The ArgusTalking Point: Do you think that Brighton and Hove should hold a referendum on council tax? (From The Argus)

Get involved: Send your news, views, pictures and video by texting SUPIC to 80360 or email us.

Talking Point: Do you think that Brighton and Hove should hold a referendum on council tax?

Last week, Brighton and Hove City Council revealed plans to raise council tax by 4.75%, which would trigger a £230,000 referendum.

Under new rules, any council wanting to raise taxes by more than 2% must put it to the vote - which has not yet been done by any other UK local authority. 

The vote would be open to all the city's275,000 residents. 

Do you think a referendum should be held? Or should the council stick to its original plans to raise taxes by 1.965?

Have your say below. 

Comments (85)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

3:14pm Mon 20 Jan 14

BrightonBrowser says...

Yes - Council show in detail what the money will be spent on - adult care service to reduce cuts etc We all grow old and it is likely that most of us will need the services provided by the Council. All will want a dignified, high quality services. Let the people decide yes or no in a public referendum.
Yes - Council show in detail what the money will be spent on - adult care service to reduce cuts etc We all grow old and it is likely that most of us will need the services provided by the Council. All will want a dignified, high quality services. Let the people decide yes or no in a public referendum. BrightonBrowser
  • Score: -25

3:18pm Mon 20 Jan 14

straightasadye says...

No I do not think a referendum costing tax payers 230K is anything but a stupid waste of money because only a lunatic would vote for an increase of 4.75% when an increase of 2% is all the council can get away with.
However, I do think it would be money well spent to hold a referendum asking tax payers: should the GREENS throw the towel before they completely wreck Brighton & Hove?
No I do not think a referendum costing tax payers 230K is anything but a stupid waste of money because only a lunatic would vote for an increase of 4.75% when an increase of 2% is all the council can get away with. However, I do think it would be money well spent to hold a referendum asking tax payers: should the GREENS throw the towel before they completely wreck Brighton & Hove? straightasadye
  • Score: 47

3:20pm Mon 20 Jan 14

VoodooGangbanger says...

so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that. VoodooGangbanger
  • Score: 43

3:30pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

Yes, let's have a referendum. When the Coalition was elected in 2010, people never knew they were voting for this level of austerity. Tens of millions have been taken out of the council budget in the last 3 years, with Brighton and Hove facing some of the harshest cuts in the South East. It's now getting to the point where threatened cuts are putting the elderly and vulnerable are at risk. Council tax rises have been below inflation in recent years but a freeze is not sustainable without causing real harm to people's lives. At the same time the Greens are a minority administration so it's fair and democratic to put this anti-austerity budget to a fresh public vote.
Yes, let's have a referendum. When the Coalition was elected in 2010, people never knew they were voting for this level of austerity. Tens of millions have been taken out of the council budget in the last 3 years, with Brighton and Hove facing some of the harshest cuts in the South East. It's now getting to the point where threatened cuts are putting the elderly and vulnerable are at risk. Council tax rises have been below inflation in recent years but a freeze is not sustainable without causing real harm to people's lives. At the same time the Greens are a minority administration so it's fair and democratic to put this anti-austerity budget to a fresh public vote. Eugenius
  • Score: -42

3:34pm Mon 20 Jan 14

kopite_rob says...

Simple maths really.
Raise the council tax by £71 a year generates £9M. (providing the Council actually colllect it)
Last years uncollected council tax £15.8M.

So rather than putting additional burden on residents how about ensuring they collect from everyone they're supposed to.
Simple maths really. Raise the council tax by £71 a year generates £9M. (providing the Council actually colllect it) Last years uncollected council tax £15.8M. So rather than putting additional burden on residents how about ensuring they collect from everyone they're supposed to. kopite_rob
  • Score: 50

3:34pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

If the referendum must be held then ONLY those that pay council tax should be allowed to vote as it's THEIR money.

That said all the referendum is really for is to abdicate the Greens responsibility and to provide political grandstanding. The Greens have yet to answer the question on how charging hard working tax payers is actually standing up to the cuts ? It's not - it's just taking yet more money from OUR pockets.
If the referendum must be held then ONLY those that pay council tax should be allowed to vote as it's THEIR money. That said all the referendum is really for is to abdicate the Greens responsibility and to provide political grandstanding. The Greens have yet to answer the question on how charging hard working tax payers is actually standing up to the cuts ? It's not - it's just taking yet more money from OUR pockets. Fight_Back
  • Score: 40

3:37pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
The Greens are actually doing a better job than the previous adminstration of making the council more efficient - a whopping £30 million has been saved through a strenuous value for money programme, including cutting down the number of office buildings in use. Senior pay has been reduced to the lowest level in the council's history.
[quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]The Greens are actually doing a better job than the previous adminstration of making the council more efficient - a whopping £30 million has been saved through a strenuous value for money programme, including cutting down the number of office buildings in use. Senior pay has been reduced to the lowest level in the council's history. Eugenius
  • Score: -40

3:38pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Man of steel says...

Yes, as long as:-
A) It is a fair and above board result, without the numbers being played with.
B) It is only open to Brighton and Hove council tax payers, meaning that any non council tax payer, i.e. students, are not allowed to vote.
C) The results are adhered to by the council, and not ignored by the greens like all other public opinions in the past.
Yes, as long as:- A) It is a fair and above board result, without the numbers being played with. B) It is only open to Brighton and Hove council tax payers, meaning that any non council tax payer, i.e. students, are not allowed to vote. C) The results are adhered to by the council, and not ignored by the greens like all other public opinions in the past. Man of steel
  • Score: 29

3:38pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

Fight_Back wrote:
If the referendum must be held then ONLY those that pay council tax should be allowed to vote as it's THEIR money.

That said all the referendum is really for is to abdicate the Greens responsibility and to provide political grandstanding. The Greens have yet to answer the question on how charging hard working tax payers is actually standing up to the cuts ? It's not - it's just taking yet more money from OUR pockets.
It's fundamentally a choice about what sort of society we want. At the moment Labour and Conservatives are just seeking to close down that debate.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: If the referendum must be held then ONLY those that pay council tax should be allowed to vote as it's THEIR money. That said all the referendum is really for is to abdicate the Greens responsibility and to provide political grandstanding. The Greens have yet to answer the question on how charging hard working tax payers is actually standing up to the cuts ? It's not - it's just taking yet more money from OUR pockets.[/p][/quote]It's fundamentally a choice about what sort of society we want. At the moment Labour and Conservatives are just seeking to close down that debate. Eugenius
  • Score: -37

3:40pm Mon 20 Jan 14

tivoli says...

