100 jobs could go in Southampton City Council in budget chaos

Daily Echo: 100 jobs could go in council in budget chaos 100 jobs could go in council in budget chaos

SOUTHAMPTON has been warned to brace itself for sweeping council cuts to jobs and services.

At least 100 more council workers could be axed as finance bosses predict the city faces its worst cash crisis.

It comes as the council’s Labour leaders scrapped a planned budget announcement to finalise the cuts.

But a secret draft copy of their proposals has been seen by the Daily Echo. In it, 100 more council job losses have been highlighted as a way of saving cash.

Labour bosses have cancelled meetings due to take place today with staff, who were to be consulted over drastic budget plans for next year.

Finance boss Councillor Simon Letts said the draft budget had been postponed so the council would have a clearer picture of its finances and more time to prepare the cuts, hikes in charges and redundancies that will be needed to plug a £26m deficit.

It is understood that at least 100 staff have already been identified for redundancy. This comes on top of an announcement last month that 200 temporary council employees would lose their jobs in the coming years.

Opposition Tories said the Labour administration was now in “chaos” and had no excuse for the “unprecedented” delay.

Cllr Letts said the unitary authority was facing a “perfect storm” of “unique circumstances” that had put it in the “premier league” of councils hit by cuts.

He said the council was facing its worst ever budget deficit. He said: “There will be no good news. There will be no new initiatives, no flashy announcements. There will be redundancies. We’ve cut out the fat, cut into the flesh down to the bone. This is (now) removing limbs.”

The council spends around £500m a year including schools and benefits. The annual budget once these are stripped out is around £190m. Cllr Letts said Government funding was being slashed more than thought and costs were going up due to inflation and greater demands on council services while the civic centre coffers had been run down to minimum £5m reserves.

He said the council has taken more than its fair share of austerity cuts, had done all it could to reorganise and become leaner, and said “significant extra charges” would have to be brought in alongside deep cuts.

“We are not choosing to do this. We are compelled to do this,” he said.

He said the cost of child social care alone had rocketed by £4m, due to heavier case loads and reliance on agency and temporary staff, which he blamed on the pay cuts by the previous Tory administration which are now being reversed.

Daily Echo: Simon Letts Southampton City Council budget graphic

Cllr Letts said the council was waiting on news of Government grants, including a £8m bid for recycling fund cash, and was attempting to negotiate further savings with Capita, the firm that runs a swathe of council services for a £36m a year charge.

He added he wanted to make sure different de par tments had a chance to see how proposed cuts would affect each other, which would produce a “better budget at the end”.

And he said a deal to restore staff pay had paved the way for better industrial relations so staff could meet bosses face to face and suggest ideas of savings from the “bottom-up”.

Opposition Tory leader Councillor Royston Smith said: “This is unprecedented in the history of the council.

There is no excuse for slipping this budget. They’ve known since February the savings they needed to make. We took £20m out last year. They’ve added nearly £3m for pay restoration and have made it worse for themselves.

“It shows there is no leadership and they’ve not got a grip on the task ahead of them. They are in chaos. They just will not take the decisions.”

The council was due to publish its draft budget proposals this week.

The date has now been put back a month for meetings with staff on November 12.

Those facing redundancy will be redeployed while permanent positions are sought.

Daily Echo: budget gap graphic

Comments (71)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:17am Mon 8 Oct 12

MGRA says...

Labour in charge of finances always equals chaos... but... to be fair the point about social care is correct, rubbish pay and conditions have mean't many have left the profession meaning indeed it is too reliant on agency staff. The blame for that does belong with the Torys.
Labour in charge of finances always equals chaos... but... to be fair the point about social care is correct, rubbish pay and conditions have mean't many have left the profession meaning indeed it is too reliant on agency staff. The blame for that does belong with the Torys. MGRA
  • Score: 0

11:32am Mon 8 Oct 12

southy says...

The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs. southy
  • Score: 0

11:34am Mon 8 Oct 12

On the inside says...

Frankly if Simon Letts can manage to set a budget with this level of Condem Govt cuts coupled with past local Tory cuts and still only cut about 100 jobs he will deserve a nighthood.
Frankly if Simon Letts can manage to set a budget with this level of Condem Govt cuts coupled with past local Tory cuts and still only cut about 100 jobs he will deserve a nighthood. On the inside
  • Score: 0

11:36am Mon 8 Oct 12

Ford Prefect says...

Another uinbiased report from Royston's mouthpiece.

I feel really sorry for any councillor charged with administering the central Tory/Lib Dem cuts. Osborne and Danny Alexander have been quite clever at devolving the implementation of their austerity programme so that councils (of all political persuasions) get the balme when people lose their jobs and the services are cut back.

Calling it "chaos" is nonsense. It's not chaos if you care about the people you employ and the services you provide and want to take the time to make the very best of an impossible situation.

The Tories care about neither so I gusess it's easier for them. BTW, who was in charge in February, Royston?
Another uinbiased report from Royston's mouthpiece. I feel really sorry for any councillor charged with administering the central Tory/Lib Dem cuts. Osborne and Danny Alexander have been quite clever at devolving the implementation of their austerity programme so that councils (of all political persuasions) get the balme when people lose their jobs and the services are cut back. Calling it "chaos" is nonsense. It's not chaos if you care about the people you employ and the services you provide and want to take the time to make the very best of an impossible situation. The Tories care about neither so I gusess it's easier for them. BTW, who was in charge in February, Royston? Ford Prefect
  • Score: 0

11:36am Mon 8 Oct 12

jimmy.little says...

"We’ve cut out the fat, cut into the flesh down to the bone. This is (now) removing limbs.”

quote of the year TBH
"We’ve cut out the fat, cut into the flesh down to the bone. This is (now) removing limbs.” quote of the year TBH jimmy.little
  • Score: 0

11:38am Mon 8 Oct 12

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before.

Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'?

We all knew it was coming anyway.

If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before. Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'? We all knew it was coming anyway. If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role. Shoong
  • Score: 0

11:42am Mon 8 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected. freefinker
  • Score: 0

11:53am Mon 8 Oct 12

FoysCornerBoy says...

The 'Echo' may be right to describe the current budget situation at Southampton City Council as 'chaos'. However it would be entirely wrong to lay the blame for this at the door of the current Labour administration.

Central (Conservative/ Liberal Democrat) government cuts to local authority budgets since 2010 have hit Councils like Southampton particularly hard and they come on top of reductions in budgets in other services such as the NHS. This contrasts with the grant allocations for Conservative-control
led county councils like Dorset or Surrey.

The situation in Southampton has been made far worse by the profligacy and mismanagement of Council finances by the previous local Conservative administration. At least £8 million of the cuts that are being forced on the Council are as a direct result of weak and ideologically driven priorities of the Conservatives these past three years.

This is an appalling legacy for the current Labour administration to have inherited and I have to admire Simon Letts' candour in being up front about a really dreadful situation.

I would like to see the City's forward-thinking political parties, the trade unions, community groups, local businesses and (yes) the local press pull together for once and speak up for the City to make sure that citizens get a better deal from this government in terms of Council grant.

Unless the central government changes tack on public service expenditure, there will be chaos on a scale that is unimaginable.
The 'Echo' may be right to describe the current budget situation at Southampton City Council as 'chaos'. However it would be entirely wrong to lay the blame for this at the door of the current Labour administration. Central (Conservative/ Liberal Democrat) government cuts to local authority budgets since 2010 have hit Councils like Southampton particularly hard and they come on top of reductions in budgets in other services such as the NHS. This contrasts with the grant allocations for Conservative-control led county councils like Dorset or Surrey. The situation in Southampton has been made far worse by the profligacy and mismanagement of Council finances by the previous local Conservative administration. At least £8 million of the cuts that are being forced on the Council are as a direct result of weak and ideologically driven priorities of the Conservatives these past three years. This is an appalling legacy for the current Labour administration to have inherited and I have to admire Simon Letts' candour in being up front about a really dreadful situation. I would like to see the City's forward-thinking political parties, the trade unions, community groups, local businesses and (yes) the local press pull together for once and speak up for the City to make sure that citizens get a better deal from this government in terms of Council grant. Unless the central government changes tack on public service expenditure, there will be chaos on a scale that is unimaginable. FoysCornerBoy
  • Score: 0

11:57am Mon 8 Oct 12

Nicole23 says...

Just put everyone at the council on the minimum wage, welcome to the real world.
Just put everyone at the council on the minimum wage, welcome to the real world. Nicole23
  • Score: 0

12:02pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Maine Lobster says...

Nicole23 wrote:
Just put everyone at the council on the minimum wage, welcome to the real world.
Mindless,ill informed comment.
[quote][p][bold]Nicole23[/bold] wrote: Just put everyone at the council on the minimum wage, welcome to the real world.[/p][/quote]Mindless,ill informed comment. Maine Lobster
  • Score: 0

12:03pm Mon 8 Oct 12

southy says...

Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before.

Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'?

We all knew it was coming anyway.

If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role.
How would Union members be incontrol of the Council, And setting a needs budget would not bankrupt the city, it would increase business in the local economy keeping the business here and not closing up shop and moving else where, for business to stay the people need money to spend, and that means they need a job with a reasonable wage, and they also need time to be able to spend there money, that means you can not over work them. and if you can keep thise simple 2 things working money will all ways coming in to the local coffers.
The way you think would put people out of work, resulting having to pay out in Benefits and reductions in local tax and less people being able to spend in the local economy resuting business closing up.
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before. Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'? We all knew it was coming anyway. If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role.[/p][/quote]How would Union members be incontrol of the Council, And setting a needs budget would not bankrupt the city, it would increase business in the local economy keeping the business here and not closing up shop and moving else where, for business to stay the people need money to spend, and that means they need a job with a reasonable wage, and they also need time to be able to spend there money, that means you can not over work them. and if you can keep thise simple 2 things working money will all ways coming in to the local coffers. The way you think would put people out of work, resulting having to pay out in Benefits and reductions in local tax and less people being able to spend in the local economy resuting business closing up. southy
  • Score: 0

12:07pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Shoong says...

southy wrote:
Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before.

Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'?

We all knew it was coming anyway.

If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role.
How would Union members be incontrol of the Council, And setting a needs budget would not bankrupt the city, it would increase business in the local economy keeping the business here and not closing up shop and moving else where, for business to stay the people need money to spend, and that means they need a job with a reasonable wage, and they also need time to be able to spend there money, that means you can not over work them. and if you can keep thise simple 2 things working money will all ways coming in to the local coffers.
The way you think would put people out of work, resulting having to pay out in Benefits and reductions in local tax and less people being able to spend in the local economy resuting business closing up.
Don't lecture me on economics, you've demonstrated that you don't even have a basic grasp.

But as someone else has commented, your parties are unelectable (even more so yourself as an individual) so you can just offer glib solutions all day long.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before. Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'? We all knew it was coming anyway. If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role.[/p][/quote]How would Union members be incontrol of the Council, And setting a needs budget would not bankrupt the city, it would increase business in the local economy keeping the business here and not closing up shop and moving else where, for business to stay the people need money to spend, and that means they need a job with a reasonable wage, and they also need time to be able to spend there money, that means you can not over work them. and if you can keep thise simple 2 things working money will all ways coming in to the local coffers. The way you think would put people out of work, resulting having to pay out in Benefits and reductions in local tax and less people being able to spend in the local economy resuting business closing up.[/p][/quote]Don't lecture me on economics, you've demonstrated that you don't even have a basic grasp. But as someone else has commented, your parties are unelectable (even more so yourself as an individual) so you can just offer glib solutions all day long. Shoong
  • Score: 0

12:10pm Mon 8 Oct 12

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate. southy
  • Score: 0

12:13pm Mon 8 Oct 12

loosehead says...

