it, and thats one of the things that is wrong with all other partys, one person puts an idea forward and the rest just agrees with it, and not knowing what they are agreeing to, so you end up getting a wrong policy made
Judging by Southy's grasp of English, who in their right mind would trust him with a budget...
If everything was all about actual ability, and not perception, the world would be a much different place than it is. But it isn't, so it isn't. If you see what I mean.
PS, we haven't forgotten Maryada-gate. Next week: looking forward to your comments.
I know you don't go on about it but those that do are often covering up for there own faults in life, most common for those that put there mind on to perfect English and Grammar generally lack in common knowledge or so the say.
I might be see him tomorrow he text me this morning saying he will be at the same location as me tomorrow
Here's an interesting article that touches on the subject. It's aimed at my industry, specifically, but holds true for pretty much anything:
http://headrush.type
pad.com/creating_pas
sionate_users/2006/0
4/when_only_the_g.ht
ml
Carpe Diem
says...
3:44pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Forget Labour, Forget Tories. Somebody else is pulling the strings here. This was part of the plan when the new school at Five Acres was approved. What was so badly wrong with the Oaklands school campus that a brand new school had to be built 400 yards away ? The answer was that there would be no way that housing development would have been approved on that green field site. Therefore the old school had to be sacrificed along with the pool. Once the school had been moved the path was open for redevelopment of the old Oaklands site. This is all about making brown envelope money. If anybody on the council seriously considered the pool as a worthwhile local amenity there would have been serious attempts to find other areas in which budgets could have been cut.
loosehead
says...
4:22pm Fri 20 Jul 12
The Watcher wrote:I think you'll find that Oasis hadn't replied with an answer on if they'd want it to stay part of the school.
peachy1 wrote:So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
The Watcher wrote:A private company could re market it and turn it into a profitable business your verbal rant may be intimidating to some but you my friend are wrong on this it's not a lot of money to turn it around a private firm old easily make money and pay rent to the council you clearly haven't got a clue have you ?
Because it runs at a £250,000 a year loss and no private contractor would touch it with a barge pool (hence it was never included in the leisure outsourcing of a few years back).
.
Kick this political football about as much as people like but it is an old, inefficient and under utilised resource costing the taxpayer thousands of pounds every year.
.
With a subsidy of something in the region of £10 per swim, it is just an exorbitant waste of public money.
.
Of course the Council needs to provide facilities and services for the population it serves, but there is a limit to what can be resourced, and what is provided needs to be achieved in an efficient and cost effective manner.
.
Subsidies in this instance and of this magnitude amount to nothing more than inefficient socialist funding by the state.
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
you can't really contract out a school facility can you?
Paramjit Bahia
says...
4:23pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Carpe Diem wrote:That may not only appear to be logical argument, but is more than likely actual truth.
Forget Labour, Forget Tories. Somebody else is pulling the strings here. This was part of the plan when the new school at Five Acres was approved. What was so badly wrong with the Oaklands school campus that a brand new school had to be built 400 yards away ? The answer was that there would be no way that housing development would have been approved on that green field site. Therefore the old school had to be sacrificed along with the pool. Once the school had been moved the path was open for redevelopment of the old Oaklands site. This is all about making brown envelope money. If anybody on the council seriously considered the pool as a worthwhile local amenity there would have been serious attempts to find other areas in which budgets could have been cut.
Council has become a comedy like 'Yes Minister'.
Pen pushers behind the scene are de facto masters, they have their own agenda, which eventually gets implemented through elected politicians who rather than representing the people's interests become puppets on bureaucratic strings.
Sadly in situations like this principled politicians get isolated or even victimised.
That is why us who care about democracy should be supporting Cllrs Don Thomas and Keith Morrell
southy
says...
4:32pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Georgem that link
http://headrush.type
pad.com/creating_pas
sionate_users/2006/0
4/when_only_the_g.ht
ml
not coming up for me. give us a basic on it.
http://headrush.type
pad.com/creating_pas
sionate_users/2006/0
4/when_only_the_g.ht
ml
not coming up for me. give us a basic on it.
Georgem
says...
4:35pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:It basically says that slick talking people who have an answer for everything are generally listened to more in business meetings and the like, because they appear to know what they're talking about.
Georgem that link
http://headrush.type
pad.com/creating_pas
sionate_users/2006/0
4/when_only_the_g.ht
ml
not coming up for me. give us a basic on it.