The council has had it finances cut year after year by this government.Efficienc
y savings and cuts have been made by the council However this year 24 million has been cut by government.Unless extra income is gaimed then cuts which which hit the most vulnerable will be made.The Green party lead council do not want this to happen.The only alternative to raise a significant sum of money is to raise council tax However this cannot done without a referendum.I would like to see the Labour and Tory parties supporting a refendum to allow the city its chance to vote for saving vital services by having a council tax increase which if you include previous years budgets by this administration still will be less than inflation over the period.But are those two parties both too grey to allow democracy?
The council has had it finances cut year after year by this government.Efficienc y savings and cuts have been made by the council However this year 24 million has been cut by government.Unless extra income is gaimed then cuts which which hit the most vulnerable will be made.The Green party lead council do not want this to happen.The only alternative to raise a significant sum of money is to raise council tax However this cannot done without a referendum.I would like to see the Labour and Tory parties supporting a refendum to allow the city its chance to vote for saving vital services by having a council tax increase which if you include previous years budgets by this administration still will be less than inflation over the period.But are those two parties both too grey to allow democracy? tivoli
  • Score: -30

3:47pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.
[quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government. Eugenius
  • Score: -16

3:47pm Mon 20 Jan 14

thelieshurts says...

VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon.
If it's for the 360i forget it.
[quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon. If it's for the 360i forget it. thelieshurts
  • Score: 22

3:49pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Sir Prised says...

I paid £652 in 1998 and £1507 in 2013. Sorry, but that increase is more than sufficient.
I paid £652 in 1998 and £1507 in 2013. Sorry, but that increase is more than sufficient. Sir Prised
  • Score: 32

3:50pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
If the referendum must be held then ONLY those that pay council tax should be allowed to vote as it's THEIR money.

That said all the referendum is really for is to abdicate the Greens responsibility and to provide political grandstanding. The Greens have yet to answer the question on how charging hard working tax payers is actually standing up to the cuts ? It's not - it's just taking yet more money from OUR pockets.
It's fundamentally a choice about what sort of society we want. At the moment Labour and Conservatives are just seeking to close down that debate.
Yet Kitcat says this is about standing up to government cuts - obviously at the tax payers expense. Let me make it clear - YOU charging ME more doesn't stop the overall cuts to council grants from central government. It just means I have less to spend on essential things like gas or food.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: If the referendum must be held then ONLY those that pay council tax should be allowed to vote as it's THEIR money. That said all the referendum is really for is to abdicate the Greens responsibility and to provide political grandstanding. The Greens have yet to answer the question on how charging hard working tax payers is actually standing up to the cuts ? It's not - it's just taking yet more money from OUR pockets.[/p][/quote]It's fundamentally a choice about what sort of society we want. At the moment Labour and Conservatives are just seeking to close down that debate.[/p][/quote]Yet Kitcat says this is about standing up to government cuts - obviously at the tax payers expense. Let me make it clear - YOU charging ME more doesn't stop the overall cuts to council grants from central government. It just means I have less to spend on essential things like gas or food. Fight_Back
  • Score: 27

3:50pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

thelieshurts wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon.
If it's for the 360i forget it.
Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council.
[quote][p][bold]thelieshurts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon. If it's for the 360i forget it.[/p][/quote]Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council. Eugenius
  • Score: -20

3:52pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

Oh, to add a question - which area of the budget is the £230k cost coming from ? Green Councillor allowances hopefully.
Oh, to add a question - which area of the budget is the £230k cost coming from ? Green Councillor allowances hopefully. Fight_Back
  • Score: 18

3:53pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Quiterie says...

Eugenius wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
The Greens are actually doing a better job than the previous adminstration of making the council more efficient - a whopping £30 million has been saved through a strenuous value for money programme, including cutting down the number of office buildings in use. Senior pay has been reduced to the lowest level in the council's history.
The fact that £30 million has already been saved just shows how grotesquely inefficient the Council was in the first place. I refuse to believe that there aren't more savings that could be made instead of increasing Council Tax. The fact that the referendum will cost £230,000 is a good example of how inefficient the Council is. How on earth can it possibly cost that much?
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]The Greens are actually doing a better job than the previous adminstration of making the council more efficient - a whopping £30 million has been saved through a strenuous value for money programme, including cutting down the number of office buildings in use. Senior pay has been reduced to the lowest level in the council's history.[/p][/quote]The fact that £30 million has already been saved just shows how grotesquely inefficient the Council was in the first place. I refuse to believe that there aren't more savings that could be made instead of increasing Council Tax. The fact that the referendum will cost £230,000 is a good example of how inefficient the Council is. How on earth can it possibly cost that much? Quiterie
  • Score: 27

3:53pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

Eugenius wrote:
thelieshurts wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon.
If it's for the 360i forget it.
Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council.
And I will ask AGAIN ( Cllr Hawtree dodged the question ) who pays the loan if the developer goes bust ?????????????????
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thelieshurts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon. If it's for the 360i forget it.[/p][/quote]Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council.[/p][/quote]And I will ask AGAIN ( Cllr Hawtree dodged the question ) who pays the loan if the developer goes bust ????????????????? Fight_Back
  • Score: 14

3:54pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Richada says...

NO!

This will be a further £230,000 wasted.

The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us.

If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.
NO! This will be a further £230,000 wasted. The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us. If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%. Richada
  • Score: 14

3:54pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

Eugenius wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.
But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.[/p][/quote]But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum. Fight_Back
  • Score: 16

3:58pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

Fight_Back wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.
But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.
Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.[/p][/quote]But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.[/p][/quote]Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down. Eugenius
  • Score: -17

4:01pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Richada says...

straightasadye wrote:
No I do not think a referendum costing tax payers 230K is anything but a stupid waste of money because only a lunatic would vote for an increase of 4.75% when an increase of 2% is all the council can get away with.
However, I do think it would be money well spent to hold a referendum asking tax payers: should the GREENS throw the towel before they completely wreck Brighton & Hove?
Yes, but all of the lunatics voting YES are not council tax payers - we pay, they get the benefits, and I am not talking about the "vulnerable" here.

I am sure that it was not the council tax paying residents who voted this chaotic shower in, we just have to pay for thier awful experiment here in Brighton and Hove.

In terms of local services - where we are at least - they have already wrecked it.
[quote][p][bold]straightasadye[/bold] wrote: No I do not think a referendum costing tax payers 230K is anything but a stupid waste of money because only a lunatic would vote for an increase of 4.75% when an increase of 2% is all the council can get away with. However, I do think it would be money well spent to hold a referendum asking tax payers: should the GREENS throw the towel before they completely wreck Brighton & Hove?[/p][/quote]Yes, but all of the lunatics voting YES are not council tax payers - we pay, they get the benefits, and I am not talking about the "vulnerable" here. I am sure that it was not the council tax paying residents who voted this chaotic shower in, we just have to pay for thier awful experiment here in Brighton and Hove. In terms of local services - where we are at least - they have already wrecked it. Richada
  • Score: 10

4:04pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

Fight_Back wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
thelieshurts wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon.
If it's for the 360i forget it.
Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council.
And I will ask AGAIN ( Cllr Hawtree dodged the question ) who pays the loan if the developer goes bust ?????????????????
I suppose the council would have to run it themselves or more likely find another company to take it on. However it's expected to be highly profitable if it does get the go ahead.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thelieshurts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon. If it's for the 360i forget it.[/p][/quote]Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council.[/p][/quote]And I will ask AGAIN ( Cllr Hawtree dodged the question ) who pays the loan if the developer goes bust ?????????????????[/p][/quote]I suppose the council would have to run it themselves or more likely find another company to take it on. However it's expected to be highly profitable if it does get the go ahead. Eugenius
  • Score: -20

4:06pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.
But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.
Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down.
If that really is the case then thank god Labour and the Tories will kill this charade off. Note you still haven't answered which budget the £230k would come from nor who pays for the i360 if the developer goes bust - questions too embarrassing for you ?
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.[/p][/quote]But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.[/p][/quote]Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down.[/p][/quote]If that really is the case then thank god Labour and the Tories will kill this charade off. Note you still haven't answered which budget the £230k would come from nor who pays for the i360 if the developer goes bust - questions too embarrassing for you ? Fight_Back
  • Score: 16

4:09pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

Richada wrote:
NO!

