Betrayed by Labour (From Daily Echo)

As the Labour administration has yet to take control of the City, something tells me that "Name and address supplied" could well be a Royston Smith fan who is prejudging the new administration.

I think you are lying. I don't believe you even work for the council let alone ever voted Labour. Why, because you are talking about a mythical Council Tax increase that NO ONE has mentioned. You are now and always were a Tory party activist.

You lost!
Badly!
Tough!

And yet Labour increased the cabinet today. That increase in councillor wages has got to be paid for.

OceansofRed wrote:
And yet Labour increased the cabinet today. That increase in councillor wages has got to be paid for.

It is called 'Delegation.'

Labour has replaced a 'one-man band.'

Firstly I am not a tory member or voter. 2nd the echo did not print my whole letter. 3rd it appears linesman and on the inside( may be of Labour) are more politically motivated than me and as happened today Mr Williams increased the cabinet-dont know where one man band was that is mentioned as all councils have cabinets just some smaller and more value than others. I have worked for the council for 11 years and delegation- from Mr Williams-every media outlet he has been on and even when on polling day,I saw him in the city with a bbc news crew following him, then within a few hours of the results he was on the radio then later tv again-Mr Vain

So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory?
It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers.
A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating.
Please don't say they're not.
The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail.
How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

conned scc employee wrote:
Firstly I am not a tory member or voter. 2nd the echo did not print my whole letter. 3rd it appears linesman and on the inside( may be of Labour) are more politically motivated than me and as happened today Mr Williams increased the cabinet-dont know where one man band was that is mentioned as all councils have cabinets just some smaller and more value than others. I have worked for the council for 11 years and delegation- from Mr Williams-every media outlet he has been on and even when on polling day,I saw him in the city with a bbc news crew following him, then within a few hours of the results he was on the radio then later tv again-Mr Vain

I stated that you were claiming things were happening under the new administration BEFORE the new administration had taken over.

I note that there was no comment about Royston signing a last minute deal, privatising CCTV, against the wishes of the new administration.

The 'one man band' comment was with regard Royston Smith, who could not delegate, but had to be the centre of attraction.

So Mr Williams has attracted every media outlet. During the run-up to the elections, do you consider that Royston Smith was a 'shrinking violet'?

The media are there to report and record, which is what they did. If they did not, you would complain. It would appear that you are also complaining because they did.

No pleasing some folk.

Linesman wrote:

conned scc employee wrote:
Firstly I am not a tory member or voter. 2nd the echo did not print my whole letter. 3rd it appears linesman and on the inside( may be of Labour) are more politically motivated than me and as happened today Mr Williams increased the cabinet-dont know where one man band was that is mentioned as all councils have cabinets just some smaller and more value than others. I have worked for the council for 11 years and delegation- from Mr Williams-every media outlet he has been on and even when on polling day,I saw him in the city with a bbc news crew following him, then within a few hours of the results he was on the radio then later tv again-Mr Vain

I stated that you were claiming things were happening under the new administration BEFORE the new administration had taken over.

I note that there was no comment about Royston signing a last minute deal, privatising CCTV, against the wishes of the new administration.

The 'one man band' comment was with regard Royston Smith, who could not delegate, but had to be the centre of attraction.

So Mr Williams has attracted every media outlet. During the run-up to the elections, do you consider that Royston Smith was a 'shrinking violet'?

The media are there to report and record, which is what they did. If they did not, you would complain. It would appear that you are also complaining because they did.

No pleasing some folk.

ps. You sign yourself conned scc employee. By that, I assume you voted as your Union asked you to.

Are you incapable of thinking things out for yourself?

If not, maybe, as an SCC employee, you are part of the city's problem and should have been one of those that Royston Smith 'unloaded.'

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

I would be happier if they didn't!

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

I would be happier if they didn't!

Yep! I agree with you. Mind you, I would not be thrilled if they said that I looked like Royston Smith.

Linesman wrote:
As the Labour administration has yet to take control of the City, something tells me that "Name and address supplied" could well be a Royston Smith fan who is prejudging the new administration.

Maybe, that's possible.

But probably not and your imagination has got the better of you.