Try this shorter link
http://you.gl/glib
southy
says...
4:43pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Lone Ranger. wrote:I wish we could Lone but unlike Labour and Torys ect we do not have millions pounds donated to us from big business or unions, nore do we have millionairs in the party, we rely on public donations and what little we have from our own pockets. Maybe if your dear beloved labour leader would donate us the money to be able to do it.
southy wrote:Well Southy as you and your party TUSC allegedly put people first and you feel so agrieved about the pool ......
SotonGreen wrote:Very true thats why the TUSC have not inclued it into there rules, and are the only party that have not, People come first not last or even second.
Totttonion,
They are under investigation because every Labour council candidate is required to sign a "contract" promising to abide by collective responsibility if elected.
They will therefore have broken this contract by voting against the budget measure.
It is sad but true but as far as the major parties are concerned the first allegiance is to the party and second those who elect them.
.
Why dont your party and its supporters ..along with the usual Tory posters all club together .. Get the £10k to get the pool up and running ....... and then run it as a co-operative.
.
Just think of how many more TUSC Members you would have.
.
Perhaps looshead and aldemoorboy along with PB would unite ... FOR THE PEOPLE of course
southy
says...
5:02pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:Very interesting and what i read so far most i would say is spot on.
southy wrote:It basically says that slick talking people who have an answer for everything are generally listened to more in business meetings and the like, because they appear to know what they're talking about.
Georgem that link
http://headrush.type
pad.com/creating_pas
sionate_users/2006/0
4/when_only_the_g.ht
ml
not coming up for me. give us a basic on it.
Try this shorter link
http://you.gl/glib
Lone Ranger.
says...
5:38pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:But you can Southy ......... You have enough who beleive it should be open.
Lone Ranger. wrote:I wish we could Lone but unlike Labour and Torys ect we do not have millions pounds donated to us from big business or unions, nore do we have millionairs in the party, we rely on public donations and what little we have from our own pockets. Maybe if your dear beloved labour leader would donate us the money to be able to do it.
southy wrote:Well Southy as you and your party TUSC allegedly put people first and you feel so agrieved about the pool ......
SotonGreen wrote:Very true thats why the TUSC have not inclued it into there rules, and are the only party that have not, People come first not last or even second.
Totttonion,
They are under investigation because every Labour council candidate is required to sign a "contract" promising to abide by collective responsibility if elected.
They will therefore have broken this contract by voting against the budget measure.
It is sad but true but as far as the major parties are concerned the first allegiance is to the party and second those who elect them.
.
Why dont your party and its supporters ..along with the usual Tory posters all club together .. Get the £10k to get the pool up and running ....... and then run it as a co-operative.
.
Just think of how many more TUSC Members you would have.
.
Perhaps looshead and aldemoorboy along with PB would unite ... FOR THE PEOPLE of course
.
You have enough Tory supporters who think it should be open.
.
You have a campaign in Lordshill asking for signatures for a petition ... see if they love it enough to stay open.
.
Moulton can put his money where his mouth is ....... So can loosehead and aldermoorboy ........ and the lordshill poster who wants it saved.
.
Yep it would be a great community co-operative.
,
10,00 people = £10,000 and a share of a business.
.
Come rally the TUSC and the Tory boys at Lordshill ..... it could win you 10,000 votes at the next election.
.
.
Not interested ???????????
.
Protest for effect !!!
The Watcher
says...
6:16pm Fri 20 Jul 12
loosehead wrote:We all seem a little short on our facts today.
The Watcher wrote:I think you'll find that Oasis hadn't replied with an answer on if they'd want it to stay part of the school.
peachy1 wrote:So why did no private company pick the pool up when the other leisure facilities were contracted out?
The Watcher wrote:A private company could re market it and turn it into a profitable business your verbal rant may be intimidating to some but you my friend are wrong on this it's not a lot of money to turn it around a private firm old easily make money and pay rent to the council you clearly haven't got a clue have you ?
Because it runs at a £250,000 a year loss and no private contractor would touch it with a barge pool (hence it was never included in the leisure outsourcing of a few years back).
.
Kick this political football about as much as people like but it is an old, inefficient and under utilised resource costing the taxpayer thousands of pounds every year.
.
With a subsidy of something in the region of £10 per swim, it is just an exorbitant waste of public money.
.