FoysCornerBoy wrote:
The 'Echo' may be right to describe the current budget situation at Southampton City Council as 'chaos'. However it would be entirely wrong to lay the blame for this at the door of the current Labour administration.

Central (Conservative/ Liberal Democrat) government cuts to local authority budgets since 2010 have hit Councils like Southampton particularly hard and they come on top of reductions in budgets in other services such as the NHS. This contrasts with the grant allocations for Conservative-control

led county councils like Dorset or Surrey.

The situation in Southampton has been made far worse by the profligacy and mismanagement of Council finances by the previous local Conservative administration. At least £8 million of the cuts that are being forced on the Council are as a direct result of weak and ideologically driven priorities of the Conservatives these past three years.

This is an appalling legacy for the current Labour administration to have inherited and I have to admire Simon Letts' candour in being up front about a really dreadful situation.

I would like to see the City's forward-thinking political parties, the trade unions, community groups, local businesses and (yes) the local press pull together for once and speak up for the City to make sure that citizens get a better deal from this government in terms of Council grant.

Unless the central government changes tack on public service expenditure, there will be chaos on a scale that is unimaginable.
No? wasn't it a Labour Government that slashed £25million from our money to give to the North?
Wasn't it a Labour Government that left this country up the creek with out a paddle?
The Tories tried to save jobs & tried to get the Unions to negotiate but as history shows the Unions refused to negotiate & we had strikes.
You can continue to blame Royston for implementing pay cuts but did the Unions leave him any choice?
In the past a tory council would/could have just gone for job cuts but the last council didn't it tried to restrict job losses & keep as many jobs as possible.
Labour are cutting 200 temporary posts moving 200 permanent workers into those posts so in fact we're losing 200 permanent jobs now we're losing 100 more .
Services to be cut & job losses this is exactly what Labour told the voters the Tories would do & this wouldn't happen under Labour?
Labour knew the level of the cut in funding so why say they didn't?
They lied about services & jobs & they've lied about knowing the extent of the cut in funding so how can you lot on here dare defend this lying council?
They've paid back a debt to the Unions even though they know this city can't afford it so how's this doing the right thing?
Ask the 100 who will lose their jobs(permanent) or the 200 temps who've lost their jobs if a small cut in pay (2%)& a small loss of jobs (80) or 300 job losses & a small percentage of workers receiving a restoration of their pay what option they'd choose & I think I know what they would opt for
[quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: The 'Echo' may be right to describe the current budget situation at Southampton City Council as 'chaos'. However it would be entirely wrong to lay the blame for this at the door of the current Labour administration. Central (Conservative/ Liberal Democrat) government cuts to local authority budgets since 2010 have hit Councils like Southampton particularly hard and they come on top of reductions in budgets in other services such as the NHS. This contrasts with the grant allocations for Conservative-control led county councils like Dorset or Surrey. The situation in Southampton has been made far worse by the profligacy and mismanagement of Council finances by the previous local Conservative administration. At least £8 million of the cuts that are being forced on the Council are as a direct result of weak and ideologically driven priorities of the Conservatives these past three years. This is an appalling legacy for the current Labour administration to have inherited and I have to admire Simon Letts' candour in being up front about a really dreadful situation. I would like to see the City's forward-thinking political parties, the trade unions, community groups, local businesses and (yes) the local press pull together for once and speak up for the City to make sure that citizens get a better deal from this government in terms of Council grant. Unless the central government changes tack on public service expenditure, there will be chaos on a scale that is unimaginable.[/p][/quote]No? wasn't it a Labour Government that slashed £25million from our money to give to the North? Wasn't it a Labour Government that left this country up the creek with out a paddle? The Tories tried to save jobs & tried to get the Unions to negotiate but as history shows the Unions refused to negotiate & we had strikes. You can continue to blame Royston for implementing pay cuts but did the Unions leave him any choice? In the past a tory council would/could have just gone for job cuts but the last council didn't it tried to restrict job losses & keep as many jobs as possible. Labour are cutting 200 temporary posts moving 200 permanent workers into those posts so in fact we're losing 200 permanent jobs now we're losing 100 more . Services to be cut & job losses this is exactly what Labour told the voters the Tories would do & this wouldn't happen under Labour? Labour knew the level of the cut in funding so why say they didn't? They lied about services & jobs & they've lied about knowing the extent of the cut in funding so how can you lot on here dare defend this lying council? They've paid back a debt to the Unions even though they know this city can't afford it so how's this doing the right thing? Ask the 100 who will lose their jobs(permanent) or the 200 temps who've lost their jobs if a small cut in pay (2%)& a small loss of jobs (80) or 300 job losses & a small percentage of workers receiving a restoration of their pay what option they'd choose & I think I know what they would opt for loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Mon 8 Oct 12

southy says...

Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
Shoong wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before.

Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'?

We all knew it was coming anyway.

If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role.
How would Union members be incontrol of the Council, And setting a needs budget would not bankrupt the city, it would increase business in the local economy keeping the business here and not closing up shop and moving else where, for business to stay the people need money to spend, and that means they need a job with a reasonable wage, and they also need time to be able to spend there money, that means you can not over work them. and if you can keep thise simple 2 things working money will all ways coming in to the local coffers.
The way you think would put people out of work, resulting having to pay out in Benefits and reductions in local tax and less people being able to spend in the local economy resuting business closing up.
Don't lecture me on economics, you've demonstrated that you don't even have a basic grasp.

But as someone else has commented, your parties are unelectable (even more so yourself as an individual) so you can just offer glib solutions all day long.
Looks like we have a better under standing than you think.
Tell me what you going to do when there are to many unemployed and the spiraling cost in having to pay out in Benefits and having to take a reduction in funds coming in to keep a city running or to keep a country running,
and its because its your kind of thinking that as got this country in the mess that we are in today.
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Yes, yes, you've said this a hundred times before. Do you have anything to offer apart from saying 'ner ner, told ya so'? We all knew it was coming anyway. If it was The Socialist Party or the TUSC it would be completely bankrupted just to keep Union members in control of the Council and on the pay role.[/p][/quote]How would Union members be incontrol of the Council, And setting a needs budget would not bankrupt the city, it would increase business in the local economy keeping the business here and not closing up shop and moving else where, for business to stay the people need money to spend, and that means they need a job with a reasonable wage, and they also need time to be able to spend there money, that means you can not over work them. and if you can keep thise simple 2 things working money will all ways coming in to the local coffers. The way you think would put people out of work, resulting having to pay out in Benefits and reductions in local tax and less people being able to spend in the local economy resuting business closing up.[/p][/quote]Don't lecture me on economics, you've demonstrated that you don't even have a basic grasp. But as someone else has commented, your parties are unelectable (even more so yourself as an individual) so you can just offer glib solutions all day long.[/p][/quote]Looks like we have a better under standing than you think. Tell me what you going to do when there are to many unemployed and the spiraling cost in having to pay out in Benefits and having to take a reduction in funds coming in to keep a city running or to keep a country running, and its because its your kind of thinking that as got this country in the mess that we are in today. southy
  • Score: 0

12:17pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Georgem says...

southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
I can't even be bothered to explain this to you yet again. I predict it will rain next week. When it does, I'm going to dance about and act smug, and then somehow persuade myself that this qualifies me for government.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]I can't even be bothered to explain this to you yet again. I predict it will rain next week. When it does, I'm going to dance about and act smug, and then somehow persuade myself that this qualifies me for government. Georgem
  • Score: 0

12:19pm Mon 8 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012? freefinker
  • Score: 0

12:26pm Mon 8 Oct 12

loosehead says...

Will they be taking the Governments option of freezing council tax next year or raise them & suffer penalties so having to raise them even more?
Will they admit the restoration of pay is the wrong thing to do?
Labour has promised the Earth to get elected & surprise,surprise can't afford to deliver.
They knew this before they got elected but Hey! that's okay the voters in this city are inbred cretins ( Labour councillors wifes words not mine) & mugs & will believe what ever we say against the Tories so let's blame them.
Sorry but the Tories locally & Nationally have told us the truth cuts will come & have to happen.
Locally they tried to cut pay to save jobs & services,
They put leisure under an outside company which pays to manage the sports & leisure facilities in this city whilst we still own them.
They never slashed school budgets Labour are.
They never hit services Labour are & accused the Tories of having plans to do the same? Who lied?
Say what you will about the Tories but in the short space of time this Labour Party has been in power we've had nothing but lies.
Snowdome Williams said it's scrapped not water based? two rowing clubs merged into one & brand new facilities to be built under Snow dome with a small Ice Rink so another lie from Williams.
You Labour supporters on here will praise you're party no matter what they do.
You Union members how can you accept 300 job losses straight away & wait for it there's more to come,When will you wake up to the fact you were better off with a pay cut & a job under the Tories than full pay & no job under Labour?
Will they be taking the Governments option of freezing council tax next year or raise them & suffer penalties so having to raise them even more? Will they admit the restoration of pay is the wrong thing to do? Labour has promised the Earth to get elected & surprise,surprise can't afford to deliver. They knew this before they got elected but Hey! that's okay the voters in this city are inbred cretins ( Labour councillors wifes words not mine) & mugs & will believe what ever we say against the Tories so let's blame them. Sorry but the Tories locally & Nationally have told us the truth cuts will come & have to happen. Locally they tried to cut pay to save jobs & services, They put leisure under an outside company which pays to manage the sports & leisure facilities in this city whilst we still own them. They never slashed school budgets Labour are. They never hit services Labour are & accused the Tories of having plans to do the same? Who lied? Say what you will about the Tories but in the short space of time this Labour Party has been in power we've had nothing but lies. Snowdome Williams said it's scrapped not water based? two rowing clubs merged into one & brand new facilities to be built under Snow dome with a small Ice Rink so another lie from Williams. You Labour supporters on here will praise you're party no matter what they do. You Union members how can you accept 300 job losses straight away & wait for it there's more to come,When will you wake up to the fact you were better off with a pay cut & a job under the Tories than full pay & no job under Labour? loosehead
  • Score: 0

12:37pm Mon 8 Oct 12

localnews says...

Cuts cuts and more cuts........you can lay blame at any party you want to (and there's enough on here that do) fact is as long as we give Billions away to countries that either don't need it or don't deserve it,there's always going to be those of us that think we should look after our own first,and its a crying shame that successive governments brush this under the carpet and whinge about the deficit
Cuts cuts and more cuts........you can lay blame at any party you want to (and there's enough on here that do) fact is as long as we give Billions away to countries that either don't need it or don't deserve it,there's always going to be those of us that think we should look after our own first,and its a crying shame that successive governments brush this under the carpet and whinge about the deficit localnews
  • Score: 0

12:43pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Rockhopper says...

I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma
nager level.
Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public.
It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton.
I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma nager level. Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public. It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton. Rockhopper
  • Score: 0

1:00pm Mon 8 Oct 12

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years. southy
  • Score: 0

1:02pm Mon 8 Oct 12

ohec says...

See what happens when they wake southy up all reasonable thought goes out the window.
See what happens when they wake southy up all reasonable thought goes out the window. ohec
  • Score: 0

1:21pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Maine Lobster says...