This will be a further £230,000 wasted.

The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us.

If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.
What vanity projects?

I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.
[quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: NO! This will be a further £230,000 wasted. The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us. If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.[/p][/quote]What vanity projects? I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot. Eugenius
  • Score: -15

4:09pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
thelieshurts wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon.
If it's for the 360i forget it.
Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council.
And I will ask AGAIN ( Cllr Hawtree dodged the question ) who pays the loan if the developer goes bust ?????????????????
I suppose the council would have to run it themselves or more likely find another company to take it on. However it's expected to be highly profitable if it does get the go ahead.
Good avoidance of the question - WHO pays the loan if the developer goes bust ? Oh, of course, the tax payer !!!!!!!!! Green deceit as usual.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thelieshurts[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]I agree let the students pay, they live here, should be a another 5,000 coming soon. If it's for the 360i forget it.[/p][/quote]Promise you it's nothing to do with the i360. If that does go ahead (still to be decided) it will be assisted with a loan from central government to the developer, not using council tax, and will be paid back with interest going to the council.[/p][/quote]And I will ask AGAIN ( Cllr Hawtree dodged the question ) who pays the loan if the developer goes bust ?????????????????[/p][/quote]I suppose the council would have to run it themselves or more likely find another company to take it on. However it's expected to be highly profitable if it does get the go ahead.[/p][/quote]Good avoidance of the question - WHO pays the loan if the developer goes bust ? Oh, of course, the tax payer !!!!!!!!! Green deceit as usual. Fight_Back
  • Score: 14

4:32pm Mon 20 Jan 14

greenhousedani says...

Yes, let's have a referendum.

The council is not being given enough money by the government to do everything we need it to do. The draft budget published in December (with a 2% council tax rise - still below inflation, so really a cut) included lots of shocking cuts to services that vulnerable people depend on. Things like residential care for elderly and disabled people, employment support for people with learning disabilities, short breaks for families with disabled children.

I'm greatly relieved that the administration is not pressing ahead with these cuts without exploring all the alternatives. I love living in a city where we look out for each other and accept all the different people who live here.

I would like to be able to vote to share the cost of those vital services between all of us, so that the people most in need are not the ones paying the heaviest price.
Yes, let's have a referendum. The council is not being given enough money by the government to do everything we need it to do. The draft budget published in December (with a 2% council tax rise - still below inflation, so really a cut) included lots of shocking cuts to services that vulnerable people depend on. Things like residential care for elderly and disabled people, employment support for people with learning disabilities, short breaks for families with disabled children. I'm greatly relieved that the administration is not pressing ahead with these cuts without exploring all the alternatives. I love living in a city where we look out for each other and accept all the different people who live here. I would like to be able to vote to share the cost of those vital services between all of us, so that the people most in need are not the ones paying the heaviest price. greenhousedani
  • Score: -15

4:38pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Richada says...

Eugenius wrote:
Richada wrote:
NO!

This will be a further £230,000 wasted.

The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us.

If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.
What vanity projects?

I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.
Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas.

Someone else votes, we get to pay.

Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site.

How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable".
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: NO! This will be a further £230,000 wasted. The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us. If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.[/p][/quote]What vanity projects? I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.[/p][/quote]Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas. Someone else votes, we get to pay. Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site. How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable". Richada
  • Score: 16

4:45pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Zeta Function says...

RE: Should Brighton & Hove hold a CT referendum?

The proposed increase will be tough on low income CT payers. Their interests need to be weighed against those who will benefit from higher CT bills.

CT paying households are likely to vote No.

With high property prices, rents and CTs many will consider the benefits of migrating.
RE: Should Brighton & Hove hold a CT referendum? The proposed increase will be tough on low income CT payers. Their interests need to be weighed against those who will benefit from higher CT bills. CT paying households are likely to vote No. With high property prices, rents and CTs many will consider the benefits of migrating. Zeta Function
  • Score: 14

4:47pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

Richada wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Richada wrote:
NO!

This will be a further £230,000 wasted.

The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us.

If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.
What vanity projects?

I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.
Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas.

Someone else votes, we get to pay.

Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site.

How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable".
I feel we're getting off the point but i360 would directly raise £1m per year for the council in loan interest and business rates. Regeneration of Preston Street would also benefit the local economy, the better the city is performing the more money is collected in business rates and the less council tax needs to be increased.
[quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: NO! This will be a further £230,000 wasted. The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us. If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.[/p][/quote]What vanity projects? I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.[/p][/quote]Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas. Someone else votes, we get to pay. Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site. How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable".[/p][/quote]I feel we're getting off the point but i360 would directly raise £1m per year for the council in loan interest and business rates. Regeneration of Preston Street would also benefit the local economy, the better the city is performing the more money is collected in business rates and the less council tax needs to be increased. Eugenius
  • Score: -15

4:54pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

Eugenius wrote:
Richada wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Richada wrote:
NO!

This will be a further £230,000 wasted.

The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us.

If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.
What vanity projects?

I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.
Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas.

Someone else votes, we get to pay.

Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site.

How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable".
I feel we're getting off the point but i360 would directly raise £1m per year for the council in loan interest and business rates. Regeneration of Preston Street would also benefit the local economy, the better the city is performing the more money is collected in business rates and the less council tax needs to be increased.
It would only raise the £1m a year IF the developer gets it built and stays in business. If they fail at any point then the local taxpayer picks up the tab. Something you, Hawtree and Kitcat refuse to admit.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: NO! This will be a further £230,000 wasted. The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us. If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.[/p][/quote]What vanity projects? I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.[/p][/quote]Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas. Someone else votes, we get to pay. Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site. How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable".[/p][/quote]I feel we're getting off the point but i360 would directly raise £1m per year for the council in loan interest and business rates. Regeneration of Preston Street would also benefit the local economy, the better the city is performing the more money is collected in business rates and the less council tax needs to be increased.[/p][/quote]It would only raise the £1m a year IF the developer gets it built and stays in business. If they fail at any point then the local taxpayer picks up the tab. Something you, Hawtree and Kitcat refuse to admit. Fight_Back
  • Score: 13

5:10pm Mon 20 Jan 14

DC Brighton says...