Of course the Council needs to provide facilities and services for the population it serves, but there is a limit to what can be resourced, and what is provided needs to be achieved in an efficient and cost effective manner.
.
Subsidies in this instance and of this magnitude amount to nothing more than inefficient socialist funding by the state.
.
Why did the Conservative Council not manage to outsource the pool?
.
And if some private company, or even a charity/community group want to run with the pool, then the council would bite their proverbial arm off.
.
I won't lower myself to your gutter levels with puerile insults.
you can't really contract out a school facility can you?
.
Oaklands swimming pool has never been a part of the Oasis Academy.
.
Oasis only took over the school and sports halls, whilst the swimming pool and it's employees remained a part of Southampton City Council.
.
It was originally a part of the
leisure outsourcing project under Cllr Samuels a few years back, but was pulled along with St Mary's Sports Hall when DC Leisure were awarded the 15 year contract.
.
The loss making St Mary's was effectively handed to Solent University, whilst no one wanted to take on the loss making Oaklands Pool.
Paramjit Bahia
says...
6:52pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Lone Ranger. wrote:Am I smelling little bit of old fashioned socialism still lurking in Lone Ranger's blood, which his Dear Leader, his Deputy to whom Williams delegated to sign off false statement on Morrell and latest convert to NuLabourism Simon Letts have so far failed to eradicate?
southy wrote:But you can Southy ......... You have enough who beleive it should be open.
Lone Ranger. wrote:I wish we could Lone but unlike Labour and Torys ect we do not have millions pounds donated to us from big business or unions, nore do we have millionairs in the party, we rely on public donations and what little we have from our own pockets. Maybe if your dear beloved labour leader would donate us the money to be able to do it.
southy wrote:Well Southy as you and your party TUSC allegedly put people first and you feel so agrieved about the pool ......
SotonGreen wrote:Very true thats why the TUSC have not inclued it into there rules, and are the only party that have not, People come first not last or even second.
Totttonion,
They are under investigation because every Labour council candidate is required to sign a "contract" promising to abide by collective responsibility if elected.
They will therefore have broken this contract by voting against the budget measure.
It is sad but true but as far as the major parties are concerned the first allegiance is to the party and second those who elect them.
.
Why dont your party and its supporters ..along with the usual Tory posters all club together .. Get the £10k to get the pool up and running ....... and then run it as a co-operative.
.
Just think of how many more TUSC Members you would have.
.
Perhaps looshead and aldemoorboy along with PB would unite ... FOR THE PEOPLE of course
.
You have enough Tory supporters who think it should be open.
.
You have a campaign in Lordshill asking for signatures for a petition ... see if they love it enough to stay open.
.
Moulton can put his money where his mouth is ....... So can loosehead and aldermoorboy ........ and the lordshill poster who wants it saved.
.
Yep it would be a great community co-operative.
,
10,00 people = £10,000 and a share of a business.
.
Come rally the TUSC and the Tory boys at Lordshill ..... it could win you 10,000 votes at the next election.
.
.
Not interested ???????????
.
Protest for effect !!!
Co-operatives used be favourite of Trade Unions and Labour Movement, so yes I see nothing wrong with this idea. In fact I am even willing to donate my ten quid and won't even demand a share in bussiness, provided Lone Ranger's beloved party makes honest admission:
That they do not care for people who support them.
That they do not believe in Councils providing services any more.
That politically they have betrayed Labour values and now are on the right of even nasty Tories.
That they are fully aware, real cause of local government financial problems is ever decreasing contributions from Central Government i.e. policies of Thatcher which Blair and Brown refused to reverse.
And that NuLabourites have not got the guts to demand proper resources from London, where national government is wasting billions on wars, contributions to EU, on 'Bankers' (probably should be with 'W') slush fund to places like well off India under heading of foreign aid etc.
That locally they have plenty of money for even more poodles of Dear Leader than required, but not enough for saving Oaklands Pool, because it reminds them caring values of good old Labour.
Hi, Lone if your Dear Leader or his Deputy do that on top of my £10 donation I will also buy you lunch in one of the favourite places of your fellow NuLabourites (only thing I won't guarantee we won't know whose cat will be in the curry!!!)
southy
says...
8:50pm Fri 20 Jul 12
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
lordshill loyal
says...