Rockhopper wrote:
I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma nager level. Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public. It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton.
You are absolutley right but unfortunately it is staff in this bracket that look for the savings and they obviously don't earmark their own downfall.
Cuts always end up at service delivery level where they are felt most. The performance management area is where it could be cut most effectively with no loss to the people of the city.
[quote][p][bold]Rockhopper[/bold] wrote: I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma nager level. Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public. It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton.[/p][/quote]You are absolutley right but unfortunately it is staff in this bracket that look for the savings and they obviously don't earmark their own downfall. Cuts always end up at service delivery level where they are felt most. The performance management area is where it could be cut most effectively with no loss to the people of the city. Maine Lobster
  • Score: 0

1:27pm Mon 8 Oct 12

southy says...

ohec wrote:
See what happens when they wake southy up all reasonable thought goes out the window.
So you don't care what happens to the generations to come, you would make them suffer just for your own greed
[quote][p][bold]ohec[/bold] wrote: See what happens when they wake southy up all reasonable thought goes out the window.[/p][/quote]So you don't care what happens to the generations to come, you would make them suffer just for your own greed southy
  • Score: 0

1:29pm Mon 8 Oct 12

hulla baloo says...

The money had to come from somewhere to cover the pay reinstatements that were announced recently. Just been move from one pot to another.
The money had to come from somewhere to cover the pay reinstatements that were announced recently. Just been move from one pot to another. hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

1:33pm Mon 8 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question. freefinker
  • Score: 0

1:47pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Georgem says...

southy wrote:
ohec wrote:
See what happens when they wake southy up all reasonable thought goes out the window.
So you don't care what happens to the generations to come, you would make them suffer just for your own greed
A massive leap in logic. Sometimes, your arguments remind me of this joke

Two fishermen, Robert and Peter, are sitting at their favorite bar, drinking beer. Robert turns to Peter and says,"You know, I'm tired of going through life without an education.Tomorrow I think I'll go the community college, and sign up for some classes." Peter agrees that it's a good idea, and the two leave.

The next day, Robert goes down to the college and meets the Dean of Admissions, who signs him up for the four basic classes:Math, English, history, and Logic.

"Logic?" Robert says. "What's that?The dean says, "I'll show you. Do you own a lawn mower?" "Yeah." "Then logically speaking, because you own a lawn mower, I think that you would have a yard." "That's true, I do have a yard." "I'm not done," the dean says. "Because you have a yard, I think logically that you would have a house." "Yes, I do have a house" "And because you have a house, I think that you might logically have a family." "I have a family." "I'm not done yet. Because you have a family, then logically you must have a wife." "Yes, I do have a wife." "And because you have a wife, then logic tells me you must be a heterosexual."

"I am a heterosexual. That's amazing, you were able to find out all of that because I have a lawn mower."

Excited to take the class now, Robert shakes the Dean's hand and leaves to go meet Peter at the bar.He tells Peter about his classes, how he is signed up for Math, English History, and Logic. "Logic?" Peter says, "What's that?"

Robert says, "I'll show you. Do you have a lawn mower?"

"No."

"What are you, some sort of poofter?"
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]ohec[/bold] wrote: See what happens when they wake southy up all reasonable thought goes out the window.[/p][/quote]So you don't care what happens to the generations to come, you would make them suffer just for your own greed[/p][/quote]A massive leap in logic. Sometimes, your arguments remind me of this joke Two fishermen, Robert and Peter, are sitting at their favorite bar, drinking beer. Robert turns to Peter and says,"You know, I'm tired of going through life without an education.Tomorrow I think I'll go the community college, and sign up for some classes." Peter agrees that it's a good idea, and the two leave. The next day, Robert goes down to the college and meets the Dean of Admissions, who signs him up for the four basic classes:Math, English, history, and Logic. "Logic?" Robert says. "What's that?The dean says, "I'll show you. Do you own a lawn mower?" "Yeah." "Then logically speaking, because you own a lawn mower, I think that you would have a yard." "That's true, I do have a yard." "I'm not done," the dean says. "Because you have a yard, I think logically that you would have a house." "Yes, I do have a house" "And because you have a house, I think that you might logically have a family." "I have a family." "I'm not done yet. Because you have a family, then logically you must have a wife." "Yes, I do have a wife." "And because you have a wife, then logic tells me you must be a heterosexual." "I am a heterosexual. That's amazing, you were able to find out all of that because I have a lawn mower." Excited to take the class now, Robert shakes the Dean's hand and leaves to go meet Peter at the bar.He tells Peter about his classes, how he is signed up for Math, English History, and Logic. "Logic?" Peter says, "What's that?" Robert says, "I'll show you. Do you have a lawn mower?" "No." "What are you, some sort of poo[bold][/bold]fter?" Georgem
  • Score: 0

1:49pm Mon 8 Oct 12

hulla baloo says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
Simple question, yes. But dont expect a simple answer. Maybe he will consult with his ficticious Sikh friend first.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]Simple question, yes. But dont expect a simple answer. Maybe he will consult with his ficticious Sikh friend first. hulla baloo
  • Score: 0

1:56pm Mon 8 Oct 12

George4th says...

The Unions who control SCC made the whole situation a lot worse!
>
Why do you think Councillor Keith Morrell resigned within days of Labour taking control of SCC?

" Cllr Morrell, who was made Cabinet member for efficiency and improvement, said he decided to resign after examining the dire state of the council’s finances and he could not defend a “dismantling of local government” to make savings."

It was perfectly clear to the Labour Council and the Unions the financial predicament SCC was facing. They chose to ignore it for their own political ideology! Chaos is the right word! This Council is taking us down the road to ruin................
.

NOTE: When the Labour Council came to power they knew that they
faced "an estimated £46m budget deficit over the next two years despite record cuts in the past two years"
The Unions who control SCC made the whole situation a lot worse! > Why do you think Councillor Keith Morrell resigned within days of Labour taking control of SCC? " Cllr Morrell, who was made Cabinet member for efficiency and improvement, said he decided to resign after examining the dire state of the council’s finances and he could not defend a “dismantling of local government” to make savings." It was perfectly clear to the Labour Council and the Unions the financial predicament SCC was facing. They chose to ignore it for their own political ideology! Chaos is the right word! This Council is taking us down the road to ruin................ . NOTE: When the Labour Council came to power they knew that they faced "an estimated £46m budget deficit over the next two years despite record cuts in the past two years" George4th
  • Score: 0

2:20pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Rockhopper says...

Maine Lobster wrote:
Rockhopper wrote: I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma nager level. Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public. It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton.
You are absolutley right but unfortunately it is staff in this bracket that look for the savings and they obviously don't earmark their own downfall. Cuts always end up at service delivery level where they are felt most. The performance management area is where it could be cut most effectively with no loss to the people of the city.
Performance management, monitoring, allocating and checking of work.
All menial tasks given to a highly paid supervisor/manager that could easily be carried out by a clerical/admin position on a substantially lower salary.
Just think how many instances of this exist in all the different departments of the Council.
Incredible wastage of tax payers money which I am sure Cllr Letts will be addressing.
[quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rockhopper[/bold] wrote: I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma nager level. Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public. It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton.[/p][/quote]You are absolutley right but unfortunately it is staff in this bracket that look for the savings and they obviously don't earmark their own downfall. Cuts always end up at service delivery level where they are felt most. The performance management area is where it could be cut most effectively with no loss to the people of the city.[/p][/quote]Performance management, monitoring, allocating and checking of work. All menial tasks given to a highly paid supervisor/manager that could easily be carried out by a clerical/admin position on a substantially lower salary. Just think how many instances of this exist in all the different departments of the Council. Incredible wastage of tax payers money which I am sure Cllr Letts will be addressing. Rockhopper
  • Score: 0

2:23pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

In fairness to NuLabour's axe man Cllr. Simon Letts it must be said that when he attended a meeting of TUSC while begging for their support for local election he'd made it clear that when in power NuLabour will also cut services and destroy jobs.

NuLabour's Dear Leader Cllr. Williams was also quoted in Echo that NuLabourites will cut 1500 jobs.

So the NuLabourites now behaving like Tories should be no surprise.

Only surprise is that most of the regular contributors on this site who used to attack Tories doing the same appear to have changed their tune. That is purset form of hypocrisy.
In fairness to NuLabour's axe man Cllr. Simon Letts it must be said that when he attended a meeting of TUSC while begging for their support for local election he'd made it clear that when in power NuLabour will also cut services and destroy jobs. NuLabour's Dear Leader Cllr. Williams was also quoted in Echo that NuLabourites will cut 1500 jobs. So the NuLabourites now behaving like Tories should be no surprise. Only surprise is that most of the regular contributors on this site who used to attack Tories doing the same appear to have changed their tune. That is purset form of hypocrisy. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

2:29pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

On the inside wrote:
Frankly if Simon Letts can manage to set a budget with this level of Condem Govt cuts coupled with past local Tory cuts and still only cut about 100 jobs he will deserve a nighthood.
Agree as he won't be deserving candidate for 'knighthood' for becoming the mad axe man of NuLabour and for betraying old Labour values he used to talk about, he certainly deserves NIGHTHOOD!!!
[quote][p][bold]On the inside[/bold] wrote: Frankly if Simon Letts can manage to set a budget with this level of Condem Govt cuts coupled with past local Tory cuts and still only cut about 100 jobs he will deserve a nighthood.[/p][/quote]Agree as he won't be deserving candidate for 'knighthood' for becoming the mad axe man of NuLabour and for betraying old Labour values he used to talk about, he certainly deserves NIGHTHOOD!!! Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

2:33pm Mon 8 Oct 12

southy says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy.
It takes spending money to make money.
Think about it.
if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens.
You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop.
This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse.
Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one. southy
  • Score: 0

2:50pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Georgem says...

Paramjit Bahia wrote:
In fairness to NuLabour's axe man Cllr. Simon Letts it must be said that when he attended a meeting of TUSC while begging for their support for local election he'd made it clear that when in power NuLabour will also cut services and destroy jobs.

NuLabour's Dear Leader Cllr. Williams was also quoted in Echo that NuLabourites will cut 1500 jobs.

So the NuLabourites now behaving like Tories should be no surprise.

Only surprise is that most of the regular contributors on this site who used to attack Tories doing the same appear to have changed their tune. That is purset form of hypocrisy.
Why's that hypocrisy? I don't buy into the idea that one has to decide on a party allegiance, and stick with it forever. It's not a football team, these are issues that affect our lives in very real ways. I'd counter that the people who always support their chosen party, regardless of that party's stance on issues, those people are guilty of not giving the issues any thought, and are in fact delegating the forming of their own opinions to someone else.
[quote][p][bold]Paramjit Bahia[/bold] wrote: In fairness to NuLabour's axe man Cllr. Simon Letts it must be said that when he attended a meeting of TUSC while begging for their support for local election he'd made it clear that when in power NuLabour will also cut services and destroy jobs. NuLabour's Dear Leader Cllr. Williams was also quoted in Echo that NuLabourites will cut 1500 jobs. So the NuLabourites now behaving like Tories should be no surprise. Only surprise is that most of the regular contributors on this site who used to attack Tories doing the same appear to have changed their tune. That is purset form of hypocrisy.[/p][/quote]Why's that hypocrisy? I don't buy into the idea that one has to decide on a party allegiance, and stick with it forever. It's not a football team, these are issues that affect our lives in very real ways. I'd counter that the people who always support their chosen party, regardless of that party's stance on issues, those people are guilty of not giving the issues any thought, and are in fact delegating the forming of their own opinions to someone else. Georgem
  • Score: 0

2:53pm Mon 8 Oct 12

chunky_lover says...