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

No I think the worse thing I could get called is a blinkered socialist who can't see the truth when it's staring them in the face.
tories & Liberals took a 5.5% pay cut Labour invent to posts to pay two Labour councillors £28,000 a year exactly how is that cutting the deficit?
I know Williams said they would create jobs but surely that was for the workers who's jobs are going not for two of his party?
All you idiots who come on here & slag down the Conservative party & Royston even coming out with f++king Tories will be eating your words when the council goes back to being blue & your two Labour MP's are replaced by two Tories.
I won't repeat anything I've heard or been told as some idiot will say prove it! but Labour in power 2 years maximum

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

No I think the worse thing I could get called is a blinkered socialist who can't see the truth when it's staring them in the face.
tories & Liberals took a 5.5% pay cut Labour invent to posts to pay two Labour councillors £28,000 a year exactly how is that cutting the deficit?
I know Williams said they would create jobs but surely that was for the workers who's jobs are going not for two of his party?
All you idiots who come on here & slag down the Conservative party & Royston even coming out with f++king Tories will be eating your words when the council goes back to being blue & your two Labour MP's are replaced by two Tories.
I won't repeat anything I've heard or been told as some idiot will say prove it! but Labour in power 2 years maximum

The creation of two council posts would be a small price to pay if even half of those that Royston Smith and his merry band of Tories put on benefit are put back in work and paying taxes.

Royston&Co were given the HeaveHo because they acted as dictators in a democracy.

Other Tory councils throughout the country had to work under the same constraints that Southampton City Council faced. The others negotiated with Unions, where Royston Smith chose confrontation, and the result was there to see, littering the city's streets.

The sad thing is, he could not see the error of his ways, and if he came to power again, the city would, once again, face the same problems.

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

No I think the worse thing I could get called is a blinkered socialist who can't see the truth when it's staring them in the face.
tories & Liberals took a 5.5% pay cut Labour invent to posts to pay two Labour councillors £28,000 a year exactly how is that cutting the deficit?
I know Williams said they would create jobs but surely that was for the workers who's jobs are going not for two of his party?
All you idiots who come on here & slag down the Conservative party & Royston even coming out with f++king Tories will be eating your words when the council goes back to being blue & your two Labour MP's are replaced by two Tories.
I won't repeat anything I've heard or been told as some idiot will say prove it! but Labour in power 2 years maximum

The creation of two council posts would be a small price to pay if even half of those that Royston Smith and his merry band of Tories put on benefit are put back in work and paying taxes.

Royston&Co were given the HeaveHo because they acted as dictators in a democracy.

Other Tory councils throughout the country had to work under the same constraints that Southampton City Council faced. The others negotiated with Unions, where Royston Smith chose confrontation, and the result was there to see, littering the city's streets.

The sad thing is, he could not see the error of his ways, and if he came to power again, the city would, once again, face the same problems.

A small price to pay? 1,500 jobs lost in the second year/
fortnightly collections?
huge council tax rises in second year?
sorry but then seeing rewards of creating high paid jobs for two of your party doesn't cut it with me & if it had been the Tories I wonder if you would have been happy with it?
Linesman stop being a hypocrite
this was wrong & you know it

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

No I think the worse thing I could get called is a blinkered socialist who can't see the truth when it's staring them in the face.
tories & Liberals took a 5.5% pay cut Labour invent to posts to pay two Labour councillors £28,000 a year exactly how is that cutting the deficit?
I know Williams said they would create jobs but surely that was for the workers who's jobs are going not for two of his party?
All you idiots who come on here & slag down the Conservative party & Royston even coming out with f++king Tories will be eating your words when the council goes back to being blue & your two Labour MP's are replaced by two Tories.
I won't repeat anything I've heard or been told as some idiot will say prove it! but Labour in power 2 years maximum

The creation of two council posts would be a small price to pay if even half of those that Royston Smith and his merry band of Tories put on benefit are put back in work and paying taxes.

Royston&Co were given the HeaveHo because they acted as dictators in a democracy.

Other Tory councils throughout the country had to work under the same constraints that Southampton City Council faced. The others negotiated with Unions, where Royston Smith chose confrontation, and the result was there to see, littering the city's streets.

The sad thing is, he could not see the error of his ways, and if he came to power again, the city would, once again, face the same problems.

A small price to pay? 1,500 jobs lost in the second year/
fortnightly collections?
huge council tax rises in second year?
sorry but then seeing rewards of creating high paid jobs for two of your party doesn't cut it with me & if it had been the Tories I wonder if you would have been happy with it?
Linesman stop being a hypocrite
this was wrong & you know it

The jobs have been created in an effort to create, and attract more jobs to the area. Jobs that Cameron claimed were there already to be taken up by those culled in the public sector.

