The Big Interview with Jason Kitcat

The Argus: The Big Interview with Jason Kitcat The Big Interview with Jason Kitcat

Last week Brighton and Hove City Council unveiled draft plans on how it proposes to reduce its spending in the coming year by £22.5 million. Adult social care, children’s services and the voluntary sector are among those areas that will be hit. Council leader JASON KITCAT defends the draft and maps out where next for the spending plans. 

The Argus: This year is the third year in a row a Green-led council, which was elected on a manifesto of resisting cuts, is set to approve massive reductions. How can you justify this?

Jason Kitcat: We’ve always said that we can’t stop the cuts made at source by the coalition government, though we totally oppose their approach to austerity. They are pursuing their ideological goal of shrinking local government by slashing our funding, attempting to pass the blame onto local government. It’s telling that so far the average council has seen a 28% cut in funding, whilst Whitehall has only trimmed its own spending by 8%.

We’ve resisted this by protecting essential services for citizens, such as through finding new ways of working, new income sources and by bringing together services and departments into fewer buildings.

Comparing how our services fare with other councils is telling. All our libraries are open as are the children’s centres. We are protecting citizens from the worst of the cuts while supporting the local economy to buck the national trends.

However the Westminster austerity consensus between the three major parties means that this dire situation will continue for years to come. I wish circumstances were different, but we’re here to make the best out of a very difficult situation for our residents.

The Argus: Other councils made controversial but radical spending decisions when austerity first started to bite but Brighton and Hove appear to be slowly slicing bits off year-by-year.

Is this death by a thousand cuts?

Jason Kitcat: Not at all. Some of the so-called ‘radical’ big ideas adopted by some other councils have started to unravel, some quietly and others very publicly. We are doing big things here, like exiting around 10 council buildings a year, moving entire services into paperless working, collaborating more closely than ever with partners in health and police. We have painstakingly searched for efficiency savings and found them.

I think, where possible, it’s better to keep services going wherever possible. Isn’t this the bold choice in light of the circumstances?

The Argus: All the talk from yourself and Labour politicians is to blame the Conservative-led government.

Should you not be taking responsibility for the budget yourself?

Jason Kitcat: What I will take responsibility for is doing the best job possible with our local pot of money, however much it is that we are left with. We have little choice over how much we get, but we do have choices around how to spend it locally and I expect to be accountable for that along with all other councillors. For example we have £3.7 million less in this coming budget because Tory and Labour councillors voted for a tax freeze in our first year.

It is true to say that even without the relentless government austerity measures, councils would still be in a tough place. About £10 to £15 million of the budget pressure each year is from growing demand, primarily in adult social care but also in relation to the recent baby boom we’ve experienced. Without major national reform to the social care system as well as a radical local rethinking of how we deliver social care then all councils still face a massive challenge.

The Argus: The elderly and the vulnerable are set to suffer the most in this year’s plans.

This could see care homes close and workers with learning disabilities made unemployed. How is this fair?

Jason Kitcat: I disagree. It’s inaccurate to suggest that just because the most money is coming from this area that it is the hardest hit. Adult care is the largest area of spending for the council, so even a relatively minor change in money spent seems huge. The reality is that as we all are living longer, demand for these services is growing in a system not set up to cope with this level of need.

There are many ways we are making savings in this area including increasing income, reducing costs and working differently. We can make major savings by helping elderly people to live at home for longer, something they generally prefer but which also costs the council less. Also every adult placed in a home outside of the city that we can bring back into Brighton and Hove is likely to save us money whilst also being better for the family who want to visit their loved one.

It’s clear that the draft budget protects the vast majority of services and we are doing what we can to keep providing care and support despite the government drastically reducing our funding.

The Argus: On one hand the council is saying that the voluntary sector can help it make millions of pounds of savings.

Yet on the other, the council is reducing its funding.

Is the council passing the buck on this issue?

Jason Kitcat: We spend about £23 million a year with the third sector locally and we are committed to developing our engagement further. I know that these largely voluntary organisations are vital to the city’s wellbeing.

In previous years we have asked our third sector providers to help us meet our savings targets, and we are continuing with that. Although we’re proposing a modest reduction to the grants pot for next year, this does not reduce our commitment to the work they do. In light of declining budgets overall, whilst it is difficult, we are doing well to keep this much spend in our local third sector.

We are also currently working jointly with the third sector to discuss how we can move forward together, especially at a time when we both find our funding reducing.

The Argus: Will there be any change to this year’s budget before it is agreed?

Jason Kitcat: I very much hope so. That is the whole point of us publishing three months early. Under previous administrations the budget only appeared a few weeks or even days before it was set in stone. That’s no way to run a city or engage citizens.

We want to allow proper debate and discussion over the proposals and take into account what people have to say. What we have published is only a draft, there is more work to be done, and I’m sure we will amend it in light of feedback as we have done every year previously.

I think the budget has been strengthened each year by public involvement and the changes feedback has brought about. We welcome input and Argus readers can find out more at www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/bhbudget

The Argus: One of your Green colleagues has already said he will vote against the final budget in February.

How many more do you expect to follow suit and does it not undermine your position as council leader?

Jason Kitcat: The budget is, of course, one of the key decisions for a council. Especially in these very difficult times there are going to be strong views about it. Every party on the council has many views and disagreements amongst their members. I believe Greens have a more healthy approach, allowing a diversity of opinions rather than imposing top-down whipping.

All councillors from all parties will need to consider very carefully how they feel about the budget before the vote in February. Our primary duty must be to do the best we can for our citizens with however much money we have available for the coming year. My hope is that everyone, councillors included, will contribute to commenting on and improving these draft proposals.