Of course not. This is throwing good money after bad. Another excuse for Kitkat and his cronies to make the national press. It is nothing to do with government cuts, the vulnerable, or any of the other tosh being spouted by the Greens.

It will be a waste of £230k at the very least. In the highly unlikely event that 4.75% gets passed, we will literally be handing over more money to be wasted on a final hurrah by the council before they finally get the push. There won't be any more money for the vulnerable - if the Greens really believed this they should have accounted for them in this year's budget BEFORE wasting it on new recycling bins and blanket speed limits (to name but two). Their ineptitude, double standards, and the utter contempt they are treating us with is astonishing.

If the no-confidence motion had received this much attention, they probably wouldn't even be here.
Of course not. This is throwing good money after bad. Another excuse for Kitkat and his cronies to make the national press. It is nothing to do with government cuts, the vulnerable, or any of the other tosh being spouted by the Greens. It will be a waste of £230k at the very least. In the highly unlikely event that 4.75% gets passed, we will literally be handing over more money to be wasted on a final hurrah by the council before they finally get the push. There won't be any more money for the vulnerable - if the Greens really believed this they should have accounted for them in this year's budget BEFORE wasting it on new recycling bins and blanket speed limits (to name but two). Their ineptitude, double standards, and the utter contempt they are treating us with is astonishing. If the no-confidence motion had received this much attention, they probably wouldn't even be here. DC Brighton
  • Score: 15

5:42pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Quiterie says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.
But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.
Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down.
So what is the exact referendum question? I've been wondering that myself.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.[/p][/quote]But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.[/p][/quote]Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down.[/p][/quote]So what is the exact referendum question? I've been wondering that myself. Quiterie
  • Score: 8

6:01pm Mon 20 Jan 14

greenpaws says...

The population in Brighton is aging and there are many more people to help than 10 years ago. The government cuts the budget much more than other departments and yet we are already much more efficient than government departments.

If we want to look after elderly and disabled it costs more and not less, yet council has coped with cuts so far. At some point, the pain kicks in. If people want to harm the elderly and disabled then keep support government bribes and smaller grants. If not, fight austerity, vote against the parties offering austerity, and please pay a bit more to help the vulnerable.

Many of us will need these services when we're older so it will effect us in the future. What about our older relatives and friends? Do we care? I do and hope many others do. I trust the people to do the best thing.
The population in Brighton is aging and there are many more people to help than 10 years ago. The government cuts the budget much more than other departments and yet we are already much more efficient than government departments. If we want to look after elderly and disabled it costs more and not less, yet council has coped with cuts so far. At some point, the pain kicks in. If people want to harm the elderly and disabled then keep support government bribes and smaller grants. If not, fight austerity, vote against the parties offering austerity, and please pay a bit more to help the vulnerable. Many of us will need these services when we're older so it will effect us in the future. What about our older relatives and friends? Do we care? I do and hope many others do. I trust the people to do the best thing. greenpaws
  • Score: -11

6:09pm Mon 20 Jan 14

HJarrs says...

Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money.

Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.
Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money. Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years. HJarrs
  • Score: -15

6:15pm Mon 20 Jan 14

greenpaws says...

Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%.

Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation.

The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse.

The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less.
Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%. Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation. The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse. The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less. greenpaws
  • Score: -12

6:18pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Fight_Back says...

HJarrs wrote:
Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money.

Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.
It's like pulling teeth but I'll ask again .... which budget will the £230k come from ? Remember, if it's a no vote you can't get the money back from the increase.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money. Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.[/p][/quote]It's like pulling teeth but I'll ask again .... which budget will the £230k come from ? Remember, if it's a no vote you can't get the money back from the increase. Fight_Back
  • Score: 10

6:41pm Mon 20 Jan 14

jimpy762 says...

No need for a referendum, Eric Pickles and sensible conservatives have exactly the right idea of a freeze. Why should local authorities be allowed to rinse people left, right and centre only to hose it about on vanity projects and PR at the expense of genuine service?. And then have the brass cheek to demand an increase without proving they're fit to make the right decisions with their existing budget. And resort to cheap emotional blackmail to fund their own careers.
Kitcat and Jarrs and lefties in general who demand to live off and waste other people's money with scarce idea where it came from, or the sheer effort it took to generate, should take their pious, poorly concealed self entitlement, drown it and have a long think about public perception of spendthrifts during hard times.
No need for a referendum, Eric Pickles and sensible conservatives have exactly the right idea of a freeze. Why should local authorities be allowed to rinse people left, right and centre only to hose it about on vanity projects and PR at the expense of genuine service?. And then have the brass cheek to demand an increase without proving they're fit to make the right decisions with their existing budget. And resort to cheap emotional blackmail to fund their own careers. Kitcat and Jarrs and lefties in general who demand to live off and waste other people's money with scarce idea where it came from, or the sheer effort it took to generate, should take their pious, poorly concealed self entitlement, drown it and have a long think about public perception of spendthrifts during hard times. jimpy762
  • Score: 9

6:45pm Mon 20 Jan 14

wexler53 says...

Hopefully common sense will prevail and the Labour and Conservatives will kick this green scourge into the wilderness with a vote of no confidence.

Then the city's finances need a thorough audit just to see what these idiots have done with the money (prosecuting any that might deserve it as necessary) before any attempt at drawing up a budget is made.

Then, efficiencies need to be prioritised, systems simplified, bureaucracy stripped out, number of councillors reduced, allowances fixed or reduced, and a sensible budget set.

And all vanity projects and consultants banned.

Let's see the city administration really work for the council tax payer.

And the question of a referendum won't arise - £230k not wasted for a start. Next, cancel the i360, the biggest white elephant ever.
Hopefully common sense will prevail and the Labour and Conservatives will kick this green scourge into the wilderness with a vote of no confidence. Then the city's finances need a thorough audit just to see what these idiots have done with the money (prosecuting any that might deserve it as necessary) before any attempt at drawing up a budget is made. Then, efficiencies need to be prioritised, systems simplified, bureaucracy stripped out, number of councillors reduced, allowances fixed or reduced, and a sensible budget set. And all vanity projects and consultants banned. Let's see the city administration really work for the council tax payer. And the question of a referendum won't arise - £230k not wasted for a start. Next, cancel the i360, the biggest white elephant ever. wexler53
  • Score: 13

6:47pm Mon 20 Jan 14

jimpy762 says...