Good.
Good. chunky_lover
  • Score: 0

2:53pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Georgem says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy.
It takes spending money to make money.
Think about it.
if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens.
You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop.
This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse.
Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.
The larger question, which you simply flat-out refuse to ever answer is

"where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are NOT made unemployed"

So far, all you've ever offered in answer to repeated challenges, are some very noble desires to not make any cuts. At some point, you have to actually demonstrate where the money IS going to come from. Not a vague idea of where it ISN'T going to come from.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.[/p][/quote]The larger question, which you simply flat-out refuse to ever answer is "where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are NOT made unemployed" So far, all you've ever offered in answer to repeated challenges, are some very noble desires to not make any cuts. At some point, you have to actually demonstrate where the money IS going to come from. Not a vague idea of where it ISN'T going to come from. Georgem
  • Score: 0

2:54pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Ford Prefect says...

Oh Paramjit, you're being disingenuous. You've been a councillor both at county and district level. You know very well that the district auditor has sweeping powers and, if the accounts don't balance, not only will the councillors be personally liable but the council will then be administered by officials with no democratic input whatsoever.

It is not a reasoned argument to say that councillors should oppose all cuts and that, if they don't, this makes them no better than the Tories. I doubt very much that Simon Letts came "begging" for TUSC support given the derisory level of votes TUSC achieve but, as you say, he was honest enough to tell you that cuts would be required no matter who won control of the council.

I'm sure all Labour councillors would rather be able to spend the money on the servces the city needs but their budget is imposed by the national coalition. All I hope and believe is that they will do their very best to make any cuts as painless as possible for those involved either as employees or service users.

The alternative to Labour is not some fantasy TUSC/socialist Alliance. It's the Tories and I know which I'd prefer.
Oh Paramjit, you're being disingenuous. You've been a councillor both at county and district level. You know very well that the district auditor has sweeping powers and, if the accounts don't balance, not only will the councillors be personally liable but the council will then be administered by officials with no democratic input whatsoever. It is not a reasoned argument to say that councillors should oppose all cuts and that, if they don't, this makes them no better than the Tories. I doubt very much that Simon Letts came "begging" for TUSC support given the derisory level of votes TUSC achieve but, as you say, he was honest enough to tell you that cuts would be required no matter who won control of the council. I'm sure all Labour councillors would rather be able to spend the money on the servces the city needs but their budget is imposed by the national coalition. All I hope and believe is that they will do their very best to make any cuts as painless as possible for those involved either as employees or service users. The alternative to Labour is not some fantasy TUSC/socialist Alliance. It's the Tories and I know which I'd prefer. Ford Prefect
  • Score: 0

2:57pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Fieldbean says...

southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
The Green Party did campaign by saying that if elected then they would not cut services. In 2011 TUSC stood against many Green Candidates in Brighton and may of cost the Green's at least one seat (Hollingdean and Stanmer). Had the Green Party not had to fight a coalition vote by Labour and the Tories which brought down the Green budget then the Greens might of got a majority on the Council and brought in a budget where more services were kept running So in answer to Southy, who really doesn't care about the effort Greens goto, to push through a budget that would protect people and the environment, you are wrong. And if you are representating the voice of TUSC in Southampton, I think the message voters are getting is - You Can't Trust TUSC-
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]The Green Party did campaign by saying that if elected then they would not cut services. In 2011 TUSC stood against many Green Candidates in Brighton and may of cost the Green's at least one seat (Hollingdean and Stanmer). Had the Green Party not had to fight a coalition vote by Labour and the Tories which brought down the Green budget then the Greens might of got a majority on the Council and brought in a budget where more services were kept running So in answer to Southy, who really doesn't care about the effort Greens goto, to push through a budget that would protect people and the environment, you are wrong. And if you are representating the voice of TUSC in Southampton, I think the message voters are getting is - You Can't Trust TUSC- Fieldbean
  • Score: 0

2:57pm Mon 8 Oct 12

freefinker says...

southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy.
It takes spending money to make money.
Think about it.
if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens.
You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop.
This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse.
Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.
.. none of that answers the question I asked, does it?

We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past.

So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'?

So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government.

If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.
[quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.[/p][/quote].. none of that answers the question I asked, does it? We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past. So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'? So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government. If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now. freefinker
  • Score: 0

3:20pm Mon 8 Oct 12

MGRA says...

many people mistakingly read politics into this issue. there are no politics really apart from the labour party having their strings pulled by the greedy Union fat cats. Apart from that is a simple case of management of services and funds with very little real choice. But why labour ALWAYS muck it up is due to the fact they have no regard for the book balance and always put spending before analysis.
many people mistakingly read politics into this issue. there are no politics really apart from the labour party having their strings pulled by the greedy Union fat cats. Apart from that is a simple case of management of services and funds with very little real choice. But why labour ALWAYS muck it up is due to the fact they have no regard for the book balance and always put spending before analysis. MGRA
  • Score: 0

3:28pm Mon 8 Oct 12

loosehead says...

So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts?
But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it?
Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way?
do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions?
If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy?
The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions.
how was this a good deal?
Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments.
How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies?
This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money?
So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts? But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it? Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way? do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions? If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy? The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions. how was this a good deal? Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments. How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies? This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money? loosehead
  • Score: 0

3:58pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Subject48 says...

I would rather this government be run by chimps. They still will throw feces at each other but at least they can be paid in bananas.

The corporate fat cats who pay for the elections and experts whom they hire will continue to make the decisions anyhow. Plus they will be more fun to watch, and, due to lack of speech we would not have to listen to their petty washed out lies and squabbles which spew out of their mouths.

Ask yourself this: what the main cause of a deficit?

Unemployment.

Why? Because no tax money coming in from those unemployed. Money is only leaving to combat the crime, health and other problems caused by the unemployment stemming from underfuned education and lack of proper social structure.

Thus leaving the country at the mercy of corporations and conglomerates. Which solicit only one thing: increasing profit margins at any and all cost. This is our reality. The digital credit which appears on the bank screens of the above, which can be indefinitely produced by the world bank.

Too many people, not enough jobs.

Resolution, either kill off part of the population,(bit harsh so I would not recommend) Re-introduce slavery(again I don’t approve) or implement population control laws like they have done in china, and strict immigration laws. In 3-4 generations most of the critical issues we face would be resolved I honestly believe.

As a society and more importantly as a species we have to take responsibility. We need to stop doing what we want but start doing what we have to.

The problems we face today and will face in 10,20,30,40+ years time cannot be simply fixed by cutting one budget to fix another. If you have a bucket full of holes simply removing one plug from one hole to the next means the water will still leak out, be it at a different rate and in another part of the bucket.

You need a new bucket.

Of course I don’t expect anyone to understand or agree with this philosophy. In fact I expect everyone to tell me I have lost the plot, that I live in an alternative universe. But just maybe it is you that’s been pulled out of that universe by the monkeys tricked into thinking there is no alternative….

Everyone will just forget about this, go down the pub moan about this and be on their merry way for their annually Tenerife holiday.

And the monkeys will keep on throwing feces at each other dragging us into their ridiculous arguments about who is to blame and who should lead this farce of a government.
I would rather this government be run by chimps. They still will throw feces at each other but at least they can be paid in bananas. The corporate fat cats who pay for the elections and experts whom they hire will continue to make the decisions anyhow. Plus they will be more fun to watch, and, due to lack of speech we would not have to listen to their petty washed out lies and squabbles which spew out of their mouths. Ask yourself this: what the main cause of a deficit? Unemployment. Why? Because no tax money coming in from those unemployed. Money is only leaving to combat the crime, health and other problems caused by the unemployment stemming from underfuned education and lack of proper social structure. Thus leaving the country at the mercy of corporations and conglomerates. Which solicit only one thing: increasing profit margins at any and all cost. This is our reality. The digital credit which appears on the bank screens of the above, which can be indefinitely produced by the world bank. Too many people, not enough jobs. Resolution, either kill off part of the population,(bit harsh so I would not recommend) Re-introduce slavery(again I don’t approve) or implement population control laws like they have done in china, and strict immigration laws. In 3-4 generations most of the critical issues we face would be resolved I honestly believe. As a society and more importantly as a species we have to take responsibility. We need to stop doing what we want but start doing what we have to. The problems we face today and will face in 10,20,30,40+ years time cannot be simply fixed by cutting one budget to fix another. If you have a bucket full of holes simply removing one plug from one hole to the next means the water will still leak out, be it at a different rate and in another part of the bucket. You need a new bucket. Of course I don’t expect anyone to understand or agree with this philosophy. In fact I expect everyone to tell me I have lost the plot, that I live in an alternative universe. But just maybe it is you that’s been pulled out of that universe by the monkeys tricked into thinking there is no alternative…. Everyone will just forget about this, go down the pub moan about this and be on their merry way for their annually Tenerife holiday. And the monkeys will keep on throwing feces at each other dragging us into their ridiculous arguments about who is to blame and who should lead this farce of a government. Subject48
  • Score: 0

4:01pm Mon 8 Oct 12

aldermoorboy says...

Well said Loosehead, correct as usual.
Georgem I loved your Southy bit, I think you and Southy could always earn a living doing an act opposite each other, you would go down a storm on the University campus.
Advice to Labour
1/. re introduce small pay cuts for the better off at the council.
2/. Take the two union men off the pay role.
3/. Have two less Cabinet members.
I have more advice for you when you have completed these, good luck with this home work.
Well said Loosehead, correct as usual. Georgem I loved your Southy bit, I think you and Southy could always earn a living doing an act opposite each other, you would go down a storm on the University campus. Advice to Labour 1/. re introduce small pay cuts for the better off at the council. 2/. Take the two union men off the pay role. 3/. Have two less Cabinet members. I have more advice for you when you have completed these, good luck with this home work. aldermoorboy
  • Score: 0

4:36pm Mon 8 Oct 12

thinklikealocal says...

loosehead wrote:
So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts? But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it? Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way? do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions? If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy? The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions. how was this a good deal? Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments. How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies? This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money?
You really are a complete drongo. If you have a temporary job somewhere, and are not kept on, how can that be being made redundant. Grow up and only post of you have something useful to add to the debate. You ramble and drone on, repeating yourself and often making very little sense. BORING.
FACT, current governement have made HUGE cuts to Council budgets. It is INEVITABLE that this will lead to job cuts. If Royston Smith sways anything else would have happened under his leadership then he is a bigger moron than you!
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts? But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it? Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way? do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions? If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy? The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions. how was this a good deal? Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments. How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies? This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money?[/p][/quote]You really are a complete drongo. If you have a temporary job somewhere, and are not kept on, how can that be being made redundant. Grow up and only post of you have something useful to add to the debate. You ramble and drone on, repeating yourself and often making very little sense. BORING. FACT, current governement have made HUGE cuts to Council budgets. It is INEVITABLE that this will lead to job cuts. If Royston Smith sways anything else would have happened under his leadership then he is a bigger moron than you! thinklikealocal
  • Score: 0

4:47pm Mon 8 Oct 12

commonsence says...

Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem.
Untill a sustainable solution
can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers.
I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!!
Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem. Untill a sustainable solution can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers. I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!! commonsence
  • Score: 0

5:13pm Mon 8 Oct 12

George4th says...

commonsence wrote:
Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem.
Untill a sustainable solution
can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers.
I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!!
The bottom line is that we were (are) living above our means. From the late nineties, people were encouraged to take out loans, borrow money, spend on credit cards, "I want it now" attitude. What did you expect?
>
The people of the UK got themselves into trouble!
>
The government of the day did not invest in the future of UK Plc and our young and unborn will be left to pay the price.
>
The coalition is stabilising our economy in the most difficult circumstances.
And who sits there criticising the coalition? The supporters from the Labour party who got us into this awful mess!
[quote][p][bold]commonsence[/bold] wrote: Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem. Untill a sustainable solution can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers. I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]The bottom line is that we were (are) living above our means. From the late nineties, people were encouraged to take out loans, borrow money, spend on credit cards, "I want it now" attitude. What did you expect? > The people of the UK got themselves into trouble! > The government of the day did not invest in the future of UK Plc and our young and unborn will be left to pay the price. > The coalition is stabilising our economy in the most difficult circumstances. And who sits there criticising the coalition? The supporters from the Labour party who got us into this awful mess! George4th
  • Score: 0

5:21pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

Ford Prefect wrote:
Oh Paramjit, you're being disingenuous. You've been a councillor both at county and district level. You know very well that the district auditor has sweeping powers and, if the accounts don't balance, not only will the councillors be personally liable but the council will then be administered by officials with no democratic input whatsoever.

It is not a reasoned argument to say that councillors should oppose all cuts and that, if they don't, this makes them no better than the Tories. I doubt very much that Simon Letts came "begging" for TUSC support given the derisory level of votes TUSC achieve but, as you say, he was honest enough to tell you that cuts would be required no matter who won control of the council.

I'm sure all Labour councillors would rather be able to spend the money on the servces the city needs but their budget is imposed by the national coalition. All I hope and believe is that they will do their very best to make any cuts as painless as possible for those involved either as employees or service users.

The alternative to Labour is not some fantasy TUSC/socialist Alliance. It's the Tories and I know which I'd prefer.
Being a well informed person I am sure you will know which version of Tories you prefer. I have the feeling it will be the ones whose leader is inspired by Disraeli i.e. The NuLabour.

I will respect your right to follow whoever you like. although if you start following Cameron or Clegg’s lot I may be bit disappointed, but you may will be able to mitigate that on some of the issues even they are more honest than Milliband led mob of turn coats, who have forgotten what The Labour Party was all about.

Yes before last election through Parry McMillan Simon did request for a meeting with TUSC. Although I am not member of any political party, I also attended that meeting (Unlike NuLabour I find TUSC is not secretive) where Simon was asking TUSC not to put any candidates against Labour, on the basis that “We are on the same side”.

I suggest you check it out with Simon Letts and let me know what he says.

As I am not aware of all the inside workings of TUSC (Yes I nominated their candidate in our ward and voted for him) I am relying on the information once posted on this site by Southy, that because of Simon’s request TUSC did not field candidates against NuLabour in 3 wards.

I have few times posted my views about local government finance on this site, and yes I have acknowledged that local authorities under all political parties are facing financial restraints because of massive control by central government over financing arrangements.

Rather than tackling the real culprits in London unfortunately virtually all the local authorities keep on victimising local people by keep on cutting their services and jobs of workers. I have always believed that with ever changing demand and nature of services needed, local authorities will often have to adopt the style of services and make changes in the nature of the work force. But not because of down right dictatorial whims of any central government.

In my view local authorities should unite and stand up to central government and start demanding that it should provide them with sufficient financial help to run the services properly.

If central governments under all three main parties can afford to blow billions while bombing other nations on behalf of American business interests, contribute to EU (whose own auditors often refuse to sign off accounts) contributing for propping up Euro Zone (Thanks to Gordon Brown who saved us from joining it) and bailing out Banks (Some of which are now found out to be involved in all kinds of scandals) and grants to big businesses and worse of all slush funds which are covered under the seductive heading of foreign aid, then the same central government could surely afford to contribute sufficient funds to local councils.

Yes I am aware of procedural threats faced by local councillors. But I am not made of blood that runs away from toothless paper tigers, as most of local councillors and their apologists like your good self tend to do.
Local councillors and their excuse makers like you should be uniting and demanding liberation from unfair and unjust laws in organised manner. Otherwise nothing will change apart from frustrations of people with local councils.

Colonies of America did exactly that and became USA, while doing exactly that Mahatama Gandhi created the situation that empire upon which sun never used to set, if there is bit of cloud sometimes, does not even see it for whole day.

My friend problem is not the ConDem Coalition or even Ed Milliband and Ed Balls etc. Real problem is local councillors and people like you who criticise them if they are Tories but keep on making lame excuses for their lack of courage and leadership when they belong to Disraeli inspired Conservatised NuLabour.

While back some intelligent contributor on this site had replied to my concern about why local councillors do not challenge central government. Explanation was very simple most of them have selfish ambitions for well paid comfortable seats in parliament. I believe that contributor was spot on.

Now you tell me if Dear Leader Williams and Simon Letts have no such ambitions…Please check with them before replying, because little birds giving me the info may be well informed.
[quote][p][bold]Ford Prefect[/bold] wrote: Oh Paramjit, you're being disingenuous. You've been a councillor both at county and district level. You know very well that the district auditor has sweeping powers and, if the accounts don't balance, not only will the councillors be personally liable but the council will then be administered by officials with no democratic input whatsoever. It is not a reasoned argument to say that councillors should oppose all cuts and that, if they don't, this makes them no better than the Tories. I doubt very much that Simon Letts came "begging" for TUSC support given the derisory level of votes TUSC achieve but, as you say, he was honest enough to tell you that cuts would be required no matter who won control of the council. I'm sure all Labour councillors would rather be able to spend the money on the servces the city needs but their budget is imposed by the national coalition. All I hope and believe is that they will do their very best to make any cuts as painless as possible for those involved either as employees or service users. The alternative to Labour is not some fantasy TUSC/socialist Alliance. It's the Tories and I know which I'd prefer.[/p][/quote]Being a well informed person I am sure you will know which version of Tories you prefer. I have the feeling it will be the ones whose leader is inspired by Disraeli i.e. The NuLabour. I will respect your right to follow whoever you like. although if you start following Cameron or Clegg’s lot I may be bit disappointed, but you may will be able to mitigate that on some of the issues even they are more honest than Milliband led mob of turn coats, who have forgotten what The Labour Party was all about. Yes before last election through Parry McMillan Simon did request for a meeting with TUSC. Although I am not member of any political party, I also attended that meeting (Unlike NuLabour I find TUSC is not secretive) where Simon was asking TUSC not to put any candidates against Labour, on the basis that “We are on the same side”. I suggest you check it out with Simon Letts and let me know what he says. As I am not aware of all the inside workings of TUSC (Yes I nominated their candidate in our ward and voted for him) I am relying on the information once posted on this site by Southy, that because of Simon’s request TUSC did not field candidates against NuLabour in 3 wards. I have few times posted my views about local government finance on this site, and yes I have acknowledged that local authorities under all political parties are facing financial restraints because of massive control by central government over financing arrangements. Rather than tackling the real culprits in London unfortunately virtually all the local authorities keep on victimising local people by keep on cutting their services and jobs of workers. I have always believed that with ever changing demand and nature of services needed, local authorities will often have to adopt the style of services and make changes in the nature of the work force. But not because of down right dictatorial whims of any central government. In my view local authorities should unite and stand up to central government and start demanding that it should provide them with sufficient financial help to run the services properly. If central governments under all three main parties can afford to blow billions while bombing other nations on behalf of American business interests, contribute to EU (whose own auditors often refuse to sign off accounts) contributing for propping up Euro Zone (Thanks to Gordon Brown who saved us from joining it) and bailing out Banks (Some of which are now found out to be involved in all kinds of scandals) and grants to big businesses and worse of all slush funds which are covered under the seductive heading of foreign aid, then the same central government could surely afford to contribute sufficient funds to local councils. Yes I am aware of procedural threats faced by local councillors. But I am not made of blood that runs away from toothless paper tigers, as most of local councillors and their apologists like your good self tend to do. Local councillors and their excuse makers like you should be uniting and demanding liberation from unfair and unjust laws in organised manner. Otherwise nothing will change apart from frustrations of people with local councils. Colonies of America did exactly that and became USA, while doing exactly that Mahatama Gandhi created the situation that empire upon which sun never used to set, if there is bit of cloud sometimes, does not even see it for whole day. My friend problem is not the ConDem Coalition or even Ed Milliband and Ed Balls etc. Real problem is local councillors and people like you who criticise them if they are Tories but keep on making lame excuses for their lack of courage and leadership when they belong to Disraeli inspired Conservatised NuLabour. While back some intelligent contributor on this site had replied to my concern about why local councillors do not challenge central government. Explanation was very simple most of them have selfish ambitions for well paid comfortable seats in parliament. I believe that contributor was spot on. Now you tell me if Dear Leader Williams and Simon Letts have no such ambitions…Please check with them before replying, because little birds giving me the info may be well informed. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

5:23pm Mon 8 Oct 12

SaintM says...

This is why they will not give change at the itchen toll booth, they hope to raise millions through us having no change, good plan after all?
This is why they will not give change at the itchen toll booth, they hope to raise millions through us having no change, good plan after all? SaintM
  • Score: 0

5:37pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Inform Al says...

loosehead wrote:
FoysCornerBoy wrote:
The 'Echo' may be right to describe the current budget situation at Southampton City Council as 'chaos'. However it would be entirely wrong to lay the blame for this at the door of the current Labour administration.

Central (Conservative/ Liberal Democrat) government cuts to local authority budgets since 2010 have hit Councils like Southampton particularly hard and they come on top of reductions in budgets in other services such as the NHS. This contrasts with the grant allocations for Conservative-control


led county councils like Dorset or Surrey.

The situation in Southampton has been made far worse by the profligacy and mismanagement of Council finances by the previous local Conservative administration. At least £8 million of the cuts that are being forced on the Council are as a direct result of weak and ideologically driven priorities of the Conservatives these past three years.

This is an appalling legacy for the current Labour administration to have inherited and I have to admire Simon Letts' candour in being up front about a really dreadful situation.

I would like to see the City's forward-thinking political parties, the trade unions, community groups, local businesses and (yes) the local press pull together for once and speak up for the City to make sure that citizens get a better deal from this government in terms of Council grant.