It is somewhat premature to decide how to vote three months ahead of time on the basis of a draft rather than working to improve it where possible. There’s a long way to go before the February budget council meeting, I look forward to hearing people’s views.

Comments (36)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:34am Sun 8 Dec 13

Zamora25 says...

If spending is being cut by £22.5m why is council tax going to rise by 2%. Surely it should be going down if anything.
If spending is being cut by £22.5m why is council tax going to rise by 2%. Surely it should be going down if anything. Zamora25

11:36am Sun 8 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

The key question is: How can you justify spending millions on transport schemes which are not working and which had targets of removing less than one per cent of traffic from our roads when you are cutting frontline services to the vulnerable which are hurting people far more than the benefits the transport schemes are delivering?
The key question is: How can you justify spending millions on transport schemes which are not working and which had targets of removing less than one per cent of traffic from our roads when you are cutting frontline services to the vulnerable which are hurting people far more than the benefits the transport schemes are delivering? Maxwell's Ghost

12:35pm Sun 8 Dec 13

scoobysnax says...

He could save £18 million by not giving away taxpayers money to that stupid Doughnut on Stick they plan on erecting at West Pier.

But it looks like Standard and Poor will reduce Brighton Council to "junk status" with the help of ConDems.
He could save £18 million by not giving away taxpayers money to that stupid Doughnut on Stick they plan on erecting at West Pier. But it looks like Standard and Poor will reduce Brighton Council to "junk status" with the help of ConDems. scoobysnax

12:43pm Sun 8 Dec 13

rolivan says...

Please could you get someone to buy you some new clothes for Christmas as that blue check shirt must be fraying at the collar.
Please could you get someone to buy you some new clothes for Christmas as that blue check shirt must be fraying at the collar. rolivan

2:11pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Thewithdeanyears. says...

Two fingers kit kat
Two fingers kit kat Thewithdeanyears.

2:15pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Eugenius says...

Zamora25 wrote:
If spending is being cut by £22.5m why is council tax going to rise by 2%. Surely it should be going down if anything.
Mainly because council tax is only one source of income (about 13% of the total) and the cuts are being made in the formula grant from central government. Each percentage point rise in council tax raises £1million so we would need a tax rise of 22% to make up the deficit.
[quote][p][bold]Zamora25[/bold] wrote: If spending is being cut by £22.5m why is council tax going to rise by 2%. Surely it should be going down if anything.[/p][/quote]Mainly because council tax is only one source of income (about 13% of the total) and the cuts are being made in the formula grant from central government. Each percentage point rise in council tax raises £1million so we would need a tax rise of 22% to make up the deficit. Eugenius

2:19pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Eugenius says...

scoobysnax wrote:
He could save £18 million by not giving away taxpayers money to that stupid Doughnut on Stick they plan on erecting at West Pier.

But it looks like Standard and Poor will reduce Brighton Council to "junk status" with the help of ConDems.
The council is not giving any money away to the i360.

Personally I'd be quite happy for the i360 to disappear up its own doughnut because I'm tired of explaining this over and over again but the proposal is that the council would borrow money from central government at a discount rate and then lend it to the developers at standard rate. This loan would generate £100,000 extra income a year for the council.
[quote][p][bold]scoobysnax[/bold] wrote: He could save £18 million by not giving away taxpayers money to that stupid Doughnut on Stick they plan on erecting at West Pier. But it looks like Standard and Poor will reduce Brighton Council to "junk status" with the help of ConDems.[/p][/quote]The council is not giving any money away to the i360. Personally I'd be quite happy for the i360 to disappear up its own doughnut because I'm tired of explaining this over and over again but the proposal is that the council would borrow money from central government at a discount rate and then lend it to the developers at standard rate. This loan would generate £100,000 extra income a year for the council. Eugenius

2:28pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Eugenius says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
The key question is: How can you justify spending millions on transport schemes which are not working and which had targets of removing less than one per cent of traffic from our roads when you are cutting frontline services to the vulnerable which are hurting people far more than the benefits the transport schemes are delivering?
Because that's not how local government finance works and we don't have the power to change it. Money for construction projects and transport schemes comes from successful bids for specific government grants. If the council wins money to build a cycle lane it isn't allowed to use that money to pay for more temporary social workers (for example). There is however a proposed cut to the transport policy team this year (so a reduction in staffing cost).
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: The key question is: How can you justify spending millions on transport schemes which are not working and which had targets of removing less than one per cent of traffic from our roads when you are cutting frontline services to the vulnerable which are hurting people far more than the benefits the transport schemes are delivering?[/p][/quote]Because that's not how local government finance works and we don't have the power to change it. Money for construction projects and transport schemes comes from successful bids for specific government grants. If the council wins money to build a cycle lane it isn't allowed to use that money to pay for more temporary social workers (for example). There is however a proposed cut to the transport policy team this year (so a reduction in staffing cost). Eugenius

3:42pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Somethingsarejustwrong says...

My one question is....

Given that you have achieved nothing other than to waste money, destroy infrastructure, demotivate residents, make life for working people difficult; why. don't you resign?

Laughable waster
My one question is.... Given that you have achieved nothing other than to waste money, destroy infrastructure, demotivate residents, make life for working people difficult; why. don't you resign? Laughable waster Somethingsarejustwrong

6:10pm Sun 8 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer.