Strange how many in the private sector have evaporated in the past twelve months.

If the two jobs had been created by Royston Smith, while he was busy making drastic cuts in the council workforce, you bet I would not have been happy.

Of course, Smith was under pressure from central government to make cuts. He could not raise council tax, otherwise the grant from central government would be reduced by the same amount. Of course, other councils were under the same restriction, but they dealt with it by Negotiation. Not so Dictator Smith. That is why the city experienced so much trouble, and why his party took such a hammering.

Of course, you would not admit it.

For you it has to be the nasty Unions that were at fault.

For you the sun rises in Cameron's rear end, and sets in Royston Smith. Trouble is, it is not suntan that the citizens found themselves the recipients of, but the colour was the same and the smell was not associated with aromatherapy.

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

No I think the worse thing I could get called is a blinkered socialist who can't see the truth when it's staring them in the face.
tories & Liberals took a 5.5% pay cut Labour invent to posts to pay two Labour councillors £28,000 a year exactly how is that cutting the deficit?
I know Williams said they would create jobs but surely that was for the workers who's jobs are going not for two of his party?
All you idiots who come on here & slag down the Conservative party & Royston even coming out with f++king Tories will be eating your words when the council goes back to being blue & your two Labour MP's are replaced by two Tories.
I won't repeat anything I've heard or been told as some idiot will say prove it! but Labour in power 2 years maximum

The creation of two council posts would be a small price to pay if even half of those that Royston Smith and his merry band of Tories put on benefit are put back in work and paying taxes.

Royston&Co were given the HeaveHo because they acted as dictators in a democracy.

Other Tory councils throughout the country had to work under the same constraints that Southampton City Council faced. The others negotiated with Unions, where Royston Smith chose confrontation, and the result was there to see, littering the city's streets.

The sad thing is, he could not see the error of his ways, and if he came to power again, the city would, once again, face the same problems.

A small price to pay? 1,500 jobs lost in the second year/
fortnightly collections?
huge council tax rises in second year?
sorry but then seeing rewards of creating high paid jobs for two of your party doesn't cut it with me & if it had been the Tories I wonder if you would have been happy with it?
Linesman stop being a hypocrite
this was wrong & you know it

The jobs have been created in an effort to create, and attract more jobs to the area. Jobs that Cameron claimed were there already to be taken up by those culled in the public sector.

Strange how many in the private sector have evaporated in the past twelve months.

If the two jobs had been created by Royston Smith, while he was busy making drastic cuts in the council workforce, you bet I would not have been happy.

Of course, Smith was under pressure from central government to make cuts. He could not raise council tax, otherwise the grant from central government would be reduced by the same amount. Of course, other councils were under the same restriction, but they dealt with it by Negotiation. Not so Dictator Smith. That is why the city experienced so much trouble, and why his party took such a hammering.

Of course, you would not admit it.

For you it has to be the nasty Unions that were at fault.

For you the sun rises in Cameron's rear end, and sets in Royston Smith. Trouble is, it is not suntan that the citizens found themselves the recipients of, but the colour was the same and the smell was not associated with aromatherapy.

Actually I learnt from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one first & then society.
Anyone threatening to hike up my tax won't get my vote.
Anyone who's promised a vote on the treaty of Europe & lies & we don't get it doesn't get my vote!
A party who talk about further integration with Europe but then promises a referendum on staying in or getting out because it's seen a rise in UKIP's vote doesn't get my vote.
If the Conservatives said we were joining the Euro they would not get my vote.
I was more a William Hague supporter than Cameron.
who to vote for? last election Gordan lying Brown or David Cameron it's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned.
next time Cameron or Ed Milliband? Milliband who's own party didn't want him they wanted his brother or Cameron who even if it made him unpopular he told it as it is? No brainer it's Cameron.
Linesman what Unite Vince Cable & GM did in Ellesmere Port has to be congratulated & Unite acted extremely well it's a pity they can't adopt that approach around the country

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

No I think the worse thing I could get called is a blinkered socialist who can't see the truth when it's staring them in the face.
tories & Liberals took a 5.5% pay cut Labour invent to posts to pay two Labour councillors £28,000 a year exactly how is that cutting the deficit?
I know Williams said they would create jobs but surely that was for the workers who's jobs are going not for two of his party?
All you idiots who come on here & slag down the Conservative party & Royston even coming out with f++king Tories will be eating your words when the council goes back to being blue & your two Labour MP's are replaced by two Tories.
I won't repeat anything I've heard or been told as some idiot will say prove it! but Labour in power 2 years maximum

The creation of two council posts would be a small price to pay if even half of those that Royston Smith and his merry band of Tories put on benefit are put back in work and paying taxes.