9:32pm Fri 20 Jul 12
the council is a disgrace.i went to the so called consultation yesterday and the council had postponed it at the last minute.i urge every single person in lordshill and surrounding areas to fight this closure.i ask all political parties not to use this as a political football and do the right thing for the people of southampton.i ask sainsburys at lordshill to help to put something back into the community after taking millions from us over the years.i ask the daily echo to start a campaign to save this pool as a lot of your staff used it.i ask alan whitehead to apply pressure on the council and come to a compromise on the pool.over 70,000 people cant be wrong they love that pool and its keeping people fit and gives the oppurtunity for youngsters to learn how to swim.to don and keith the people are behind you.PLEASE TO YOU ALL SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL.
IronLady2010
says...
9:35pm Fri 20 Jul 12
southy wrote:Post it again, so I can understand.
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
IronLady2010
says...
9:54pm Fri 20 Jul 12
IronLady2010 wrote:I've got as far as And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham.
southy wrote:Post it again, so I can understand.
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
Can someone interpret the rest?
I hope you never become a Councillor, how can you represent people when you can't talk to them as they can't understand you?
Paramjit Bahia
says...
10:07pm Fri 20 Jul 12
lordshill loyal wrote:Hi, Council arranging consultation and then cancelling it at the last minute is not only disgraceful it may even have more sinister motive; frustrate people so much that they get fed up and simply give up.
the council is a disgrace.i went to the so called consultation yesterday and the council had postponed it at the last minute.i urge every single person in lordshill and surrounding areas to fight this closure.i ask all political parties not to use this as a political football and do the right thing for the people of southampton.i ask sainsburys at lordshill to help to put something back into the community after taking millions from us over the years.i ask the daily echo to start a campaign to save this pool as a lot of your staff used it.i ask alan whitehead to apply pressure on the council and come to a compromise on the pool.over 70,000 people cant be wrong they love that pool and its keeping people fit and gives the oppurtunity for youngsters to learn how to swim.to don and keith the people are behind you.PLEASE TO YOU ALL SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL.
One of establishment's tried and tested trick.
How widely are they publicising these fake consultations? Some of us are not aware of these. Could you post any details if you are aware please..
Paramjit Bahia
says...
10:13pm Fri 20 Jul 12
IronLady2010 wrote:Perhaps people can understand Southy when they have not consumed gallons of wine or few bottles of champagne!!!
IronLady2010 wrote:I've got as far as And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham.
southy wrote:Post it again, so I can understand.
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
Can someone interpret the rest?
I hope you never become a Councillor, how can you represent people when you can't talk to them as they can't understand you?
IronLady2010
says...
10:19pm Fri 20 Jul 12
Paramjit Bahia wrote:Maybe you can interpret it then?
IronLady2010 wrote:Perhaps people can understand Southy when they have not consumed gallons of wine or few bottles of champagne!!!
IronLady2010 wrote:I've got as far as And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham.
southy wrote:Post it again, so I can understand.
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
Can someone interpret the rest?
I hope you never become a Councillor, how can you represent people when you can't talk to them as they can't understand you?
"And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center"
This is a future Councillor? I can't make any sense of it!
Lone Ranger.
says...
10:43pm Fri 20 Jul 12
lordshill loyal wrote:Ive made a genuine suggestion to you and your loyal band who want to save the pool
the council is a disgrace.i went to the so called consultation yesterday and the council had postponed it at the last minute.i urge every single person in lordshill and surrounding areas to fight this closure.i ask all political parties not to use this as a political football and do the right thing for the people of southampton.i ask sainsburys at lordshill to help to put something back into the community after taking millions from us over the years.i ask the daily echo to start a campaign to save this pool as a lot of your staff used it.i ask alan whitehead to apply pressure on the council and come to a compromise on the pool.over 70,000 people cant be wrong they love that pool and its keeping people fit and gives the oppurtunity for youngsters to learn how to swim.to don and keith the people are behind you.PLEASE TO YOU ALL SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL.
.
Put your money where your mouth is.
.
As its only £10k .... get on and raise it with all of your supporters.
.
Lets see how much you want to save it then
.
My guess is you will get £50 if you are lucky.
.
The gauntlett is thrown down ....... I dare you to pick it up
Paramjit Bahia
says...
11:40pm Fri 20 Jul 12
IronLady2010 wrote:Like most people Southy has his share of faults, mainly spelling. I sympathise with him because my own spelling grammar and word processing ability is also not good.