How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest.
Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer. How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest. HJarrs

6:59pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Then break the mould Eugenius. Become a leading council which challenges how money is allocated and ring fenced instead of being with ther herd and spending it just because you have it.
Why not set up a transport co-operative and offer cut price transport for the deprived to help them back into work instead of re painting a cycle lane which leads to two unis which are closed for four months of the year.
Offer discounted bus tickets to those on low wages with some sort of grants, anything except spending millions re painting a cycle lane which already existed.
Waste is shameful, particulalry when the projected reduction in traffic was going to be less than one percent.
Come on Eugenius, it's no wonder that the general population think that local councils are a load of wasteful idiots. It wouldn't be tolerated in the private sector.
Be brave and get your colleagues at the council from all parties to change the system. Be leaders instead of followers.
Then break the mould Eugenius. Become a leading council which challenges how money is allocated and ring fenced instead of being with ther herd and spending it just because you have it. Why not set up a transport co-operative and offer cut price transport for the deprived to help them back into work instead of re painting a cycle lane which leads to two unis which are closed for four months of the year. Offer discounted bus tickets to those on low wages with some sort of grants, anything except spending millions re painting a cycle lane which already existed. Waste is shameful, particulalry when the projected reduction in traffic was going to be less than one percent. Come on Eugenius, it's no wonder that the general population think that local councils are a load of wasteful idiots. It wouldn't be tolerated in the private sector. Be brave and get your colleagues at the council from all parties to change the system. Be leaders instead of followers. Maxwell's Ghost

7:07pm Sun 8 Dec 13

keswick says...

If they want to save money in Adult Social Services they could save a fortune by getting it run properly and being properly accountable. That department is a disgrace and is rotten from the top downwards. And don't start me about the social workers it employs because they are a complete joke who I would not have cleaning my toilet.
If they want to save money in Adult Social Services they could save a fortune by getting it run properly and being properly accountable. That department is a disgrace and is rotten from the top downwards. And don't start me about the social workers it employs because they are a complete joke who I would not have cleaning my toilet. keswick

7:57pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Quiterie says...

HJarrs wrote:
Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer.

How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest.
So just out of interest mate, are you saying you really disagree with the cuts that ALL the major parties agree are necessary to reduce the national deficit? Is that REALLY what you think? And if that is really what you think what is the alternative?

Even with the current austerity measures we are adding over £100 billion a year to the National Debt. Do you REALLY want to add to that debt even more by borrowing more?

It's ok being anti-cuts if you're not in a position of responsibility, but the Greens are in power now. They're playing with the big boys. They can't make themselves look like petulant little school children throwing their toys out of the pram like Ben Duncan and say they're going to vote against their own party's budget without producing a viable alternative. It makes them looks ridiculous and gives them even less credibility as a serious political party. You have to deal with the hand you've been dealt by the government of the day. You can't just cry about it.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer. How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest.[/p][/quote]So just out of interest mate, are you saying you really disagree with the cuts that ALL the major parties agree are necessary to reduce the national deficit? Is that REALLY what you think? And if that is really what you think what is the alternative? Even with the current austerity measures we are adding over £100 billion a year to the National Debt. Do you REALLY want to add to that debt even more by borrowing more? It's ok being anti-cuts if you're not in a position of responsibility, but the Greens are in power now. They're playing with the big boys. They can't make themselves look like petulant little school children throwing their toys out of the pram like Ben Duncan and say they're going to vote against their own party's budget without producing a viable alternative. It makes them looks ridiculous and gives them even less credibility as a serious political party. You have to deal with the hand you've been dealt by the government of the day. You can't just cry about it. Quiterie

8:07pm Sun 8 Dec 13

the red head says...

I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now.

It's not rocket science. It's called humanity.
I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now. It's not rocket science. It's called humanity. the red head

8:36pm Sun 8 Dec 13

BtnLaurence says...

Was there really any point in that? The Greens spin so much that I'm surprised they can stand up.
Green could have been a great party for Brighton if they listened to people and compromised here and there and didn't try to spin out every mistake into a plus. Standing up and admitting things have been done wrong or badly looks so much better in my book than coming out with endless twaddle.
I'm sure we all want a cleaner, nicer city to live in but people are not going to stop driving their cars, however many times the Greens try to squeeze two lanes into one and make things as difficult and as expensive as possible for the motorist. People are still driving, only now a lot of the main roads are gridlocked and fumes and pollution billowing out on everyone. And why not make the parking zone areas out of Central Brighton "lite" it would make life so much easier for the people that pay for you. It's another example of you being so anti-car and not listening to residents.
If you weren't so anti-car and didn't try and steamroller everyone into your way of thinking, you might stand a chance of getting in again to continue some good work.
As it is, you have alienated so many people, including an awful lot of people that voted for you in the first place. I could go on and on about all this but really, what's the point? You don't take any notice of consultations unless they are in your favour, so why would you take any notice of this?
What a shame, you could have been so good.
Was there really any point in that? The Greens spin so much that I'm surprised they can stand up. Green could have been a great party for Brighton if they listened to people and compromised here and there and didn't try to spin out every mistake into a plus. Standing up and admitting things have been done wrong or badly looks so much better in my book than coming out with endless twaddle. I'm sure we all want a cleaner, nicer city to live in but people are not going to stop driving their cars, however many times the Greens try to squeeze two lanes into one and make things as difficult and as expensive as possible for the motorist. People are still driving, only now a lot of the main roads are gridlocked and fumes and pollution billowing out on everyone. And why not make the parking zone areas out of Central Brighton "lite" it would make life so much easier for the people that pay for you. It's another example of you being so anti-car and not listening to residents. If you weren't so anti-car and didn't try and steamroller everyone into your way of thinking, you might stand a chance of getting in again to continue some good work. As it is, you have alienated so many people, including an awful lot of people that voted for you in the first place. I could go on and on about all this but really, what's the point? You don't take any notice of consultations unless they are in your favour, so why would you take any notice of this? What a shame, you could have been so good. BtnLaurence

8:37pm Sun 8 Dec 13

jackthekipper says...

two chocolate covered fingers to you kitkat
youve messed the roads up even more,allowed a container town to be built '..wasted millions on the level park and given us nothing we can be proud of in our city,
two chocolate covered fingers to you kitkat youve messed the roads up even more,allowed a container town to be built '..wasted millions on the level park and given us nothing we can be proud of in our city, jackthekipper

9:30pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Eugenius says...

the red head wrote:
I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now.