jimpy762 wrote:
No need for a referendum, Eric Pickles and sensible conservatives have exactly the right idea of a freeze. Why should local authorities be allowed to rinse people left, right and centre only to hose it about on vanity projects and PR at the expense of genuine service?. And then have the brass cheek to demand an increase without proving they're fit to make the right decisions with their existing budget. And resort to cheap emotional blackmail to fund their own careers.
Kitcat and Jarrs and lefties in general who demand to live off and waste other people's money with scarce idea where it came from, or the sheer effort it took to generate, should take their pious, poorly concealed self entitlement, drown it and have a long think about public perception of spendthrifts during hard times.
I despise hypocrisy but that's all we get from the left. On one hand they try to score cheap political points about the cost of living and the next minute they want to bump taxes up. They must think we're stupid. Anyone who buys into their bull***t has to be. Unless of course they have a vested interest.
[quote][p][bold]jimpy762[/bold] wrote: No need for a referendum, Eric Pickles and sensible conservatives have exactly the right idea of a freeze. Why should local authorities be allowed to rinse people left, right and centre only to hose it about on vanity projects and PR at the expense of genuine service?. And then have the brass cheek to demand an increase without proving they're fit to make the right decisions with their existing budget. And resort to cheap emotional blackmail to fund their own careers. Kitcat and Jarrs and lefties in general who demand to live off and waste other people's money with scarce idea where it came from, or the sheer effort it took to generate, should take their pious, poorly concealed self entitlement, drown it and have a long think about public perception of spendthrifts during hard times.[/p][/quote]I despise hypocrisy but that's all we get from the left. On one hand they try to score cheap political points about the cost of living and the next minute they want to bump taxes up. They must think we're stupid. Anyone who buys into their bull***t has to be. Unless of course they have a vested interest. jimpy762
  • Score: 11

6:53pm Mon 20 Jan 14

mimseycal says...

Do I think that BHCC should hold a referendum on proposed Council Tax rises? Yes, I do!
I also think that prior to this referendum, we should hold public meetings, not council or political party led, explaining exactly
1 - What this proposed rise is meant to address.
2 - How can we make sure that the money will actually go towards those issues we have highlighted as holding priority.

We need to take control of this council which ultimately works for us. Councillors are elected by us to represent us and Council Officers are paid for by us to run our city.
Do I think that BHCC should hold a referendum on proposed Council Tax rises? Yes, I do! I also think that prior to this referendum, we should hold public meetings, not council or political party led, explaining exactly 1 - What this proposed rise is meant to address. 2 - How can we make sure that the money will actually go towards those issues we have highlighted as holding priority. We need to take control of this council which ultimately works for us. Councillors are elected by us to represent us and Council Officers are paid for by us to run our city. mimseycal
  • Score: 3

7:32pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Richada says...

HJarrs wrote:
Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money.

Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.
4.75% modest?

It is more than double the current inflation rate and 100% more than very many council tax payers have had in the way of an increase during the last 3 years.

These same council tax payers have had to satisfy their bosses and customers, whilst struggling to look after their own families - in many cases including "vulnerable" relatives.

During that time council services have gone to pot in the name of political ideology, serving nobody but a minority of Councillors, some of whom have the temerity to accuse Brighton born residents of being "in-bred".

As a self-confessed in-bred, fully paid up member of those to whom you refer as the "moanerati" I do not consider 4.75% to be a "modest increase".

Neither do I wish to see another £230,000 squandered on a referendum PLUS the ensuing cost and chaos when council tax bills, standing orders etc have to be adjusted and re-issued.

The current administration has failed us miserably, it is broken. No 4.75% "sticking plaster" is going to fix that.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money. Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.[/p][/quote]4.75% modest? It is more than double the current inflation rate and 100% more than very many council tax payers have had in the way of an increase during the last 3 years. These same council tax payers have had to satisfy their bosses and customers, whilst struggling to look after their own families - in many cases including "vulnerable" relatives. During that time council services have gone to pot in the name of political ideology, serving nobody but a minority of Councillors, some of whom have the temerity to accuse Brighton born residents of being "in-bred". As a self-confessed in-bred, fully paid up member of those to whom you refer as the "moanerati" I do not consider 4.75% to be a "modest increase". Neither do I wish to see another £230,000 squandered on a referendum PLUS the ensuing cost and chaos when council tax bills, standing orders etc have to be adjusted and re-issued. The current administration has failed us miserably, it is broken. No 4.75% "sticking plaster" is going to fix that. Richada
  • Score: 9

7:40pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Don't tell me a council needs money when it has spent £6 million re painting a cycle lane which already existed.
No one believes a word the greens say.
The game is over.
Don't tell me a council needs money when it has spent £6 million re painting a cycle lane which already existed. No one believes a word the greens say. The game is over. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 10

7:43pm Mon 20 Jan 14

a person says...

How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student.

The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself.
Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay
council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to.
How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community
a fee / tax for overnight parking .

It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up.
If everybody paid their share it need never go up.
How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student. The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself. Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to. How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community a fee / tax for overnight parking . It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up. If everybody paid their share it need never go up. a person
  • Score: 7

7:44pm Mon 20 Jan 14

HJarrs says...

Fight_Back wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money.

Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.
It's like pulling teeth but I'll ask again .... which budget will the £230k come from ? Remember, if it's a no vote you can't get the money back from the increase.
Dunno, why don't you ask the council and whilst you are asking them perhaps you can find out which budgets are to be slashed due the this year's £24 million grant cut and what could be saved by the £7-10 million to be raised by the proposed council tax rise?

Just look down the road to Seaford in today's paper to see what a mess the Conservatives will bring.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money. Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.[/p][/quote]It's like pulling teeth but I'll ask again .... which budget will the £230k come from ? Remember, if it's a no vote you can't get the money back from the increase.[/p][/quote]Dunno, why don't you ask the council and whilst you are asking them perhaps you can find out which budgets are to be slashed due the this year's £24 million grant cut and what could be saved by the £7-10 million to be raised by the proposed council tax rise? Just look down the road to Seaford in today's paper to see what a mess the Conservatives will bring. HJarrs
  • Score: -9

7:50pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Brighton Living says...

I think they are only doing this because they are a bunch of Amateurs who have spend thousands making mistakes and now need to cover it up by getting more money.
I think they are only doing this because they are a bunch of Amateurs who have spend thousands making mistakes and now need to cover it up by getting more money. Brighton Living
  • Score: 8

7:55pm Mon 20 Jan 14

jimpy762 says...

Its now common knowledge that only a smidgeon of revenue raised actually ends up in the mouths of the much trumpeted 'vulnerable and needy'. The majority of it gets filtered off into salaries and pensions, administration and consultancy fees, IT programmes, websites and blurb. Its an industry designed to suit those who work in it and not those its actually meant to help. So to keep banging on about helping the helpless when you're basically feathering your own nests at theirs and our expense is a line in poor taste and more than a little thin.
Its now common knowledge that only a smidgeon of revenue raised actually ends up in the mouths of the much trumpeted 'vulnerable and needy'. The majority of it gets filtered off into salaries and pensions, administration and consultancy fees, IT programmes, websites and blurb. Its an industry designed to suit those who work in it and not those its actually meant to help. So to keep banging on about helping the helpless when you're basically feathering your own nests at theirs and our expense is a line in poor taste and more than a little thin. jimpy762
  • Score: 11

8:04pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

Check out Brighton and Hove Independent News for a six page special about a very interesting situation in the housing department of this council.
Well done to that newspaper but at least now we have some of the UKs broadsheet journalists sniffing around the council and its members and officers. Your PR nonsense has been exposed and it's only just begun.
Check out Brighton and Hove Independent News for a six page special about a very interesting situation in the housing department of this council. Well done to that newspaper but at least now we have some of the UKs broadsheet journalists sniffing around the council and its members and officers. Your PR nonsense has been exposed and it's only just begun. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 9

8:10pm Mon 20 Jan 14

greenpaws says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Don't tell me a council needs money when it has spent £6 million re painting a cycle lane which already existed.
No one believes a word the greens say.
The game is over.
Transport funding CANNOT be spent on adult social care. Equally, capital funding CANNOT be spent on running costs.