Unless the central government changes tack on public service expenditure, there will be chaos on a scale that is unimaginable.
No? wasn't it a Labour Government that slashed £25million from our money to give to the North?
Wasn't it a Labour Government that left this country up the creek with out a paddle?
The Tories tried to save jobs & tried to get the Unions to negotiate but as history shows the Unions refused to negotiate & we had strikes.
You can continue to blame Royston for implementing pay cuts but did the Unions leave him any choice?
In the past a tory council would/could have just gone for job cuts but the last council didn't it tried to restrict job losses & keep as many jobs as possible.
Labour are cutting 200 temporary posts moving 200 permanent workers into those posts so in fact we're losing 200 permanent jobs now we're losing 100 more .
Services to be cut & job losses this is exactly what Labour told the voters the Tories would do & this wouldn't happen under Labour?
Labour knew the level of the cut in funding so why say they didn't?
They lied about services & jobs & they've lied about knowing the extent of the cut in funding so how can you lot on here dare defend this lying council?
They've paid back a debt to the Unions even though they know this city can't afford it so how's this doing the right thing?
Ask the 100 who will lose their jobs(permanent) or the 200 temps who've lost their jobs if a small cut in pay (2%)& a small loss of jobs (80) or 300 job losses & a small percentage of workers receiving a restoration of their pay what option they'd choose & I think I know what they would opt for
Getting pretty obvious that there are a lot of party sheep, with about as much nous, posting on this site.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]FoysCornerBoy[/bold] wrote: The 'Echo' may be right to describe the current budget situation at Southampton City Council as 'chaos'. However it would be entirely wrong to lay the blame for this at the door of the current Labour administration. Central (Conservative/ Liberal Democrat) government cuts to local authority budgets since 2010 have hit Councils like Southampton particularly hard and they come on top of reductions in budgets in other services such as the NHS. This contrasts with the grant allocations for Conservative-control led county councils like Dorset or Surrey. The situation in Southampton has been made far worse by the profligacy and mismanagement of Council finances by the previous local Conservative administration. At least £8 million of the cuts that are being forced on the Council are as a direct result of weak and ideologically driven priorities of the Conservatives these past three years. This is an appalling legacy for the current Labour administration to have inherited and I have to admire Simon Letts' candour in being up front about a really dreadful situation. I would like to see the City's forward-thinking political parties, the trade unions, community groups, local businesses and (yes) the local press pull together for once and speak up for the City to make sure that citizens get a better deal from this government in terms of Council grant. Unless the central government changes tack on public service expenditure, there will be chaos on a scale that is unimaginable.[/p][/quote]No? wasn't it a Labour Government that slashed £25million from our money to give to the North? Wasn't it a Labour Government that left this country up the creek with out a paddle? The Tories tried to save jobs & tried to get the Unions to negotiate but as history shows the Unions refused to negotiate & we had strikes. You can continue to blame Royston for implementing pay cuts but did the Unions leave him any choice? In the past a tory council would/could have just gone for job cuts but the last council didn't it tried to restrict job losses & keep as many jobs as possible. Labour are cutting 200 temporary posts moving 200 permanent workers into those posts so in fact we're losing 200 permanent jobs now we're losing 100 more . Services to be cut & job losses this is exactly what Labour told the voters the Tories would do & this wouldn't happen under Labour? Labour knew the level of the cut in funding so why say they didn't? They lied about services & jobs & they've lied about knowing the extent of the cut in funding so how can you lot on here dare defend this lying council? They've paid back a debt to the Unions even though they know this city can't afford it so how's this doing the right thing? Ask the 100 who will lose their jobs(permanent) or the 200 temps who've lost their jobs if a small cut in pay (2%)& a small loss of jobs (80) or 300 job losses & a small percentage of workers receiving a restoration of their pay what option they'd choose & I think I know what they would opt for[/p][/quote]Getting pretty obvious that there are a lot of party sheep, with about as much nous, posting on this site. Inform Al
  • Score: 0

5:39pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Paramjit Bahia says...

loosehead wrote:
So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts?
But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it?
Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way?
do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions?
If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy?
The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions.
how was this a good deal?
Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments.
How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies?
This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money?
I am surprised when even a self confirmed Conservative supporter loosehead can work out the realities of Dear Leader led NuLabourites in Southampton, then why the well paid full time union officers could no explain all this in simple terms to their members?

If these workers were about to thrashed by male version of Maggie Thatcher the Smith led Tories, now with the help of self serving union officers they are going to be screwed by Disreali inspired NuLabourites.
[quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts? But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it? Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way? do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions? If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy? The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions. how was this a good deal? Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments. How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies? This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money?[/p][/quote]I am surprised when even a self confirmed Conservative supporter loosehead can work out the realities of Dear Leader led NuLabourites in Southampton, then why the well paid full time union officers could no explain all this in simple terms to their members? If these workers were about to thrashed by male version of Maggie Thatcher the Smith led Tories, now with the help of self serving union officers they are going to be screwed by Disreali inspired NuLabourites. Paramjit Bahia
  • Score: 0

5:45pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Linesman says...

Royston's chickens have come home to roost on the new administration.

How much money was spent on the new White Elephant Museum?

It has to be staffed and maintained.

How much did it cost to have the battle with the Unions?

When you add to this the fact that Westminster put a cap on council tax, meaning that it could not be increased to meet the rising costs linked to inflation, is it any wonder that Southampton City Council is facing problems?
Royston's chickens have come home to roost on the new administration. How much money was spent on the new White Elephant Museum? It has to be staffed and maintained. How much did it cost to have the battle with the Unions? When you add to this the fact that Westminster put a cap on council tax, meaning that it could not be increased to meet the rising costs linked to inflation, is it any wonder that Southampton City Council is facing problems? Linesman
  • Score: 0

6:08pm Mon 8 Oct 12

andysaints007 says...

Get rid of the whole planning department first! Not one single person in that department can do their job properly anyway! The move on to whoever is responsible for traffic light sequences in the slowest moving city in the land!!!!!!!
Get rid of the whole planning department first! Not one single person in that department can do their job properly anyway! The move on to whoever is responsible for traffic light sequences in the slowest moving city in the land!!!!!!! andysaints007
  • Score: 0

6:17pm Mon 8 Oct 12

skin2000 says...

commonsence wrote:
Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem.
Untill a sustainable solution
can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers.
I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!!
There is probably not an answer.
[quote][p][bold]commonsence[/bold] wrote: Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem. Untill a sustainable solution can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers. I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]There is probably not an answer. skin2000
  • Score: 0

7:35pm Mon 8 Oct 12

kenbaileysteeth says...

Southampton Council Clueless!!

You alll blame each other and give a million excuses. The fact is none of the elected parties could organise a childrens tea party.
Meanwhile you mess with all your staffs terms and conditions and one round of redundances after another leaving all of your staff completly demoralised.

Easy answer still too many overpaid underperforming clueless morons at the top. Cut from the top downwards not from the bottom.
Southampton Council Clueless!! You alll blame each other and give a million excuses. The fact is none of the elected parties could organise a childrens tea party. Meanwhile you mess with all your staffs terms and conditions and one round of redundances after another leaving all of your staff completly demoralised. Easy answer still too many overpaid underperforming clueless morons at the top. Cut from the top downwards not from the bottom. kenbaileysteeth
  • Score: 0

7:45pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Subject48 says...

@commonsense I have some ideas. See if you like any of them...

Cap the population growth/immigration to limit unemployment. This will not happen overnight. This will resolve most of the problems in the long run.

Nationalize the car insurance industry government rates, being paid to the government for something the government insists you need to have. So no more profiteering for the big companies which leech off us…

Make the gov jobs available to those that want to do it for free. This will get rid of the gold diggers and the selfish self driven cockroaches and leave those that want to actually make a difference and are not for sale.

Health service?

Legalize all drugs and charge accordingly. By licensing, those registered as drug takers will then be eligible to pay higher tax NI rates. Same with drinkiners and smokers.

By doing this it should cut "crime prevention" costs maintaining the poxy war on drugs that is the money sucking black hole with no bottom. If you want to do drugs, fine. We cant stop you. Buy them from us and if you need medical help you sure as hell can pay for it compared to someone who does not.

Improving infrastructure?

Get our troops back home tomorow.

Ask hem to make the roadwork’s as they are already being paid and most of them will be much better qualified and suited to do the job well. In the very very unlikely event that we get invaded by Afghanistan or Iraq we can redeploy on our home soil as they will already be here... And if this occurs, re-contract the road works to private companies which will take an arm and a leg and do a rubbish job so we will contract them again in the future.

And if any of this seems drastic I can’t pick a different word to describe the current mess this country is in. So the term drastic time’s call for drastic measures springs to mind.

I have a few more ideas but just threw some out there.... :)
@commonsense I have some ideas. See if you like any of them... Cap the population growth/immigration to limit unemployment. This will not happen overnight. This will resolve most of the problems in the long run. Nationalize the car insurance industry government rates, being paid to the government for something the government insists you need to have. So no more profiteering for the big companies which leech off us… Make the gov jobs available to those that want to do it for free. This will get rid of the gold diggers and the selfish self driven cockroaches and leave those that want to actually make a difference and are not for sale. Health service? Legalize all drugs and charge accordingly. By licensing, those registered as drug takers will then be eligible to pay higher tax NI rates. Same with drinkiners and smokers. By doing this it should cut "crime prevention" costs maintaining the poxy war on drugs that is the money sucking black hole with no bottom. If you want to do drugs, fine. We cant stop you. Buy them from us and if you need medical help you sure as hell can pay for it compared to someone who does not. Improving infrastructure? Get our troops back home tomorow. Ask hem to make the roadwork’s as they are already being paid and most of them will be much better qualified and suited to do the job well. In the very very unlikely event that we get invaded by Afghanistan or Iraq we can redeploy on our home soil as they will already be here... And if this occurs, re-contract the road works to private companies which will take an arm and a leg and do a rubbish job so we will contract them again in the future. And if any of this seems drastic I can’t pick a different word to describe the current mess this country is in. So the term drastic time’s call for drastic measures springs to mind. I have a few more ideas but just threw some out there.... :) Subject48
  • Score: 0

7:56pm Mon 8 Oct 12

freefinker says...

skin2000 wrote:
commonsence wrote:
Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem.
Untill a sustainable solution
can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers.
I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!!
There is probably not an answer.
.. agreed. It's very depressing, but as a nation, as well as collectively as individuals, we have both spent money we didn't have for at least the past 40 years.

We need to start living within our means - economically as well as environmentally. That means cuts to our standard of living until we do live within our monetary revenues; and to use only our fair share planetary resources, and only then at a rate with which the ecosystem can deal with our wastes without causing further harm.

Our relative affluence over the last two centuries has been the result of overt colonial exploitation followed by equally bad indirect corporate colonialism.

But the games over; it’s just nobody wants to accept it.
[quote][p][bold]skin2000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]commonsence[/bold] wrote: Whatever party is in power either local council or the government , something has to be done about the countries debt problem. Untill a sustainable solution can be found matters of paycuts , job losses, cuts in services etc affecting every-one will continue. Many people know what is wrong but no-one is coming up with positive answers. I dont know what the answer is !!!!!!!!!!![/p][/quote]There is probably not an answer.[/p][/quote].. agreed. It's very depressing, but as a nation, as well as collectively as individuals, we have both spent money we didn't have for at least the past 40 years. We need to start living within our means - economically as well as environmentally. That means cuts to our standard of living until we do live within our monetary revenues; and to use only our fair share planetary resources, and only then at a rate with which the ecosystem can deal with our wastes without causing further harm. Our relative affluence over the last two centuries has been the result of overt colonial exploitation followed by equally bad indirect corporate colonialism. But the games over; it’s just nobody wants to accept it. freefinker
  • Score: 0

8:01pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Maine Lobster says...

Rockhopper wrote:
Maine Lobster wrote:
Rockhopper wrote: I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma nager level. Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public. It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton.
You are absolutley right but unfortunately it is staff in this bracket that look for the savings and they obviously don't earmark their own downfall. Cuts always end up at service delivery level where they are felt most. The performance management area is where it could be cut most effectively with no loss to the people of the city.
Performance management, monitoring, allocating and checking of work.
All menial tasks given to a highly paid supervisor/manager that could easily be carried out by a clerical/admin position on a substantially lower salary.
Just think how many instances of this exist in all the different departments of the Council.
Incredible wastage of tax payers money which I am sure Cllr Letts will be addressing.
If only that were the outcome we would all be better off. Alas, I doubt it will happen.
[quote][p][bold]Rockhopper[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maine Lobster[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Rockhopper[/bold] wrote: I'm sure Councillor Simon Letts knows SCC are over-staffed at supervisor/middle-ma nager level. Many of these employees are on salaries of £30-£60K per year which could easily be cut without any reduction in the services provided to the public. It is clear the priority for SCC must be to retain front line staff who actually provide a service to the Council Tax payers of Southampton.[/p][/quote]You are absolutley right but unfortunately it is staff in this bracket that look for the savings and they obviously don't earmark their own downfall. Cuts always end up at service delivery level where they are felt most. The performance management area is where it could be cut most effectively with no loss to the people of the city.[/p][/quote]Performance management, monitoring, allocating and checking of work. All menial tasks given to a highly paid supervisor/manager that could easily be carried out by a clerical/admin position on a substantially lower salary. Just think how many instances of this exist in all the different departments of the Council. Incredible wastage of tax payers money which I am sure Cllr Letts will be addressing.[/p][/quote]If only that were the outcome we would all be better off. Alas, I doubt it will happen. Maine Lobster
  • Score: 0

8:13pm Mon 8 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

I actually feel sorry for this Council, they have an impossible task ahead. They are forced to make cuts from Government and are also forced to not make cuts by the Unions.