It's not rocket science. It's called humanity.
If it was all one pot of money then of course social care would benefit at transport's expense. But they're separate sources of income.

Capital projects such as the Level, Seven Dials and Lewes Road are funded from one-off grants from central or EU government or the Lottery, and it just so happens our council is really good at bidding for these grants.

On the other hand, the revenue funding for local frontline services and staffing is being decimated by the Tory/Lib Dem government, 10% year on year. It's a deliberate squeeze to try and shift service delivery to the private sector, and that's what we're trying to resist because we don't believe tax payers' money should go to the shareholders of private companies.

Birmingham City Council has paid outsourcing company Capita £1billion over the last six years in a private contract that has turned sour. We don't think that is the way forwards for Brighton & Hove.
[quote][p][bold]the red head[/bold] wrote: I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now. It's not rocket science. It's called humanity.[/p][/quote]If it was all one pot of money then of course social care would benefit at transport's expense. But they're separate sources of income. Capital projects such as the Level, Seven Dials and Lewes Road are funded from one-off grants from central or EU government or the Lottery, and it just so happens our council is really good at bidding for these grants. On the other hand, the revenue funding for local frontline services and staffing is being decimated by the Tory/Lib Dem government, 10% year on year. It's a deliberate squeeze to try and shift service delivery to the private sector, and that's what we're trying to resist because we don't believe tax payers' money should go to the shareholders of private companies. Birmingham City Council has paid outsourcing company Capita £1billion over the last six years in a private contract that has turned sour. We don't think that is the way forwards for Brighton & Hove. Eugenius

9:46pm Sun 8 Dec 13

the red head says...

Eugenius wrote:
the red head wrote:
I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now.

It's not rocket science. It's called humanity.
If it was all one pot of money then of course social care would benefit at transport's expense. But they're separate sources of income.

Capital projects such as the Level, Seven Dials and Lewes Road are funded from one-off grants from central or EU government or the Lottery, and it just so happens our council is really good at bidding for these grants.

On the other hand, the revenue funding for local frontline services and staffing is being decimated by the Tory/Lib Dem government, 10% year on year. It's a deliberate squeeze to try and shift service delivery to the private sector, and that's what we're trying to resist because we don't believe tax payers' money should go to the shareholders of private companies.

Birmingham City Council has paid outsourcing company Capita £1billion over the last six years in a private contract that has turned sour. We don't think that is the way forwards for Brighton & Hove.
That isn't the point. You cannot eat at a fine restaurant with people starving tapping on the window to use an extreme analogy. Please do not patronise me with your pots and political point scoring. People in this city are suffering. I work for the council and have had a 1% payrise - the only one in three years.
There is no denying that this council is slapping us in the face with every new roadsign or tree misplaced on some egg shaped roundabout. And it goes on and on with more 20mphs being proposed, more road furniture, more dim street lighting - money money money - whilst people suffer to eat and heat their homes.
If you don't realise this - if you don't know this - then you are out of touch with what is happening here, in Brighton, now... and that is EVERYTHING that is wrong with this council.
You insult me with your tone.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the red head[/bold] wrote: I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now. It's not rocket science. It's called humanity.[/p][/quote]If it was all one pot of money then of course social care would benefit at transport's expense. But they're separate sources of income. Capital projects such as the Level, Seven Dials and Lewes Road are funded from one-off grants from central or EU government or the Lottery, and it just so happens our council is really good at bidding for these grants. On the other hand, the revenue funding for local frontline services and staffing is being decimated by the Tory/Lib Dem government, 10% year on year. It's a deliberate squeeze to try and shift service delivery to the private sector, and that's what we're trying to resist because we don't believe tax payers' money should go to the shareholders of private companies. Birmingham City Council has paid outsourcing company Capita £1billion over the last six years in a private contract that has turned sour. We don't think that is the way forwards for Brighton & Hove.[/p][/quote]That isn't the point. You cannot eat at a fine restaurant with people starving tapping on the window to use an extreme analogy. Please do not patronise me with your pots and political point scoring. People in this city are suffering. I work for the council and have had a 1% payrise - the only one in three years. There is no denying that this council is slapping us in the face with every new roadsign or tree misplaced on some egg shaped roundabout. And it goes on and on with more 20mphs being proposed, more road furniture, more dim street lighting - money money money - whilst people suffer to eat and heat their homes. If you don't realise this - if you don't know this - then you are out of touch with what is happening here, in Brighton, now... and that is EVERYTHING that is wrong with this council. You insult me with your tone. the red head

10:08pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Eugenius says...

the red head wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
the red head wrote:
I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now.

It's not rocket science. It's called humanity.
If it was all one pot of money then of course social care would benefit at transport's expense. But they're separate sources of income.

Capital projects such as the Level, Seven Dials and Lewes Road are funded from one-off grants from central or EU government or the Lottery, and it just so happens our council is really good at bidding for these grants.

On the other hand, the revenue funding for local frontline services and staffing is being decimated by the Tory/Lib Dem government, 10% year on year. It's a deliberate squeeze to try and shift service delivery to the private sector, and that's what we're trying to resist because we don't believe tax payers' money should go to the shareholders of private companies.