The council CANNOT change the rules.

Improved highways also will allow for less accident for the vulnerable and DO NOT reduce their services.

The government CUTS money NOT the council.

The vast majority of council have fared much worse in their management and I'm grateful we have a Green administration putting people and not politics first!
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Don't tell me a council needs money when it has spent £6 million re painting a cycle lane which already existed. No one believes a word the greens say. The game is over.[/p][/quote]Transport funding CANNOT be spent on adult social care. Equally, capital funding CANNOT be spent on running costs. The council CANNOT change the rules. Improved highways also will allow for less accident for the vulnerable and DO NOT reduce their services. The government CUTS money NOT the council. The vast majority of council have fared much worse in their management and I'm grateful we have a Green administration putting people and not politics first! greenpaws
  • Score: -10

8:12pm Mon 20 Jan 14

s&k says...

We pay them to make decions even if they are unpalatable. No to spending such a large amount on referendum for council tax!
We pay them to make decions even if they are unpalatable. No to spending such a large amount on referendum for council tax! s&k
  • Score: -1

8:13pm Mon 20 Jan 14

greenpaws says...

a person wrote:
How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student.

The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself.
Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay
council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to.
How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community
a fee / tax for overnight parking .

It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up.
If everybody paid their share it need never go up.
If you want the Council Tax rules changed you should lobby the government or vote for a party that does.

The Greens would scrap Council Tax as they think it is abhorrent and unfair. They have little power due to the Tories' and Labour's centralisation of powers.

20mph speed limits come from transport capital funding and not Council Tax. The money CANNOT be used to fill; the gap in the adult social care bill.
[quote][p][bold]a person[/bold] wrote: How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student. The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself. Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to. How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community a fee / tax for overnight parking . It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up. If everybody paid their share it need never go up.[/p][/quote]If you want the Council Tax rules changed you should lobby the government or vote for a party that does. The Greens would scrap Council Tax as they think it is abhorrent and unfair. They have little power due to the Tories' and Labour's centralisation of powers. 20mph speed limits come from transport capital funding and not Council Tax. The money CANNOT be used to fill; the gap in the adult social care bill. greenpaws
  • Score: -5

8:15pm Mon 20 Jan 14

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
Don't tell me a council needs money when it has spent £6 million re painting a cycle lane which already existed.
No one believes a word the greens say.
The game is over.
What we up to now? A 100 times with this old chestnut? £1.4 million for a cycle lane out of a £6 million transport scheme with the works to the Gyratory to come out of this sum. What was the council share? Ah yes, a bit under £500k. Good business! Did it even come from council tax? I bet not, it probably came from the parking surplus.

You must be beside yourself that Labour is begging the Tories to come in and take over, which cuts do you fancy first?
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: Don't tell me a council needs money when it has spent £6 million re painting a cycle lane which already existed. No one believes a word the greens say. The game is over.[/p][/quote]What we up to now? A 100 times with this old chestnut? £1.4 million for a cycle lane out of a £6 million transport scheme with the works to the Gyratory to come out of this sum. What was the council share? Ah yes, a bit under £500k. Good business! Did it even come from council tax? I bet not, it probably came from the parking surplus. You must be beside yourself that Labour is begging the Tories to come in and take over, which cuts do you fancy first? HJarrs
  • Score: -9

8:17pm Mon 20 Jan 14

HJarrs says...

mimseycal wrote:
Do I think that BHCC should hold a referendum on proposed Council Tax rises? Yes, I do!
I also think that prior to this referendum, we should hold public meetings, not council or political party led, explaining exactly
1 - What this proposed rise is meant to address.
2 - How can we make sure that the money will actually go towards those issues we have highlighted as holding priority.

We need to take control of this council which ultimately works for us. Councillors are elected by us to represent us and Council Officers are paid for by us to run our city.
Yes. Very sensible. I really had hoped for a united non-political council front on this. Oh well!
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: Do I think that BHCC should hold a referendum on proposed Council Tax rises? Yes, I do! I also think that prior to this referendum, we should hold public meetings, not council or political party led, explaining exactly 1 - What this proposed rise is meant to address. 2 - How can we make sure that the money will actually go towards those issues we have highlighted as holding priority. We need to take control of this council which ultimately works for us. Councillors are elected by us to represent us and Council Officers are paid for by us to run our city.[/p][/quote]Yes. Very sensible. I really had hoped for a united non-political council front on this. Oh well! HJarrs
  • Score: -8

8:26pm Mon 20 Jan 14

a person says...

greenpaws wrote:
a person wrote:
How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student.

The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself.
Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay
council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to.
How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community
a fee / tax for overnight parking .

It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up.
If everybody paid their share it need never go up.
If you want the Council Tax rules changed you should lobby the government or vote for a party that does.

The Greens would scrap Council Tax as they think it is abhorrent and unfair. They have little power due to the Tories' and Labour's centralisation of powers.

20mph speed limits come from transport capital funding and not Council Tax. The money CANNOT be used to fill; the gap in the adult social care bill.
My point was not the money it costs , but the fact
I assume the greens bought in the 20mph law ! by themselves .
it did not come from the government .
So why cant the greens bring in a law for landlords and travellers.
Maybe the greens should lobby the government ,
to make it fair for every council tax payer .
[quote][p][bold]greenpaws[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]a person[/bold] wrote: How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student. The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself. Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to. How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community a fee / tax for overnight parking . It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up. If everybody paid their share it need never go up.[/p][/quote]If you want the Council Tax rules changed you should lobby the government or vote for a party that does. The Greens would scrap Council Tax as they think it is abhorrent and unfair. They have little power due to the Tories' and Labour's centralisation of powers. 20mph speed limits come from transport capital funding and not Council Tax. The money CANNOT be used to fill; the gap in the adult social care bill.[/p][/quote]My point was not the money it costs , but the fact I assume the greens bought in the 20mph law ! by themselves . it did not come from the government . So why cant the greens bring in a law for landlords and travellers. Maybe the greens should lobby the government , to make it fair for every council tax payer . a person
  • Score: 4

8:46pm Mon 20 Jan 14

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! says...

HJ said to me that some smart Alec will probably come on here and suggest that if Brighton residents want to increase their personal contributions to the council coffers then they can do without any unnecessary bureaucracy and cost.