Royston&Co were given the HeaveHo because they acted as dictators in a democracy.

Other Tory councils throughout the country had to work under the same constraints that Southampton City Council faced. The others negotiated with Unions, where Royston Smith chose confrontation, and the result was there to see, littering the city's streets.

The sad thing is, he could not see the error of his ways, and if he came to power again, the city would, once again, face the same problems.

A small price to pay? 1,500 jobs lost in the second year/
fortnightly collections?
huge council tax rises in second year?
sorry but then seeing rewards of creating high paid jobs for two of your party doesn't cut it with me & if it had been the Tories I wonder if you would have been happy with it?
Linesman stop being a hypocrite
this was wrong & you know it

The jobs have been created in an effort to create, and attract more jobs to the area. Jobs that Cameron claimed were there already to be taken up by those culled in the public sector.

Strange how many in the private sector have evaporated in the past twelve months.

If the two jobs had been created by Royston Smith, while he was busy making drastic cuts in the council workforce, you bet I would not have been happy.

Of course, Smith was under pressure from central government to make cuts. He could not raise council tax, otherwise the grant from central government would be reduced by the same amount. Of course, other councils were under the same restriction, but they dealt with it by Negotiation. Not so Dictator Smith. That is why the city experienced so much trouble, and why his party took such a hammering.

Of course, you would not admit it.

For you it has to be the nasty Unions that were at fault.

For you the sun rises in Cameron's rear end, and sets in Royston Smith. Trouble is, it is not suntan that the citizens found themselves the recipients of, but the colour was the same and the smell was not associated with aromatherapy.

Actually I learnt from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one first & then society.
Anyone threatening to hike up my tax won't get my vote.
Anyone who's promised a vote on the treaty of Europe & lies & we don't get it doesn't get my vote!
A party who talk about further integration with Europe but then promises a referendum on staying in or getting out because it's seen a rise in UKIP's vote doesn't get my vote.
If the Conservatives said we were joining the Euro they would not get my vote.
I was more a William Hague supporter than Cameron.
who to vote for? last election Gordan lying Brown or David Cameron it's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned.
next time Cameron or Ed Milliband? Milliband who's own party didn't want him they wanted his brother or Cameron who even if it made him unpopular he told it as it is? No brainer it's Cameron.
Linesman what Unite Vince Cable & GM did in Ellesmere Port has to be congratulated & Unite acted extremely well it's a pity they can't adopt that approach around the country

"Actually I learned from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one first & then society."

I assume that the example they used was the current government and the way that, in the last budget, they handed out a nice tax-cut to their wealthy high-tax paying supporters, while at the same time screwing the pensioners.

Your die hard socialists/shop stewards used an excellent example.

"Anyone threatening to hike up my tax won't get my vote."

An excellent example of 'Looking after No 1 and to hell with Society.'

"Anyone who's promised a vote on the treaty of Europe & lies & we don't get it doesn'g get my vote!"

So you don't intend to use your vote. If you don't vote then, in my opinion, you have opted out and have no justification in complaining.

"If the Conservatives said we were joining the Euro.........."

It is the Tories that were all for joining the Euro. Surely you remember Maestrict and Black Wednesday?

"I was more a William Hague supporter than Cameron."

Neither of whom have identified with the general public.

Ed Milliband was the result of the election process used by the Labour Party, and is an indication of the sort of result that is achieved by the Proportional Representation process. In theory it is OK, but produces a result that is less than popular.

With regard Cameron v Ed Milliband at the next election. In my opinion, the big difference is that where Cameron is proving to be, at best, not up to the job that he is in, Ed Milliband is growing in stature as leader of the opposition. How would he be as Prime Minister? I am no Mystic Meg but, let's face it, he has not got a hard act to follow.

Yes! Congratulation to Vince Cable, GM and Unite for bringing more jobs to Ellesmere Port. What a pity that the jobs created there will make a very small dent in the numbers that have joined the ranks of the unemployed in the past eighteen months - many of them in our area.

The example of Ellesmere Port shows what can be done when there is negotiation and consultation with unions. What a pity that Royston Smith had not used the same approach instead of acting like a Dictator.