Birmingham City Council has paid outsourcing company Capita £1billion over the last six years in a private contract that has turned sour. We don't think that is the way forwards for Brighton & Hove.
That isn't the point. You cannot eat at a fine restaurant with people starving tapping on the window to use an extreme analogy. Please do not patronise me with your pots and political point scoring. People in this city are suffering. I work for the council and have had a 1% payrise - the only one in three years.
There is no denying that this council is slapping us in the face with every new roadsign or tree misplaced on some egg shaped roundabout. And it goes on and on with more 20mphs being proposed, more road furniture, more dim street lighting - money money money - whilst people suffer to eat and heat their homes.
If you don't realise this - if you don't know this - then you are out of touch with what is happening here, in Brighton, now... and that is EVERYTHING that is wrong with this council.
You insult me with your tone.
Sorry you feel insulted but it is an important point - none of the capital projects have been at the expense of day-to-day services because the funding source is completely different. I'm sorry that I don't know how to explain this in a way that doesn't sound bureaucratic but it is the truth.

To try an put it another way, if we had not had the Level, Lewes Road or Seven Dials work it would not have helped people who are suffering. No more money would have been available to frontline services.
[quote][p][bold]the red head[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the red head[/bold] wrote: I can barely look at this stuff anymore. STOP WASTING SO MUCH MONEY ON POINTLESS ROAD SCHEMES and start putting it into people who are suffering now. It's not rocket science. It's called humanity.[/p][/quote]If it was all one pot of money then of course social care would benefit at transport's expense. But they're separate sources of income. Capital projects such as the Level, Seven Dials and Lewes Road are funded from one-off grants from central or EU government or the Lottery, and it just so happens our council is really good at bidding for these grants. On the other hand, the revenue funding for local frontline services and staffing is being decimated by the Tory/Lib Dem government, 10% year on year. It's a deliberate squeeze to try and shift service delivery to the private sector, and that's what we're trying to resist because we don't believe tax payers' money should go to the shareholders of private companies. Birmingham City Council has paid outsourcing company Capita £1billion over the last six years in a private contract that has turned sour. We don't think that is the way forwards for Brighton & Hove.[/p][/quote]That isn't the point. You cannot eat at a fine restaurant with people starving tapping on the window to use an extreme analogy. Please do not patronise me with your pots and political point scoring. People in this city are suffering. I work for the council and have had a 1% payrise - the only one in three years. There is no denying that this council is slapping us in the face with every new roadsign or tree misplaced on some egg shaped roundabout. And it goes on and on with more 20mphs being proposed, more road furniture, more dim street lighting - money money money - whilst people suffer to eat and heat their homes. If you don't realise this - if you don't know this - then you are out of touch with what is happening here, in Brighton, now... and that is EVERYTHING that is wrong with this council. You insult me with your tone.[/p][/quote]Sorry you feel insulted but it is an important point - none of the capital projects have been at the expense of day-to-day services because the funding source is completely different. I'm sorry that I don't know how to explain this in a way that doesn't sound bureaucratic but it is the truth. To try an put it another way, if we had not had the Level, Lewes Road or Seven Dials work it would not have helped people who are suffering. No more money would have been available to frontline services. Eugenius

10:24pm Sun 8 Dec 13

the red head says...

Then eugenius, you have to concede that it is a vulgar show of misplaced resources. If you trained council workers who currently spend months, years working road schemes that prove to be dis functional and place them in positions where they can be used to help the suffering areas, instead of paying consultants, then you may get somewhere.
You need to listen. You really need to start to understand. People in this town feel abused. The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling. The greens are responsible for that as are all the sides who have used the past few years to give the greens enough rope for them to hang themselves. We, the ordinary inhabitants of this town are suffering and these shows of frivolity are insulting. You need to listen, you really do.
Then eugenius, you have to concede that it is a vulgar show of misplaced resources. If you trained council workers who currently spend months, years working road schemes that prove to be dis functional and place them in positions where they can be used to help the suffering areas, instead of paying consultants, then you may get somewhere. You need to listen. You really need to start to understand. People in this town feel abused. The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling. The greens are responsible for that as are all the sides who have used the past few years to give the greens enough rope for them to hang themselves. We, the ordinary inhabitants of this town are suffering and these shows of frivolity are insulting. You need to listen, you really do. the red head

10:54pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Eugenius must be part of the political machine because like many politicians he doesn't listen to the residents and still follows the old mantras of ring fenced money and continues to challenge the system which isn't working, old school, old politics.
I don't care if the transport schemes didn't come out of the budgets which affect the front line services, the picture being painted by the party in power locally is a council which is feathering the nests of a minority of wealthy people who can afford electric cars, who are time rich and can wander to local schools to drop the kids off and who work from home on media projects and don't need cars.
While this minority of people wander past the Level slapping themselves on the back and hold a party in Wild Park with about 20 people there to celebrate the re painted cycle lane, the families who live opposite in Moulsecoomb can't afford the £25 a week bus fare to get to work in town let alone take a family up the i360 or jump on the empty spinning wheel at £20 a time.
It sickens me to my stomach to see so-called socialists plugging their ears and closing their eyes to what's really going on in this city.
There is no excuse for excuses when we have 20 percent of the city's kids living in poverty while this council celebrates installing a light up bus time table in Preston Park.
Weird, insensitive and the end of the road for the Green Party.
Eugenius must be part of the political machine because like many politicians he doesn't listen to the residents and still follows the old mantras of ring fenced money and continues to challenge the system which isn't working, old school, old politics. I don't care if the transport schemes didn't come out of the budgets which affect the front line services, the picture being painted by the party in power locally is a council which is feathering the nests of a minority of wealthy people who can afford electric cars, who are time rich and can wander to local schools to drop the kids off and who work from home on media projects and don't need cars. While this minority of people wander past the Level slapping themselves on the back and hold a party in Wild Park with about 20 people there to celebrate the re painted cycle lane, the families who live opposite in Moulsecoomb can't afford the £25 a week bus fare to get to work in town let alone take a family up the i360 or jump on the empty spinning wheel at £20 a time. It sickens me to my stomach to see so-called socialists plugging their ears and closing their eyes to what's really going on in this city. There is no excuse for excuses when we have 20 percent of the city's kids living in poverty while this council celebrates installing a light up bus time table in Preston Park. Weird, insensitive and the end of the road for the Green Party. Maxwell's Ghost

10:54pm Sun 8 Dec 13

Eugenius says...