Paramjit Bahia wrote:Maybe you can interpret it then?
IronLady2010 wrote:Perhaps people can understand Southy when they have not consumed gallons of wine or few bottles of champagne!!!
IronLady2010 wrote:I've got as far as And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham.
southy wrote:Post it again, so I can understand.
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
Can someone interpret the rest?
I hope you never become a Councillor, how can you represent people when you can't talk to them as they can't understand you?
"And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center"
This is a future Councillor? I can't make any sense of it!
I know some doctors and surgeons whose handwritting is worse than even mine But that does not mean they are not very good in their own field.
Jackie Stewart is good example, could hardly read but became one of the best F1 racer on this planet and is not only successful in his own bussiness but is ambassador for some multinational empires.
So I request you to make allowances for Southy's weakness. People may not share his views, but a) he is entitled to hold those and b) He is open and honest, which these days is sadly very rare quality in our politicians. Just look in Southampton Council's chamber, or observe what NuLabour is doing to Don and Keith for being honest, to see what I mean.
Southy was trying to say that he only found about the consultation regarding pool last Saturday while at his party's stall where they were collecting signatures for petition. And he posted that info yesterday after he observed how many showed up at consultation meeting on Wednesday. He is also concerned about the lack of publicity for these meetings.
If even I can understand that with my worn out old brain I am surprised that a young and supposedly intelligent lady like you can't.
So please be honest and spit out the real reason.
For some in our area closing of Oaklands is a serious matter, but probably for people like your good self it is simply something to chat about.
Sorry for my typing errors and poor quality working class lingo
aldermoorboy
says...
5:52am Sat 21 Jul 12
Lone Ranger, I have the answer for keeping the pool open.
1/. All Labour councillors reduce their allowances, as the Tories and Liberals did.
2/. Reduce the number of cabinet members by 2 as the Tories did.
Savings £50,000 +
If Labour do this, I will say on this occasion Labour put the public first and themselves second.
On all other occasions Labour/Union militants put themselves first and we the public second, shame on you Labour.
1/. All Labour councillors reduce their allowances, as the Tories and Liberals did.
2/. Reduce the number of cabinet members by 2 as the Tories did.
Savings £50,000 +
If Labour do this, I will say on this occasion Labour put the public first and themselves second.
On all other occasions Labour/Union militants put themselves first and we the public second, shame on you Labour.
Lone Ranger.
says...
9:44am Sat 21 Jul 12
aldermoorboy wrote:Ahh you cant do anything for your own community can you ..... Take take.
Lone Ranger, I have the answer for keeping the pool open.
1/. All Labour councillors reduce their allowances, as the Tories and Liberals did.
2/. Reduce the number of cabinet members by 2 as the Tories did.
Savings £50,000 +
If Labour do this, I will say on this occasion Labour put the public first and themselves second.
On all other occasions Labour/Union militants put themselves first and we the public second, shame on you Labour.
.
Why not give a bit back.
.
You supported slippery Dave Big Society ....... So heres your chance to keep open a Community pool for the Community by the Community.
.
Its only £10k.
.
Come stop blaming others .... put your money where your mouth is.
.
The bottom line is ....... You are all mouth and NO ACTION.
.
If you and your mates care so much about the Community then DO SOMETHING.
.
Put up........ Or ........ Shut up.
.
Shame on YOU ...... You dont give a toss about the Community
freefinker
says...
10:08am Sat 21 Jul 12
Paramjit Bahia wrote:.. quite agree with you Paramjit and I make a point of not criticising southys spelling and grammar. And, nearly always I can follow his sometimes odd sentence construction.
IronLady2010 wrote:Like most people Southy has his share of faults, mainly spelling. I sympathise with him because my own spelling grammar and word processing ability is also not good.
Paramjit Bahia wrote:Maybe you can interpret it then?
IronLady2010 wrote:Perhaps people can understand Southy when they have not consumed gallons of wine or few bottles of champagne!!!
IronLady2010 wrote:I've got as far as And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham.
southy wrote:Post it again, so I can understand.
The two Labour councillors who rebelled against party leaders over the closure of a Southampton pool have branded a consultation on its future a “sham”
And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center
Can someone interpret the rest?
I hope you never become a Councillor, how can you represent people when you can't talk to them as they can't understand you?