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:

OSPREYSAINT wrote:

loosehead wrote:
So if you tell the truth you get called a liar or even worse a Tory? It was more than obvious to anyone that the Unions used the council workers to put Labour into power & now couldn't give a **** for those workers. A true Tory council would have just made the cuts even if it meant the size of redundancies Labour are contemplating. Please don't say they're not. The Tory council tried to come to a deal where jobs could be saved & cuts made but to no avail. How soon will it be before even more council workers/voters realise they've been conned into voting Labour?

Can't think of anything worse than being called a Tory!

An F*****g Tory?

No I think the worse thing I could get called is a blinkered socialist who can't see the truth when it's staring them in the face.
tories & Liberals took a 5.5% pay cut Labour invent to posts to pay two Labour councillors £28,000 a year exactly how is that cutting the deficit?
I know Williams said they would create jobs but surely that was for the workers who's jobs are going not for two of his party?
All you idiots who come on here & slag down the Conservative party & Royston even coming out with f++king Tories will be eating your words when the council goes back to being blue & your two Labour MP's are replaced by two Tories.
I won't repeat anything I've heard or been told as some idiot will say prove it! but Labour in power 2 years maximum

The creation of two council posts would be a small price to pay if even half of those that Royston Smith and his merry band of Tories put on benefit are put back in work and paying taxes.

Royston&Co were given the HeaveHo because they acted as dictators in a democracy.

Other Tory councils throughout the country had to work under the same constraints that Southampton City Council faced. The others negotiated with Unions, where Royston Smith chose confrontation, and the result was there to see, littering the city's streets.

The sad thing is, he could not see the error of his ways, and if he came to power again, the city would, once again, face the same problems.

A small price to pay? 1,500 jobs lost in the second year/
fortnightly collections?
huge council tax rises in second year?
sorry but then seeing rewards of creating high paid jobs for two of your party doesn't cut it with me & if it had been the Tories I wonder if you would have been happy with it?
Linesman stop being a hypocrite
this was wrong & you know it

The jobs have been created in an effort to create, and attract more jobs to the area. Jobs that Cameron claimed were there already to be taken up by those culled in the public sector.

Strange how many in the private sector have evaporated in the past twelve months.

If the two jobs had been created by Royston Smith, while he was busy making drastic cuts in the council workforce, you bet I would not have been happy.

Of course, Smith was under pressure from central government to make cuts. He could not raise council tax, otherwise the grant from central government would be reduced by the same amount. Of course, other councils were under the same restriction, but they dealt with it by Negotiation. Not so Dictator Smith. That is why the city experienced so much trouble, and why his party took such a hammering.

Of course, you would not admit it.

For you it has to be the nasty Unions that were at fault.

For you the sun rises in Cameron's rear end, and sets in Royston Smith. Trouble is, it is not suntan that the citizens found themselves the recipients of, but the colour was the same and the smell was not associated with aromatherapy.

Actually I learnt from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one first & then society.
Anyone threatening to hike up my tax won't get my vote.
Anyone who's promised a vote on the treaty of Europe & lies & we don't get it doesn't get my vote!
A party who talk about further integration with Europe but then promises a referendum on staying in or getting out because it's seen a rise in UKIP's vote doesn't get my vote.
If the Conservatives said we were joining the Euro they would not get my vote.
I was more a William Hague supporter than Cameron.
who to vote for? last election Gordan lying Brown or David Cameron it's a no brainer as far as I'm concerned.
next time Cameron or Ed Milliband? Milliband who's own party didn't want him they wanted his brother or Cameron who even if it made him unpopular he told it as it is? No brainer it's Cameron.
Linesman what Unite Vince Cable & GM did in Ellesmere Port has to be congratulated & Unite acted extremely well it's a pity they can't adopt that approach around the country

"Actually I learned from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one first & then society."

I assume that the example they used was the current government and the way that, in the last budget, they handed out a nice tax-cut to their wealthy high-tax paying supporters, while at the same time screwing the pensioners.

Your die hard socialists/shop stewards used an excellent example.

"Anyone threatening to hike up my tax won't get my vote."

An excellent example of 'Looking after No 1 and to hell with Society.'

"Anyone who's promised a vote on the treaty of Europe & lies & we don't get it doesn'g get my vote!"

So you don't intend to use your vote. If you don't vote then, in my opinion, you have opted out and have no justification in complaining.

"If the Conservatives said we were joining the Euro.........."