"The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling."

You've given away your supposed neutrality there, the evidence doesn't support this view at all.

Unemployment in the city is at a five year low (Argus 17 October), bucking the national trend and retail vacancies are down to 6% compared to a national average of 14%.

A BBC/ComRes poll in October this year asked residents for their verdict on the Green administration:

58% said council-provided services had improved

65% said Brighton and Hove was a nicer place to live
"The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling." You've given away your supposed neutrality there, the evidence doesn't support this view at all. Unemployment in the city is at a five year low (Argus 17 October), bucking the national trend and retail vacancies are down to 6% compared to a national average of 14%. A BBC/ComRes poll in October this year asked residents for their verdict on the Green administration: 58% said council-provided services had improved 65% said Brighton and Hove was a nicer place to live Eugenius

1:46am Mon 9 Dec 13

Golfer69 says...

Eugenius
Perhaps it's the Council fault for not explaining clearer to people why money from road schemes cannot be used! As it looks to most people F..k the special needs adults and children the Elderly social care, build a bike lane!
It doesn't look right however it's dressed up,!!! And I do understand the schemes monies are ring fenced. The Council officers do not help the Councillors when it comes to PR.
Eugenius Perhaps it's the Council fault for not explaining clearer to people why money from road schemes cannot be used! As it looks to most people F..k the special needs adults and children the Elderly social care, build a bike lane! It doesn't look right however it's dressed up,!!! And I do understand the schemes monies are ring fenced. The Council officers do not help the Councillors when it comes to PR. Golfer69

7:59am Mon 9 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

Golfer69 wrote:
Eugenius
Perhaps it's the Council fault for not explaining clearer to people why money from road schemes cannot be used! As it looks to most people F..k the special needs adults and children the Elderly social care, build a bike lane!
It doesn't look right however it's dressed up,!!! And I do understand the schemes monies are ring fenced. The Council officers do not help the Councillors when it comes to PR.
The funding of road schemes is well understood on this comments forum, we constantly repeat ourselves; conflating road funding with social spending etc, whilst knowing full well the money is legally ring fenced and therefore available only for specific areas of spending. Unfortunately, this obscures the fact that the council has been incredibly successful in attracting external funding, now running into the tens of millions. Money that has employed local people in construction and is preparing B&H for a brighter future. Sadly, some people, would rather the city turns away transport funding, yet know not a penny more would be spent on the areas they quote. Fewer jobs would be created and B&H would stagnate a result.

I read that spending is to be continually cut through to 2019! Forget local democracy, (remember the Tory snake oil of localism and big society?) before then local councils will have been reduced to providing the low threshold of statutory provision. If you are old, have a young family, ill or in any way reliant on council services you should take note and kick out Weatherly and Kirby at the next election, otherwise your predicament is very grim indeed.
[quote][p][bold]Golfer69[/bold] wrote: Eugenius Perhaps it's the Council fault for not explaining clearer to people why money from road schemes cannot be used! As it looks to most people F..k the special needs adults and children the Elderly social care, build a bike lane! It doesn't look right however it's dressed up,!!! And I do understand the schemes monies are ring fenced. The Council officers do not help the Councillors when it comes to PR.[/p][/quote]The funding of road schemes is well understood on this comments forum, we constantly repeat ourselves; conflating road funding with social spending etc, whilst knowing full well the money is legally ring fenced and therefore available only for specific areas of spending. Unfortunately, this obscures the fact that the council has been incredibly successful in attracting external funding, now running into the tens of millions. Money that has employed local people in construction and is preparing B&H for a brighter future. Sadly, some people, would rather the city turns away transport funding, yet know not a penny more would be spent on the areas they quote. Fewer jobs would be created and B&H would stagnate a result. I read that spending is to be continually cut through to 2019! Forget local democracy, (remember the Tory snake oil of localism and big society?) before then local councils will have been reduced to providing the low threshold of statutory provision. If you are old, have a young family, ill or in any way reliant on council services you should take note and kick out Weatherly and Kirby at the next election, otherwise your predicament is very grim indeed. HJarrs

8:03am Mon 9 Dec 13

salty_pete says...

Eugenius wrote:
"The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling."

You've given away your supposed neutrality there, the evidence doesn't support this view at all.

Unemployment in the city is at a five year low (Argus 17 October), bucking the national trend and retail vacancies are down to 6% compared to a national average of 14%.

A BBC/ComRes poll in October this year asked residents for their verdict on the Green administration:

58% said council-provided services had improved

65% said Brighton and Hove was a nicer place to live
Eugenius: You use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post. For support rather than illumination.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: "The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling." You've given away your supposed neutrality there, the evidence doesn't support this view at all. Unemployment in the city is at a five year low (Argus 17 October), bucking the national trend and retail vacancies are down to 6% compared to a national average of 14%. A BBC/ComRes poll in October this year asked residents for their verdict on the Green administration: 58% said council-provided services had improved 65% said Brighton and Hove was a nicer place to live[/p][/quote]Eugenius: You use statistics like a drunk uses a lamp post. For support rather than illumination. salty_pete

2:17pm Mon 9 Dec 13

the red head says...