HJ also said that the Greens were taking the tax paying residents for a ride. Apparently when the final cycle path has been built, from the air they will read ' Brighton Ghetto '
HJ said to me that some smart Alec will probably come on here and suggest that if Brighton residents want to increase their personal contributions to the council coffers then they can do without any unnecessary bureaucracy and cost. HJ also said that the Greens were taking the tax paying residents for a ride. Apparently when the final cycle path has been built, from the air they will read ' Brighton Ghetto ' I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars!
  • Score: 5

8:57pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Idontbelieveit1948 says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
VoodooGangbanger wrote:
so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back.

the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.
It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.
But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.
Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down.
Are you sure on your statement above Eugenius ?

According to the Elections and Democracy division it is ultimately a matter for the Electoral Registrations Officer to determine whether an individual is resident at a particular address as residence is not defined in the Representation of the People Act 1983.

Interestingly the question of residence has been ruled by the courts to a considerable degree of permanence.

To me this must cast doubt on the right of students to vote as they can hardly be held to be permanent residents as they ;

1) are only here for approximately 30 weeks a year and
2) almost exclusively have a permanent residence elsewhere (unless they come from the area of course)

I believe there is a strong argument for denying the student population, which is largely transient and most definitely not permanent, a vote in local and general elections and in a local referendum.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]VoodooGangbanger[/bold] wrote: so many residents have been driven from the city, if we just made students pay council tax the council wouldn't be in dire need of funds, students cause the most noise and waste in the city and give nothing back. the already high council tax going higher will just drive more residents from the city and more students in, it will achieve nothing in the long run, and so long as the council squanders its funds theres no point in giving them more, they need to grow up and learn how to manage money a bit better and simply handing them more won't help them do that.[/p][/quote]It's true that the number of students in the city adds to the budget pressure (more people using services without paying any tax), but the council has no power to charge them, that's another rule set by national government.[/p][/quote]But you don't need to allow them to vote in the referendum.[/p][/quote]Afraid we do, the rules are set by Eric Pickles. Even the referendum question is set down.[/p][/quote]Are you sure on your statement above Eugenius ? According to the Elections and Democracy division it is ultimately a matter for the Electoral Registrations Officer to determine whether an individual is resident at a particular address as residence is not defined in the Representation of the People Act 1983. Interestingly the question of residence has been ruled by the courts to a considerable degree of permanence. To me this must cast doubt on the right of students to vote as they can hardly be held to be permanent residents as they ; 1) are only here for approximately 30 weeks a year and 2) almost exclusively have a permanent residence elsewhere (unless they come from the area of course) I believe there is a strong argument for denying the student population, which is largely transient and most definitely not permanent, a vote in local and general elections and in a local referendum. Idontbelieveit1948
  • Score: 7

9:17pm Mon 20 Jan 14

NickBtn says...

Eugenius wrote:
Richada wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Richada wrote:
NO!

This will be a further £230,000 wasted.

The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us.

If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.
What vanity projects?

I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.
Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas.

Someone else votes, we get to pay.

Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site.

How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable".
I feel we're getting off the point but i360 would directly raise £1m per year for the council in loan interest and business rates. Regeneration of Preston Street would also benefit the local economy, the better the city is performing the more money is collected in business rates and the less council tax needs to be increased.
So business is good for the city? Why then aren't the greens supporting business - driving local residents and visitors away from the city. Drop evening parking charges after 6pm.

I rarely go into the city in the evening for a meal - parking charges or around £4 for a bus fare are too much. So if you want to regenerate then allow people to park for free in the evening

If you prefer bus use (I certainly would prefer this as allows me to drink too) then why have the council sat by and allowed year after year of bus price rises more than double inflation (and quadruple average wage rises)? Why not work with the bus company, persuade them to introduce specials fares (eg. refund of bus ticket with meal bought locally etc). So many wasted opportunities for the greens....

Vote green - get rubbish
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: NO! This will be a further £230,000 wasted. The current administration cannot be trusted to spend our hard earned cash on essential services rather than vanity projects. A new administration can have 2% i.e. the present inflation rate, the current administration deserve not a penny extra from us. If the law forces a referendum to be held, only those actually paying council tax should be given the vote. This could be very simply (and cheaply) administered by sending out a three option "tick form" with the council tax bills, those options being FREEZE - PLUS 2% - PLUS 4.75%.[/p][/quote]What vanity projects? I think that's an interesting idea about sending the questionnaire out with the bills however the Localism Act defines in detail the requirements for the referendum and it has to be a proper ballot.[/p][/quote]Oh yes, a "proper ballot" - that's where chickens vote on behalf of turkeys for Christmas. Someone else votes, we get to pay. Vanity projects? Hmmm.......guess you don't live in this town, read the local news.....watch TV - shall we start with a paultry (sorry - terrible pun there) £36M loan for the i360. You can read about that elsewhere here without even leaving this site. How exactly are such projects helping the "elderly and vulnerable" you quite rightly hilight elsewhere in this thread? I know that I sound like a stuck record, but when you can't even get our biins emptied, we all start to feel "vulnerable".[/p][/quote]I feel we're getting off the point but i360 would directly raise £1m per year for the council in loan interest and business rates. Regeneration of Preston Street would also benefit the local economy, the better the city is performing the more money is collected in business rates and the less council tax needs to be increased.[/p][/quote]So business is good for the city? Why then aren't the greens supporting business - driving local residents and visitors away from the city. Drop evening parking charges after 6pm. I rarely go into the city in the evening for a meal - parking charges or around £4 for a bus fare are too much. So if you want to regenerate then allow people to park for free in the evening If you prefer bus use (I certainly would prefer this as allows me to drink too) then why have the council sat by and allowed year after year of bus price rises more than double inflation (and quadruple average wage rises)? Why not work with the bus company, persuade them to introduce specials fares (eg. refund of bus ticket with meal bought locally etc). So many wasted opportunities for the greens.... Vote green - get rubbish NickBtn
  • Score: 9

9:19pm Mon 20 Jan 14

NickBtn says...

HJarrs wrote:
Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money.

Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.
The proposed increase will be significantly higher than the average increase in wages - so it is an increase in the proportion of income that you are asking working people to pay
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: Reluctantly, to save services in the face of government cuts, having already made huge efficiencies and having sold off city assets, a modest increase of council tax is the only way in which sufficient revenue can be raised. The referendum is a government requirement for this and democracy costs money. Nobody wants to pay more than they have to. But even after the proposed increase, council tax will have gone up by less than the rate of inflation over the last 3 years.[/p][/quote]The proposed increase will be significantly higher than the average increase in wages - so it is an increase in the proportion of income that you are asking working people to pay NickBtn
  • Score: 9

9:32pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Maxwell's Ghost says...

HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you. Maxwell's Ghost
  • Score: 10

9:46pm Mon 20 Jan 14

mimseycal says...

greenpaws wrote:
Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%.

Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation.

The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse.

The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less.
The rate of inflation has very little bearing on the spending capacity of the average wage earner. Inflation measures the aggregate or general price level within an economy. It does not measure the disposable income in an economy.