"And I would agree with Don and Keith it is a sham, I only found out the consultataion last sat while doing a stall petition, and I post it up yesterday after seeing how miny show for the weds consultation, there seem to be extremely very little pubication of the 3 days consultataion in the evening and the last one is on the go now at lordshill shopping center"
This is a future Councillor? I can't make any sense of it!
I know some doctors and surgeons whose handwritting is worse than even mine But that does not mean they are not very good in their own field.
Jackie Stewart is good example, could hardly read but became one of the best F1 racer on this planet and is not only successful in his own bussiness but is ambassador for some multinational empires.
So I request you to make allowances for Southy's weakness. People may not share his views, but a) he is entitled to hold those and b) He is open and honest, which these days is sadly very rare quality in our politicians. Just look in Southampton Council's chamber, or observe what NuLabour is doing to Don and Keith for being honest, to see what I mean.
Southy was trying to say that he only found about the consultation regarding pool last Saturday while at his party's stall where they were collecting signatures for petition. And he posted that info yesterday after he observed how many showed up at consultation meeting on Wednesday. He is also concerned about the lack of publicity for these meetings.
If even I can understand that with my worn out old brain I am surprised that a young and supposedly intelligent lady like you can't.
So please be honest and spit out the real reason.
For some in our area closing of Oaklands is a serious matter, but probably for people like your good self it is simply something to chat about.
Sorry for my typing errors and poor quality working class lingo
However, there are some occasions when it is virtually impossible to get the gist of what he's saying. And I must admit I thought this about the last paragraph of his post before IronLady2010 brought it up.
There are occasions when one just has to say 'what?' and ask for a translation.
southy
says...
11:10am Sat 21 Jul 12
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
Lone Ranger.
says...
11:18am Sat 21 Jul 12
southy wrote:Southy ....... Your spelling and grammer should not be up for debate.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
.
Your views ..... well thats different !!
OSPREYSAINT
says...
11:28am Sat 21 Jul 12
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
Georgem
says...
3:02pm Sat 21 Jul 12
OSPREYSAINT wrote:*ruins
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
(sorry!)
OSPREYSAINT
says...
4:47pm Sat 21 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:not sure on that ruin one point, ruins many points?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:*ruins
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
(sorry!)
Georgem
says...
5:08pm Sat 21 Jul 12
OSPREYSAINT wrote:It's how you're addressing 'that' which matters, which person it's in.
Georgem wrote:not sure on that ruin one point, ruins many points?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:*ruins
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
(sorry!)
I RUIN the point.
I RUIN the points.
He RUINS the point.
He RUINS the points.
That RUINS the point.
That RUINS the points.
The number of points is irrelevant.
You know this, I'm sure.
Condor Man
says...
11:04pm Sat 21 Jul 12
Great to see Labour imploding so early on. Morrell and Thomas clearly can't tow the line which doesn't say much about William's leadership qualities. If the school is closing it makes sense to get rid of the swimming pool at the same time. The pools at Shirley and Red Lodge aren't that far away anyway.
lordshill loyal
says...
1:47pm Sun 22 Jul 12
lone ranger i put my money where my mouth is every month by paying my community tax unlike you i expect.maybe you should put your money where your mouth is or are you just a couch potato who only cares about there own sorry arse.
OSPREYSAINT
says...
1:59pm Sun 22 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:Good point, ruined by being too pedantic.
OSPREYSAINT wrote:It's how you're addressing 'that' which matters, which person it's in.
Georgem wrote:not sure on that ruin one point, ruins many points?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:*ruins
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
(sorry!)
I RUIN the point.
I RUIN the points.
He RUINS the point.
He RUINS the points.
That RUINS the point.
That RUINS the points.
The number of points is irrelevant.
You know this, I'm sure.
OSPREYSAINT
says...
2:00pm Sun 22 Jul 12
Any new news LH?
Georgem
says...
3:29pm Sun 22 Jul 12
OSPREYSAINT wrote:I'll bear that in mind next time you correct someone else's spelling or grammer....
Georgem wrote:Good point, ruined by being too pedantic.
OSPREYSAINT wrote:It's how you're addressing 'that' which matters, which person it's in.
Georgem wrote:not sure on that ruin one point, ruins many points?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:*ruins
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
(sorry!)
I RUIN the point.
I RUIN the points.
He RUINS the point.
He RUINS the points.
That RUINS the point.