Eugenius wrote:
"The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling."

You've given away your supposed neutrality there, the evidence doesn't support this view at all.

Unemployment in the city is at a five year low (Argus 17 October), bucking the national trend and retail vacancies are down to 6% compared to a national average of 14%.

A BBC/ComRes poll in October this year asked residents for their verdict on the Green administration:

58% said council-provided services had improved

65% said Brighton and Hove was a nicer place to live
I've given myself away? I wasn't trying to hide anything, of that I can assure you. Your statistics speak of nothing but numbers. I speak to people, real people, who live and work in this city. Not one... Not a single one... Has said that this council is doing good by them. Even the cyclists, eugenius, feel that the measures are just not working.

Like I said, learn to listen rather than spouting your party line. Is that really too hard? Start talking to real people and accepting that the way they feel is more valid than your percentages in some consultants report. Start engaging and listening rather than fighting it all the time.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: "The road users are at war. This towns morale is at an all time low. Businesses, residents, schools...all are struggling." You've given away your supposed neutrality there, the evidence doesn't support this view at all. Unemployment in the city is at a five year low (Argus 17 October), bucking the national trend and retail vacancies are down to 6% compared to a national average of 14%. A BBC/ComRes poll in October this year asked residents for their verdict on the Green administration: 58% said council-provided services had improved 65% said Brighton and Hove was a nicer place to live[/p][/quote]I've given myself away? I wasn't trying to hide anything, of that I can assure you. Your statistics speak of nothing but numbers. I speak to people, real people, who live and work in this city. Not one... Not a single one... Has said that this council is doing good by them. Even the cyclists, eugenius, feel that the measures are just not working. Like I said, learn to listen rather than spouting your party line. Is that really too hard? Start talking to real people and accepting that the way they feel is more valid than your percentages in some consultants report. Start engaging and listening rather than fighting it all the time. the red head

4:00pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Dealing with idiots says...

Why have you closed down another of your limited companies and started another Jason?
Why have you closed down another of your limited companies and started another Jason? Dealing with idiots

4:01pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Dealing with idiots says...

Why have you closed down another of your limited companies and started another?
Why have you closed down another of your limited companies and started another? Dealing with idiots

4:07pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Dealing with idiots says...

HJarrs wrote:
Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer. How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest.
We can start saving some money by cutting out 'consultants' like you HJ. Brush up your CV mate as Jason won't be in power much longer. Phelim is planning another palace coup shortly after Xmas. Ho Ho F*****G Ho.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer. How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest.[/p][/quote]We can start saving some money by cutting out 'consultants' like you HJ. Brush up your CV mate as Jason won't be in power much longer. Phelim is planning another palace coup shortly after Xmas. Ho Ho F*****G Ho. Dealing with idiots

7:26pm Mon 9 Dec 13

jimpy762 says...

Kitcats comments about resisting austerity and central plans to reduce local government show us quite effectively how out of step he is with the real world.
The students of our city have saddled the rest of us with a very expensive liability and a man of limited vision. Change please.
Kitcats comments about resisting austerity and central plans to reduce local government show us quite effectively how out of step he is with the real world. The students of our city have saddled the rest of us with a very expensive liability and a man of limited vision. Change please. jimpy762

9:46pm Mon 9 Dec 13

Somethingsarejustwrong says...

HJarrs wrote:
Golfer69 wrote:
Eugenius
Perhaps it's the Council fault for not explaining clearer to people why money from road schemes cannot be used! As it looks to most people F..k the special needs adults and children the Elderly social care, build a bike lane!
It doesn't look right however it's dressed up,!!! And I do understand the schemes monies are ring fenced. The Council officers do not help the Councillors when it comes to PR.
The funding of road schemes is well understood on this comments forum, we constantly repeat ourselves; conflating road funding with social spending etc, whilst knowing full well the money is legally ring fenced and therefore available only for specific areas of spending. Unfortunately, this obscures the fact that the council has been incredibly successful in attracting external funding, now running into the tens of millions. Money that has employed local people in construction and is preparing B&H for a brighter future. Sadly, some people, would rather the city turns away transport funding, yet know not a penny more would be spent on the areas they quote. Fewer jobs would be created and B&H would stagnate a result.

I read that spending is to be continually cut through to 2019! Forget local democracy, (remember the Tory snake oil of localism and big society?) before then local councils will have been reduced to providing the low threshold of statutory provision. If you are old, have a young family, ill or in any way reliant on council services you should take note and kick out Weatherly and Kirby at the next election, otherwise your predicament is very grim indeed.
Gosh. What a loser you are.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Golfer69[/bold] wrote: Eugenius Perhaps it's the Council fault for not explaining clearer to people why money from road schemes cannot be used! As it looks to most people F..k the special needs adults and children the Elderly social care, build a bike lane! It doesn't look right however it's dressed up,!!! And I do understand the schemes monies are ring fenced. The Council officers do not help the Councillors when it comes to PR.[/p][/quote]The funding of road schemes is well understood on this comments forum, we constantly repeat ourselves; conflating road funding with social spending etc, whilst knowing full well the money is legally ring fenced and therefore available only for specific areas of spending. Unfortunately, this obscures the fact that the council has been incredibly successful in attracting external funding, now running into the tens of millions. Money that has employed local people in construction and is preparing B&H for a brighter future. Sadly, some people, would rather the city turns away transport funding, yet know not a penny more would be spent on the areas they quote. Fewer jobs would be created and B&H would stagnate a result. I read that spending is to be continually cut through to 2019! Forget local democracy, (remember the Tory snake oil of localism and big society?) before then local councils will have been reduced to providing the low threshold of statutory provision. If you are old, have a young family, ill or in any way reliant on council services you should take note and kick out Weatherly and Kirby at the next election, otherwise your predicament is very grim indeed.[/p][/quote]Gosh. What a loser you are. Somethingsarejustwrong

7:10am Tue 10 Dec 13

HJarrs says...