This Council are in a no win situation. Until they cut the Union cord, which they can't due to funding, they will have to keep the line from many sides.

I wish them luck as a resident of Southampton and hope they make the right decisions for us ALL wether we're rich poor or whatever.
I actually feel sorry for this Council, they have an impossible task ahead. They are forced to make cuts from Government and are also forced to not make cuts by the Unions. This Council are in a no win situation. Until they cut the Union cord, which they can't due to funding, they will have to keep the line from many sides. I wish them luck as a resident of Southampton and hope they make the right decisions for us ALL wether we're rich poor or whatever. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

8:22pm Mon 8 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

I think I'm joining the workers side by saying..... 'Don't increase my Council Tax'!!!!!

They don't want a pay cut, I don't want my Council Tax increased. We are united afterall!
I think I'm joining the workers side by saying..... 'Don't increase my Council Tax'!!!!! They don't want a pay cut, I don't want my Council Tax increased. We are united afterall! IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:04pm Mon 8 Oct 12

loosehead says...

thinklikealocal wrote:
loosehead wrote:
So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts? But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it? Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way? do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions? If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy? The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions. how was this a good deal? Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments. How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies? This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money?
You really are a complete drongo. If you have a temporary job somewhere, and are not kept on, how can that be being made redundant. Grow up and only post of you have something useful to add to the debate. You ramble and drone on, repeating yourself and often making very little sense. BORING.
FACT, current governement have made HUGE cuts to Council budgets. It is INEVITABLE that this will lead to job cuts. If Royston Smith sways anything else would have happened under his leadership then he is a bigger moron than you!
I thought you were supposed to be intelligent?
200 temporary posts to go to make room for 200 permanent workers means that 200 permanent posts will be redundant or that's how it was put to us when my company changed our working practices & made us do three people's jobs.also if we didn't take them we were deemed to be refusing to work.
But I forgot you were on here advocating job losses to have pay restored weren't you?
[quote][p][bold]thinklikealocal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]loosehead[/bold] wrote: So as Paramjit has said Williams & Letts said there would be 1,500 job cuts? But when Williams said 1-10 refuse collectors to go he immediately said he wasn't quoted correctly & he never said it? Since then they've said they were opting for the Sunderland way? do away with the jobs & put the workers in Temporary positions if they don't accept it they get a small pay out which is not called redundancy as they were offered temporary positions? If they take the temp positions they haven't said if they would have to take lower pay plus a lower pay out if they can't find permanent job after four months but once again this isn't being called redundancy? The pay deal ( restoration) came with two conditions 1/no court action. 2/ lower redundancy (what redundancy)payments & lower pensions. how was this a good deal? Under the Tory deal once the Government started to restore payments to the councils the wage cuts would be restored with no cuts to the pension or redundancy pay ments. How can they say 1,500 job losses but no redundancies? This can only mean many workers are going to find them selves out of work with a low payment & not made redundant? does this mean they've just left? or are they being sacked? how will that effect their claim for Social security/Dole money?[/p][/quote]You really are a complete drongo. If you have a temporary job somewhere, and are not kept on, how can that be being made redundant. Grow up and only post of you have something useful to add to the debate. You ramble and drone on, repeating yourself and often making very little sense. BORING. FACT, current governement have made HUGE cuts to Council budgets. It is INEVITABLE that this will lead to job cuts. If Royston Smith sways anything else would have happened under his leadership then he is a bigger moron than you![/p][/quote]I thought you were supposed to be intelligent? 200 temporary posts to go to make room for 200 permanent workers means that 200 permanent posts will be redundant or that's how it was put to us when my company changed our working practices & made us do three people's jobs.also if we didn't take them we were deemed to be refusing to work. But I forgot you were on here advocating job losses to have pay restored weren't you? loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:19pm Mon 8 Oct 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
I think I'm joining the workers side by saying..... 'Don't increase my Council Tax'!!!!!

They don't want a pay cut, I don't want my Council Tax increased. We are united afterall!
There were certain council workers (thinklikealocal but live in Eastleigh) that were on here saying the council never asked us to take a pay cut to save jobs why not cut jobs as I don't want my pay cut.
Now they've got their wish but they still come on here & try to justify 200 temps losing there jobs plus 200 permanent workers being moved to those jobs for four months & then what?
then there's now 100 more permanent posts to go but don't worry they can join the other 200 in temporary work for four months so there won't be any redundancies but they will get a low pay off if they can't find work in four months but it's not redundancy?
If these people are not made redundant but are out of work how do they claim social?
exactly how did they lose their jobs?
Ironlady is this person & the left that stupid?
200 jobs being done & must need to be done & suddenly there's no one to do them?
1-10 refuse workers go & look we have 200 low paid positions to fill do you want a job or are you refusing work?
just how can't the left & union members oh! & council workers see this?
I've been called a drongo by a lady who only thinks of herself yet there were people out on strike who weren't taking a pay cut for the likes of her.
I know the sort of name I would like to call her but won't .
I also could sit & gloat & say I told you so but that's not fair on the workers they've been lied to by both the unions & the Labour party & I feel they're now being shafted
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: I think I'm joining the workers side by saying..... 'Don't increase my Council Tax'!!!!! They don't want a pay cut, I don't want my Council Tax increased. We are united afterall![/p][/quote]There were certain council workers (thinklikealocal but live in Eastleigh) that were on here saying the council never asked us to take a pay cut to save jobs why not cut jobs as I don't want my pay cut. Now they've got their wish but they still come on here & try to justify 200 temps losing there jobs plus 200 permanent workers being moved to those jobs for four months & then what? then there's now 100 more permanent posts to go but don't worry they can join the other 200 in temporary work for four months so there won't be any redundancies but they will get a low pay off if they can't find work in four months but it's not redundancy? If these people are not made redundant but are out of work how do they claim social? exactly how did they lose their jobs? Ironlady is this person & the left that stupid? 200 jobs being done & must need to be done & suddenly there's no one to do them? 1-10 refuse workers go & look we have 200 low paid positions to fill do you want a job or are you refusing work? just how can't the left & union members oh! & council workers see this? I've been called a drongo by a lady who only thinks of herself yet there were people out on strike who weren't taking a pay cut for the likes of her. I know the sort of name I would like to call her but won't . I also could sit & gloat & say I told you so but that's not fair on the workers they've been lied to by both the unions & the Labour party & I feel they're now being shafted loosehead
  • Score: 0

9:30pm Mon 8 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

Hang on, this Council are going to Redploy, so there will be no natural wastage? Any Natural wastage will be taken by redeployment, so we'll see no cuts?
Hang on, this Council are going to Redploy, so there will be no natural wastage? Any Natural wastage will be taken by redeployment, so we'll see no cuts? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:48pm Mon 8 Oct 12

loosehead says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
Hang on, this Council are going to Redploy, so there will be no natural wastage? Any Natural wastage will be taken by redeployment, so we'll see no cuts?
They have said they will do a Sunderland but will cut the time of temporary work offer to four months instead of eight it was going to be six but they changed it to four.
If the workers can't do the work or refuse to do the work there will be no redundancy but they will make a payment that will be no where near redundancy levels.
Also if after four months they haven't found another permanent job in the council they will receive a payment not redundancy pay.
they have accepted ( some of them voted to accept) restoration of pay but reduced redundancy pay & pensions.
The Joke is they were about to announce these job losses a week after the workers voted for those conditions would they have won if they had announced it before the vote?
Why have they suddenly decided not to announce it? have the Unions had words?
The same Unions who had words after Williams said 1-10 refuse jobs to go fortnightly collections & 1,500 jobs to go but then denied saying it?
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: Hang on, this Council are going to Redploy, so there will be no natural wastage? Any Natural wastage will be taken by redeployment, so we'll see no cuts?[/p][/quote]They have said they will do a Sunderland but will cut the time of temporary work offer to four months instead of eight it was going to be six but they changed it to four. If the workers can't do the work or refuse to do the work there will be no redundancy but they will make a payment that will be no where near redundancy levels. Also if after four months they haven't found another permanent job in the council they will receive a payment not redundancy pay. they have accepted ( some of them voted to accept) restoration of pay but reduced redundancy pay & pensions. The Joke is they were about to announce these job losses a week after the workers voted for those conditions would they have won if they had announced it before the vote? Why have they suddenly decided not to announce it? have the Unions had words? The same Unions who had words after Williams said 1-10 refuse jobs to go fortnightly collections & 1,500 jobs to go but then denied saying it? loosehead
  • Score: 0

10:14pm Mon 8 Oct 12

Shoong says...

Linesman wrote:
Royston's chickens have come home to roost on the new administration.

How much money was spent on the new White Elephant Museum?

It has to be staffed and maintained.

How much did it cost to have the battle with the Unions?

When you add to this the fact that Westminster put a cap on council tax, meaning that it could not be increased to meet the rising costs linked to inflation, is it any wonder that Southampton City Council is facing problems?
You keep going back to this 'White Elephant' of a Sea Museum, you could be right & seem to know for sure, can you let us know your sources or somewhere we can all take a look?

Otherwise I'm going to consider you're just making it up..?

Surely not..?
[quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Royston's chickens have come home to roost on the new administration. How much money was spent on the new White Elephant Museum? It has to be staffed and maintained. How much did it cost to have the battle with the Unions? When you add to this the fact that Westminster put a cap on council tax, meaning that it could not be increased to meet the rising costs linked to inflation, is it any wonder that Southampton City Council is facing problems?[/p][/quote]You keep going back to this 'White Elephant' of a Sea Museum, you could be right & seem to know for sure, can you let us know your sources or somewhere we can all take a look? Otherwise I'm going to consider you're just making it up..? Surely not..? Shoong
  • Score: 0

10:27pm Mon 8 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

Shoong wrote:
Linesman wrote:
Royston's chickens have come home to roost on the new administration.

How much money was spent on the new White Elephant Museum?

It has to be staffed and maintained.

How much did it cost to have the battle with the Unions?

When you add to this the fact that Westminster put a cap on council tax, meaning that it could not be increased to meet the rising costs linked to inflation, is it any wonder that Southampton City Council is facing problems?
You keep going back to this 'White Elephant' of a Sea Museum, you could be right & seem to know for sure, can you let us know your sources or somewhere we can all take a look?

Otherwise I'm going to consider you're just making it up..?