That RUINS the points.
The number of points is irrelevant.
You know this, I'm sure.
aldermoorboy
says...
4:07pm Sun 22 Jul 12
Well said Lordshill loyal, same here.
I suspect Lone Ranger is a selfish Labour councillor.
People throw insults when they have lost their case.
Labour are a disgrace.
I suspect Lone Ranger is a selfish Labour councillor.
People throw insults when they have lost their case.
Labour are a disgrace.
Lone Ranger.
says...
5:31pm Sun 22 Jul 12
lordshill loyal wrote:Oh dear chucking a few insults about are we.
lone ranger i put my money where my mouth is every month by paying my community tax unlike you i expect.maybe you should put your money where your mouth is or are you just a couch potato who only cares about there own sorry arse.
.
Yes i pay my Council Tax.
.
Couch potato .... NO.
.
I am quite happy to start YOUR community project off with £50 towards YOUR Community project of raising £10,000 to save YOUR COMMUNITY pool.
..
Where is you commitment ..... NONE FROM YOU.
.
NONE from your other loyal Community Tories.
.
Come on ... put your money in to save YOUR COMMUNITY ...... Be a part of Slippery Dave's Big Society.
.
Or perhaps you dont really give a toss yourself ..... Just like your other Communty Heroes
Lone Ranger.
says...
5:33pm Sun 22 Jul 12
aldermoorboy wrote:Not selfish.
Well said Lordshill loyal, same here.
I suspect Lone Ranger is a selfish Labour councillor.
People throw insults when they have lost their case.
Labour are a disgrace.
.
Not a councillor.
.
No insults thrown.
.
Just waiting to see how much your community means to you and your loyal Tories.
.
Having read your responses .... YOUR Community means NOTHING to YOU ...... Just one big gust of wind.
.
Slippery Dave obviously faile to get you to believe the his Big Society
OSPREYSAINT
says...
5:54pm Sun 22 Jul 12
Georgem wrote:grammer you are having a larf?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:I'll bear that in mind next time you correct someone else's spelling or grammer....
Georgem wrote:Good point, ruined by being too pedantic.
OSPREYSAINT wrote:It's how you're addressing 'that' which matters, which person it's in.
Georgem wrote:not sure on that ruin one point, ruins many points?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:*ruins
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
(sorry!)
I RUIN the point.
I RUIN the points.
He RUINS the point.
He RUINS the points.
That RUINS the point.
That RUINS the points.
The number of points is irrelevant.
You know this, I'm sure.
OSPREYSAINT
says...
5:57pm Sun 22 Jul 12
I am fluent in English and effluent in Giberish.
Georgem
says...
5:59pm Sun 22 Jul 12
OSPREYSAINT wrote:Yes.
Georgem wrote:grammer you are having a larf?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:I'll bear that in mind next time you correct someone else's spelling or grammer....
Georgem wrote:Good point, ruined by being too pedantic.
OSPREYSAINT wrote:It's how you're addressing 'that' which matters, which person it's in.
Georgem wrote:not sure on that ruin one point, ruins many points?
OSPREYSAINT wrote:*ruins
southy wrote:Not a problem, my problems are down to getting in too much of a rush to post, and then not proof reading, thus missing words, wrong letters, poor spelling all tend to creep in. That always detracts from the post and ruin the point one is trying to make.
Some times its tiredness included where I only get about 4 to 6 hours sleep a night, and a lot of running around back and forth
(sorry!)
I RUIN the point.
I RUIN the points.
He RUINS the point.
He RUINS the points.
That RUINS the point.
That RUINS the points.
The number of points is irrelevant.
You know this, I'm sure.
lordshill loyal
says...
8:15pm Sun 22 Jul 12
lone ranger or should that be man with no mates.you need to lighten up and come and join the fight.public meeting 10th august at lordshill church.oh and by the way i aint no tory and i dont support labour i just care about my local community.keep smiling.SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL
Lone Ranger.
says...
9:16pm Sun 22 Jul 12
lordshill loyal wrote:Great well done.
lone ranger or should that be man with no mates.you need to lighten up and come and join the fight.public meeting 10th august at lordshill church.oh and by the way i aint no tory and i dont support labour i just care about my local community.keep smiling.SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL
.
A meeting is one thing ... actions are something else
.
Now organise a fund raising group for the Community.
.
Raise the £10k that the Tories say it costs to repair.