Dealing with idiots wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer. How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest.
We can start saving some money by cutting out 'consultants' like you HJ. Brush up your CV mate as Jason won't be in power much longer. Phelim is planning another palace coup shortly after Xmas. Ho Ho F*****G Ho.
What a shame for you that I don't, nor ever have done any work for B&H council, no savings here. But don't let stop you from trying to obscure the fact that the council has lost £7.4 million so far over 2 years due to labour and conservative headline grabbing. And you want them in power!

I read yesterday that Birmingham is to lose a further 1000 jobs, it has already lost 6000 jobs (30%+) since 2010 as government cuts bite and services are rolled back or even ended. B&H council has done well comparatively to other authorities up and down the country but maintaining services cannot carry on as year on year government funding cuts take effect.

Ironically for the moanerati, the only money available for discretionary spending will be transport funding. Whoever is in power it will be cuts and cycle lanes.
[quote][p][bold]Dealing with idiots[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Reading about what is happening in neighbouring local councils and councils up and down the country, we have done exceptionally well in cutting costs and retaining services.......so far. Many councils have seen droves Libraries, Surestart centres, old people homes, day care centres etc already close down (East Sussex in the paper this week for example). However, as the cuts handed down by the wealthy members of the Nasty Party continue, there is an enevitability that the vulnerable are going to suffer. How disgraceful that 2 years ago locally Labour and Tories joined together to generate a cheap headline by stopping a 2% rise in council tax. They knew the cuts that were to come and this shameful act now costs the city £3.7million a year in lost revenue, hitting the poorest the hardest.[/p][/quote]We can start saving some money by cutting out 'consultants' like you HJ. Brush up your CV mate as Jason won't be in power much longer. Phelim is planning another palace coup shortly after Xmas. Ho Ho F*****G Ho.[/p][/quote]What a shame for you that I don't, nor ever have done any work for B&H council, no savings here. But don't let stop you from trying to obscure the fact that the council has lost £7.4 million so far over 2 years due to labour and conservative headline grabbing. And you want them in power! I read yesterday that Birmingham is to lose a further 1000 jobs, it has already lost 6000 jobs (30%+) since 2010 as government cuts bite and services are rolled back or even ended. B&H council has done well comparatively to other authorities up and down the country but maintaining services cannot carry on as year on year government funding cuts take effect. Ironically for the moanerati, the only money available for discretionary spending will be transport funding. Whoever is in power it will be cuts and cycle lanes. HJarrs

1:13pm Tue 10 Dec 13

s_james says...

At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded.

The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be.
At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded. The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be. s_james

10:41pm Tue 10 Dec 13

Somethingsarejustwrong says...

s_james wrote:
At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded.

The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be.
Yes HJarrs.

You are at best ridiculous. Keep up the hysterical posting

Laughable
[quote][p][bold]s_james[/bold] wrote: At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded. The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be.[/p][/quote]Yes HJarrs. You are at best ridiculous. Keep up the hysterical posting Laughable Somethingsarejustwrong

9:30am Wed 11 Dec 13

s_james says...

Somethingsarejustwro
ng
wrote:
s_james wrote:
At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded.

The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be.
Yes HJarrs.

You are at best ridiculous. Keep up the hysterical posting

Laughable
It greatly amuses me that people like you think that anyone with a different point of view must be hjarrs masquerading under one of numerous pseudonyms.
[quote][p][bold]Somethingsarejustwro ng[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s_james[/bold] wrote: At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded. The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be.[/p][/quote]Yes HJarrs. You are at best ridiculous. Keep up the hysterical posting Laughable[/p][/quote]It greatly amuses me that people like you think that anyone with a different point of view must be hjarrs masquerading under one of numerous pseudonyms. s_james

7:02am Thu 12 Dec 13

Somethingsarejustwrong says...

s_james wrote:
Somethingsarejustwro

ng
wrote:
s_james wrote:
At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded.

The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be.
Yes HJarrs.

You are at best ridiculous. Keep up the hysterical posting

Laughable
It greatly amuses me that people like you think that anyone with a different point of view must be hjarrs masquerading under one of numerous pseudonyms.
Yes HJarrs

You may be able to fool yourself although no regular user of this site can fail to spot your attempted spin

Sad yet laughable
[quote][p][bold]s_james[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Somethingsarejustwro ng[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]s_james[/bold] wrote: At least Eugenius and H_Jarrs are making valid points supported by the evidence. Vast majority of the rest of the comments are the usual ignorant hysterical rants from people who clearly have no understanding, or willingness to understand, how local government funding works. This all has nothing to do with road schemes! And nothing to do with the Greens – all Councils are under similar pressures and making similar cuts, although I happen to think the way our council is so transparent about budget setting is to be applauded. The more dislikes I get for making the points the more satisfied I will be.[/p][/quote]Yes HJarrs. You are at best ridiculous. Keep up the hysterical posting Laughable[/p][/quote]It greatly amuses me that people like you think that anyone with a different point of view must be hjarrs masquerading under one of numerous pseudonyms.[/p][/quote]Yes HJarrs You may be able to fool yourself although no regular user of this site can fail to spot your attempted spin Sad yet laughable Somethingsarejustwrong

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