Surely not..?
I thought this White Elephant was up for another award?
[quote][p][bold]Shoong[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Linesman[/bold] wrote: Royston's chickens have come home to roost on the new administration. How much money was spent on the new White Elephant Museum? It has to be staffed and maintained. How much did it cost to have the battle with the Unions? When you add to this the fact that Westminster put a cap on council tax, meaning that it could not be increased to meet the rising costs linked to inflation, is it any wonder that Southampton City Council is facing problems?[/p][/quote]You keep going back to this 'White Elephant' of a Sea Museum, you could be right & seem to know for sure, can you let us know your sources or somewhere we can all take a look? Otherwise I'm going to consider you're just making it up..? Surely not..?[/p][/quote]I thought this White Elephant was up for another award? IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

10:43pm Mon 8 Oct 12

freefinker says...

freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy.
It takes spending money to make money.
Think about it.
if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens.
You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop.
This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse.
Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.
.. none of that answers the question I asked, does it?

We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past.

So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'?

So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government.

If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.
.. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government.

All slogan, no substance.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.[/p][/quote].. none of that answers the question I asked, does it? We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past. So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'? So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government. If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.[/p][/quote].. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government. All slogan, no substance. freefinker
  • Score: 0

10:48pm Mon 8 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

freefinker wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy.
It takes spending money to make money.
Think about it.
if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens.
You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop.
This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse.
Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.
.. none of that answers the question I asked, does it?

We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past.

So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'?

So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government.

If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.
.. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government.

All slogan, no substance.
No need to tell us what we already know ;-)

I think Southy is a genuine man, he just doesn't understand the modern world, he is learning in his old age.

But we have to admit Southy is a strong person who stands up for what he believes, even though he is wrong in many respects. Fair play to the man.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.[/p][/quote].. none of that answers the question I asked, does it? We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past. So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'? So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government. If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.[/p][/quote].. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government. All slogan, no substance.[/p][/quote]No need to tell us what we already know ;-) I think Southy is a genuine man, he just doesn't understand the modern world, he is learning in his old age. But we have to admit Southy is a strong person who stands up for what he believes, even though he is wrong in many respects. Fair play to the man. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

11:56pm Mon 8 Oct 12

freefinker says...

.. oh yes IronLady, I do know.

But I feel a need to point out the ridiculousness of TUSC’s financial position – but it is ALWAYS in response to southy’s initial posting.

Alas, I do not agree with you that “he is learning in his old age”. Far from it, in fact.
.. oh yes IronLady, I do know. But I feel a need to point out the ridiculousness of TUSC’s financial position – but it is ALWAYS in response to southy’s initial posting. Alas, I do not agree with you that “he is learning in his old age”. Far from it, in fact. freefinker
  • Score: 0

12:07am Tue 9 Oct 12

IronLady2010 says...

freefinker wrote:
.. oh yes IronLady, I do know.

But I feel a need to point out the ridiculousness of TUSC’s financial position – but it is ALWAYS in response to southy’s initial posting.

Alas, I do not agree with you that “he is learning in his old age”. Far from it, in fact.
I think we all know TUSC is a joke, we don't need Southy to tell us that.

I have no degree in Economics, but even I can see that no Cuts is impossible for any party.
[quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: .. oh yes IronLady, I do know. But I feel a need to point out the ridiculousness of TUSC’s financial position – but it is ALWAYS in response to southy’s initial posting. Alas, I do not agree with you that “he is learning in his old age”. Far from it, in fact.[/p][/quote]I think we all know TUSC is a joke, we don't need Southy to tell us that. I have no degree in Economics, but even I can see that no Cuts is impossible for any party. IronLady2010
  • Score: 0

9:20am Tue 9 Oct 12

Georgem says...

IronLady2010 wrote:
freefinker wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again.

TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’.

To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc.

That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government.

And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future.

So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced?

You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program.
After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it?

We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least.

Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever.

So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else.
Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid.
And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again.
You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981????

What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment?

In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council.

So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you.

What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy.
It takes spending money to make money.
Think about it.
if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens.
You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop.
This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse.
Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.
.. none of that answers the question I asked, does it?

We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past.

So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'?

So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government.

If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.
.. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government.

All slogan, no substance.
No need to tell us what we already know ;-)

I think Southy is a genuine man, he just doesn't understand the modern world, he is learning in his old age.

But we have to admit Southy is a strong person who stands up for what he believes, even though he is wrong in many respects. Fair play to the man.
I honestly don't see much strength in blindly insisting you're right all the time, regardless of the evidence put in front of you. I respect southy's commitment to his cause, think he's a genuine person in many respects and clearly wants to do the right thing as a politician. But his reasoning is riddled with holes. True strength would mean he'd be able to recognise that.
[quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.[/p][/quote].. none of that answers the question I asked, does it? We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past. So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'? So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government. If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.[/p][/quote].. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government. All slogan, no substance.[/p][/quote]No need to tell us what we already know ;-) I think Southy is a genuine man, he just doesn't understand the modern world, he is learning in his old age. But we have to admit Southy is a strong person who stands up for what he believes, even though he is wrong in many respects. Fair play to the man.[/p][/quote]I honestly don't see much strength in blindly insisting you're right all the time, regardless of the evidence put in front of you. I respect southy's commitment to his cause, think he's a genuine person in many respects and clearly wants to do the right thing as a politician. But his reasoning is riddled with holes. True strength would mean he'd be able to recognise that. Georgem
  • Score: 0

10:56am Tue 9 Oct 12

rich the stitch says...

Georgem wrote:
IronLady2010 wrote:
freefinker wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote:
freefinker wrote:
southy wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.
Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.
You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.
.. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?
theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.
1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.
It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.
.. none of that answers the question I asked, does it? We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past. So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'? So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government. If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.
.. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government. All slogan, no substance.
No need to tell us what we already know ;-) I think Southy is a genuine man, he just doesn't understand the modern world, he is learning in his old age. But we have to admit Southy is a strong person who stands up for what he believes, even though he is wrong in many respects. Fair play to the man.
I honestly don't see much strength in blindly insisting you're right all the time, regardless of the evidence put in front of you. I respect southy's commitment to his cause, think he's a genuine person in many respects and clearly wants to do the right thing as a politician. But his reasoning is riddled with holes. True strength would mean he'd be able to recognise that.
Spouts loads of rubbish, can't back it up, won’t admit when they are wrong and then disappears when backed in to a corner. Who am I talking about? Cameron? Clegg? Thatcher? No, it’s Southy.
[quote][p][bold]Georgem[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]IronLady2010[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]freefinker[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]southy[/bold] wrote: The TUSC and Socialist Party did warn people this would happen and it would of happen if you had a Tory, Labour, Lib/Dems, Greens or a UKIP Controlled Council. there Economics and Political Policy is one off cuts and not one of a needs.[/p][/quote]Oh dear, southy is at it again. TUSC is just a slogan – ‘No Cuts’. To quote the TUSC website, ‘Oppose all cuts to council jobs, services, pay and conditions’; ‘Reject increases in council tax, rent and service charges to compensate for government cuts’; ‘When faced with government cuts to council funding, councils should refuse to implement the cuts’; etc. That’s all very well, as they are unelectable. However, when southy went off on one of his ‘I can’t admit I’m ever wrong’ exercises over Council Tax, he admitted, and rightly, that it is central government that tightly controls the purse strings of local government. And local government income is being cut by this dreadful coalition year on year into the distant future. So, perhaps southy would like to ‘square the circle’. Where is the money coming from to fund ALL the existing local services provided by local government (i.e No Cuts, as per the TUSC manifesto) if total income is meanwhile being drastically reduced? You see, it’s easy to be irresponsible in politics if you haven’t a hope in hell of ever being elected.[/p][/quote]You got to be able to push national government into a corner which all partys that have a 100% right wing economics and political policy will not do, because they are all on the same program. After Brighton Budget of Cuts we are now more likely to get people elected in now, also now the TUSC are less likey now stand down in favour of a Green Canididate.[/p][/quote].. that does NOT explain where the money is going to come from, does it? We have a ConDem coalition that IS drastically cutting local government income. That is the reality of the situation until 2015 at least. Yet TUSC say 'No Cuts' whatsoever. So, again I ask, where is the money coming from to put your clear manifesto commitments into practise – right now, in the real world, in the present, in 2012?[/p][/quote]theres more to and you know it, Some one as to make that stand and do no cuts or else. Making cuts only leads on to making more cuts because the system of cuts can not support it self and keeps pushing deeper into debt, though having to pay out more in benefits and reducing the local tax to the unemployed and poorly paid. And who going to be having to pay for the lost in funds, those that are in jobs and have a reasonable or above reasonable pay, think beyond 2012 think into the future, we are paying now for the errors of the 1980's, and the errors that are being made now with all these cuts we be paid for in the future, and if they do the same thing and make more cuts so to will that be pass on to the future and so that cycle starts again. You got to make a stand if you going to break that endless cycle repeating it self over and over again, they been trying this system that causes cuts since the 1700's to 1945 and we know it do not work it just create more unemployment, more poverity, more homeless which pushes up the crime rate, between 45 to 81 there was no cuts made money was being used how it should be used as a tool and it was working so there was a few strikes that is nothing compaired with the human misery that is being push on to people for the last 25 plus years.[/p][/quote]1980’s, 1700’s, 1945, 1981???? What on earth has that got to do with my simple question – where’s the money coming from to honour TUSC’s manifesto commitment? In 2011 and 2012 TUSC stood in a total of 26 wards. You stood to win on a manifesto of ‘No Cuts’. If you had achieved the success you were aiming for TUSC, and not Labour, would now be in overall control of Southampton City Council. So, let’s assume southy have been appointed Cabinet Member for Resources, i.e. finance. You have an absolute manifesto commitment to ‘No Cuts’ but a huge decrease in the money available to you. What are you going to do? I want practical answers, not waffle. You claim TUSC is a serious alternative to the current political set-up. OK, I’ve put you in power locally. It was electoral success you were all aiming for, wasn’t it? Now tell me where the money is coming from? It’s a very simple question.[/p][/quote]It as a lot to do with it. where are councils and main government going to get the money from if people are made unemployed and have no spare money to spend in the economy. It takes spending money to make money. Think about it. if you don't spend money into keeping jobs and creating more, what happens. You end up having to divert money into paying for benefits and reductions in rent and council tax, now where are you going to get this money from to cover this cost, so what do they do make more cuts so more job losses and there an increase in benefits being paid out and funds coming takes another drop. This is the cycle you are in, its a cycle that will keep coming around and getting deeper and worse. Now you explain to me how you going to get pass that one.[/p][/quote].. none of that answers the question I asked, does it? We are where we are. You can't alter that. There are no time machines to go back and alter the past. So, where are TUSC going to get the money to honour its manifesto commitment of 'No Cuts'? So far you have totally failed to explain to Southampton’s voters how you will perform this financial undertaking given the reality of the money being provided by central government. If all the waffle you have given for the last three posts is actually an admission that TUSC's slogan, 'No Cuts', is actually undeliverable, you really need to say so, and say it now.[/p][/quote].. well, I just have to assume southy's silence speaks volumes about TUSC's ability to actually manage the finances of a local government. All slogan, no substance.[/p][/quote]No need to tell us what we already know ;-) I think Southy is a genuine man, he just doesn't understand the modern world, he is learning in his old age. But we have to admit Southy is a strong person who stands up for what he believes, even though he is wrong in many respects. Fair play to the man.[/p][/quote]I honestly don't see much strength in blindly insisting you're right all the time, regardless of the evidence put in front of you. I respect southy's commitment to his cause, think he's a genuine person in many respects and clearly wants to do the right thing as a politician. But his reasoning is riddled with holes. True strength would mean he'd be able to recognise that.[/p][/quote]Spouts loads of rubbish, can't back it up, won’t admit when they are wrong and then disappears when backed in to a corner. Who am I talking about? Cameron? Clegg? Thatcher? No, it’s Southy. rich the stitch
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

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

I agree