It is the Tories that were all for joining the Euro. Surely you remember Maestrict and Black Wednesday?

"I was more a William Hague supporter than Cameron."

Neither of whom have identified with the general public.

Ed Milliband was the result of the election process used by the Labour Party, and is an indication of the sort of result that is achieved by the Proportional Representation process. In theory it is OK, but produces a result that is less than popular.

With regard Cameron v Ed Milliband at the next election. In my opinion, the big difference is that where Cameron is proving to be, at best, not up to the job that he is in, Ed Milliband is growing in stature as leader of the opposition. How would he be as Prime Minister? I am no Mystic Meg but, let's face it, he has not got a hard act to follow.

Yes! Congratulation to Vince Cable, GM and Unite for bringing more jobs to Ellesmere Port. What a pity that the jobs created there will make a very small dent in the numbers that have joined the ranks of the unemployed in the past eighteen months - many of them in our area.

The example of Ellesmere Port shows what can be done when there is negotiation and consultation with unions. What a pity that Royston Smith had not used the same approach instead of acting like a Dictator.

Actually the die hard socialist/shop steward put forward a group of us for redundancy after he had got us to take industrial action to get a pay rise after seeing the books & knowing the company couldn't afford it but he needed the increase of earnings to get a pay rise,
the company then went back to him ( mortgage acquired) & told him they couldn't keep on paying the wage bill so it was give up the pay rise or have redundancies.
he worked his butt off to get his mates to back him & he swung the vote to redundancies & I & three others lost our jobs so don't comment on my look after number one approach as you know nothing of me.
How many of those who live on the dole & will never look for work aren't looking after number one & give a **** about society?
Ed Milliband was voted leader by Unite's block vote not the Labour party

It is not me who stated, "Actually I learned from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one & then society" so I DO know something about you.

You have previously stated the people that you would not vote for, so I also know a bit more about you.

You claimed that you were more of a William Hague supporter than a David Cameron supporter, which is a bit more information that I know about you.

Another thing I know about you is that you appear to be totally ignorant about the way that the leader of the Labour Party was elected. If, as you claim, it was Unite's block vote that got him elected, he would have got it on the first count, but he did not.

Linesman wrote:
It is not me who stated, "Actually I learned from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one & then society" so I DO know something about you.

You have previously stated the people that you would not vote for, so I also know a bit more about you.

You claimed that you were more of a William Hague supporter than a David Cameron supporter, which is a bit more information that I know about you.

Another thing I know about you is that you appear to be totally ignorant about the way that the leader of the Labour Party was elected. If, as you claim, it was Unite's block vote that got him elected, he would have got it on the first count, but he did not.

So did the parliamentary Labour Party,The rank & file Labour members vote for Ed or his brother?
was it not the unions who got him elected the head of the Labour Party?
Linesman I won't let this drag on so you can try to use my own posts against me but I know this of you you are blinkered & no matter what proof is put in front of you your pro Labour council & down with the Tories so trying to have a debate with you is a total waste of time

loosehead wrote:

Linesman wrote:
It is not me who stated, "Actually I learned from die hard socialists/shop stewards that you look after number one & then society" so I DO know something about you.

You have previously stated the people that you would not vote for, so I also know a bit more about you.

You claimed that you were more of a William Hague supporter than a David Cameron supporter, which is a bit more information that I know about you.

Another thing I know about you is that you appear to be totally ignorant about the way that the leader of the Labour Party was elected. If, as you claim, it was Unite's block vote that got him elected, he would have got it on the first count, but he did not.

So did the parliamentary Labour Party,The rank & file Labour members vote for Ed or his brother?
was it not the unions who got him elected the head of the Labour Party?
Linesman I won't let this drag on so you can try to use my own posts against me but I know this of you you are blinkered & no matter what proof is put in front of you your pro Labour council & down with the Tories so trying to have a debate with you is a total waste of time

In the vote, members voted for the candidates in order of preference. If a candidate did not receive 51% of the votes in the first count, then the second preference votes were counted and added. It was not a 'First past the post' election.

I am not attempting to use your own posts against you. You are doing a pretty good job of that without any help from me.

If you put PROOF in front of me, I am afraid that I have yet to see it.

I have attempted to debate with you, but when you complain that I am attempting to use your own posts against you, indicates to me that you are a trifle confused. You appear to object to people who 'look after No 1' and then claim that is your outlook on life.

I don't need to argue with you because your appear to be having an argument with yourself.