.
Speak to Southy who knows how to run a Co-operative.
.
It could be up and running in a couple of weeks ....... I promise to send £50 as a donation if you do it.
.
.
My guess is though ........... It will cost more that £10k and more like £250k.
.
With that amount of money it is not worth it. That is why when the Tories handed the other pools and sport amenities over to "Sport Nation" they would not take on Oaklands ..... because it was far too expensive.
.
Moulton knows this and is just sh** stirring.
.
Good luck with it ....... and a bit less sarcasm please ........ you will find out i am correct on this one
aldermoorboy
says...
6:21am Mon 23 Jul 12
Lone ranger, I told you how to get the money, spend less on politics.Labour always spend more on themselves.
I do care about local community, my family give a large amount of time and money to help others with pleasure and we are not rich accept in happiness.
Repent Lone Ranger and join the caring Tories.
I do care about local community, my family give a large amount of time and money to help others with pleasure and we are not rich accept in happiness.
Repent Lone Ranger and join the caring Tories.
Lone Ranger.
says...
8:43am Mon 23 Jul 12
aldermoorboy wrote:You really are missing the point arent you aldermoorboy ............ You just cant see anyfurther than the end of your keyboard.
Lone ranger, I told you how to get the money, spend less on politics.Labour always spend more on themselves.
I do care about local community, my family give a large amount of time and money to help others with pleasure and we are not rich accept in happiness.
Repent Lone Ranger and join the caring Tories.
Inform Al
says...
8:49am Mon 23 Jul 12
aldermoorboy wrote:Are these the same caring Tories that took away the Flower Roads community centrem probably because there are no rich Old Etonians living there. The Tories used to have social values but the current lot are interested in one thing only, themselves.
Lone ranger, I told you how to get the money, spend less on politics.Labour always spend more on themselves.
I do care about local community, my family give a large amount of time and money to help others with pleasure and we are not rich accept in happiness.
Repent Lone Ranger and join the caring Tories.
OSPREYSAINT
says...
3:20pm Mon 23 Jul 12
aldermoorboy wrote:oxymoron
Lone ranger, I told you how to get the money, spend less on politics.Labour always spend more on themselves.
I do care about local community, my family give a large amount of time and money to help others with pleasure and we are not rich accept in happiness.
Repent Lone Ranger and join the caring Tories.
lordshill loyal
says...
6:30pm Mon 23 Jul 12
lone ranger hope to see you on the 10th.im not saying what you are stating is untrue,i dont trust none of them.all i know is that alot of disabled and elderly people have had there lives shattered by this decision.sometimes in life there are more important things in life than money.and this is one of them.this is for the benefit and well being of the people of southampton who unlike you i care about.SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL.!!!!!!!!!
Lone Ranger.
says...
8:13pm Mon 23 Jul 12
lordshill loyal wrote:OAP's and disabled have had their lives shattered through by the Tories locally and Nationally ...... But you didnt shout about that did.
lone ranger hope to see you on the 10th.im not saying what you are stating is untrue,i dont trust none of them.all i know is that alot of disabled and elderly people have had there lives shattered by this decision.sometimes in life there are more important things in life than money.and this is one of them.this is for the benefit and well being of the people of southampton who unlike you i care about.SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL.!!!!!!!!!
.
Put politics to one side.
.
If you want to save a community place or landmark or anything ..... You cannot rely on anyone apart from yourselves.
.
That why you need an action committee to raise the funds.
.
You could easily start with Carillion the builders of Oasis, Sainsburys, the Bookies, Ordnance Survey and even a donation from the Council.
.
Perhaps they need to see how much you REALLY want it.
.
NOT just talk and hot air.
.
I once fought a community project 20 years ago close to where you are .... It can be done if you want it bad enough....... and its viable
lordshill loyal
says...
8:09pm Tue 24 Jul 12
lone ranger seeing as your a seasoned campaigner why not join the fight and stop hiding behind your computer.we need all the help we can.sainsburys owes this community bigtime so yes i will start there,SAVE OAKLANDS SWIMMING POOL
SotonGreen says...
7:10am Fri 20 Jul 12
The average Labour voter needs to realise, Labour isnt going to be there for you, it has a long track record to taking your vote in its heartlands and then doing whatever it **** well pleases for the elites perceived "greater good".
If you want a party that has localism written in its very DNA, vote Green !