Given that wages and disposable income on average has failed to rise, what with weak wage growth and the rising cost of utilities; even where a loaf of bread would be no more then 10p, if you have but 5p in your pocket, the price of a loaf of bread would be beyond you.
[quote][p][bold]greenpaws[/bold] wrote: Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%. Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation. The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse. The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less.[/p][/quote]The rate of inflation has very little bearing on the spending capacity of the average wage earner. Inflation measures the aggregate or general price level within an economy. It does not measure the disposable income in an economy. Given that wages and disposable income on average has failed to rise, what with weak wage growth and the rising cost of utilities; even where a loaf of bread would be no more then 10p, if you have but 5p in your pocket, the price of a loaf of bread would be beyond you. mimseycal
  • Score: 6

10:02pm Mon 20 Jan 14

greenpaws says...

a person wrote:
greenpaws wrote:
a person wrote:
How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student.

The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself.
Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay
council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to.
How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community
a fee / tax for overnight parking .

It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up.
If everybody paid their share it need never go up.
If you want the Council Tax rules changed you should lobby the government or vote for a party that does.

The Greens would scrap Council Tax as they think it is abhorrent and unfair. They have little power due to the Tories' and Labour's centralisation of powers.

20mph speed limits come from transport capital funding and not Council Tax. The money CANNOT be used to fill; the gap in the adult social care bill.
My point was not the money it costs , but the fact
I assume the greens bought in the 20mph law ! by themselves .
it did not come from the government .
So why cant the greens bring in a law for landlords and travellers.
Maybe the greens should lobby the government ,
to make it fair for every council tax payer .
The 20mph is allowed under transport law set by parliament. The council has no law creating powers.

Councils are NOT allowed to change the law to tax landlords in any circumstances. It simply cannot change the laws.
[quote][p][bold]a person[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenpaws[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]a person[/bold] wrote: How ridiculous that the government say the landlords don’t have to pay council tax ,for houses that they own if let to a student. The council bought in the 20 mph speed limits by itself. Why cant it bring in a law ! to say landlords should pay council tax on the houses they own , regardless of who they let it to. How about also bringing in a law ! charging the travelling community a fee / tax for overnight parking . It would seem that thousands of people that do not pay council tax , will be able to tell the people that do pay it , that their bills are unfairly going up. If everybody paid their share it need never go up.[/p][/quote]If you want the Council Tax rules changed you should lobby the government or vote for a party that does. The Greens would scrap Council Tax as they think it is abhorrent and unfair. They have little power due to the Tories' and Labour's centralisation of powers. 20mph speed limits come from transport capital funding and not Council Tax. The money CANNOT be used to fill; the gap in the adult social care bill.[/p][/quote]My point was not the money it costs , but the fact I assume the greens bought in the 20mph law ! by themselves . it did not come from the government . So why cant the greens bring in a law for landlords and travellers. Maybe the greens should lobby the government , to make it fair for every council tax payer .[/p][/quote]The 20mph is allowed under transport law set by parliament. The council has no law creating powers. Councils are NOT allowed to change the law to tax landlords in any circumstances. It simply cannot change the laws. greenpaws
  • Score: -3

10:24pm Mon 20 Jan 14

the red head says...

To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now...
People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects.
Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology.
To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now... People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects. Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology. the red head
  • Score: 7

10:28pm Mon 20 Jan 14

Eugenius says...

mimseycal wrote:
greenpaws wrote:
Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%.

Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation.

The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse.

The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less.
The rate of inflation has very little bearing on the spending capacity of the average wage earner. Inflation measures the aggregate or general price level within an economy. It does not measure the disposable income in an economy.

Given that wages and disposable income on average has failed to rise, what with weak wage growth and the rising cost of utilities; even where a loaf of bread would be no more then 10p, if you have but 5p in your pocket, the price of a loaf of bread would be beyond you.
This is a good point, which is why we are being careful not to describe it as a modest or trivial increase. But if we put it to a referendum then it does become a personal spending choice. Taking Green and Labour votes together, there is a majority in this city who did not vote for austerity in 2010 or 2011 so I have some faith that, presented with the facts, a narrow majority will vote for a tax rise this year to plug the gap made by the Coalition's cuts.
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenpaws[/bold] wrote: Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%. Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation. The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse. The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less.[/p][/quote]The rate of inflation has very little bearing on the spending capacity of the average wage earner. Inflation measures the aggregate or general price level within an economy. It does not measure the disposable income in an economy. Given that wages and disposable income on average has failed to rise, what with weak wage growth and the rising cost of utilities; even where a loaf of bread would be no more then 10p, if you have but 5p in your pocket, the price of a loaf of bread would be beyond you.[/p][/quote]This is a good point, which is why we are being careful not to describe it as a modest or trivial increase. But if we put it to a referendum then it does become a personal spending choice. Taking Green and Labour votes together, there is a majority in this city who did not vote for austerity in 2010 or 2011 so I have some faith that, presented with the facts, a narrow majority will vote for a tax rise this year to plug the gap made by the Coalition's cuts. Eugenius
  • Score: -5

11:20pm Mon 20 Jan 14

mimseycal says...

Putting a question to a referendum does not mean that you are making it a personal spending choice. What it does mean however is that you are ceding that it is the residents of this city who have the right to determine what happens in their city.
Putting a question to a referendum does not mean that you are making it a personal spending choice. What it does mean however is that you are ceding that it is the residents of this city who have the right to determine what happens in their city. mimseycal
  • Score: 2

12:26am Tue 21 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

the red head wrote:
To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now...
People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects.
Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology.
Yes, such a shame this turned into a more balanced and informed debate than the usual coarse, one-sided, under-informed, over-opinionated, anti-everything discussions we normally see. This thread is also heavily lacking in the usual personal insults and disguised foul language that people normally like to use to force their message home.
[quote][p][bold]the red head[/bold] wrote: To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now... People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects. Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology.[/p][/quote]Yes, such a shame this turned into a more balanced and informed debate than the usual coarse, one-sided, under-informed, over-opinionated, anti-everything discussions we normally see. This thread is also heavily lacking in the usual personal insults and disguised foul language that people normally like to use to force their message home. Gribbet
  • Score: -2

6:10am Tue 21 Jan 14

I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars! says...

Gribbet wrote:
the red head wrote:
To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now...
People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects.
Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology.
Yes, such a shame this turned into a more balanced and informed debate than the usual coarse, one-sided, under-informed, over-opinionated, anti-everything discussions we normally see. This thread is also heavily lacking in the usual personal insults and disguised foul language that people normally like to use to force their message home.
Yes, well done to the Greens on this one
[quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the red head[/bold] wrote: To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now... People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects. Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology.[/p][/quote]Yes, such a shame this turned into a more balanced and informed debate than the usual coarse, one-sided, under-informed, over-opinionated, anti-everything discussions we normally see. This thread is also heavily lacking in the usual personal insults and disguised foul language that people normally like to use to force their message home.[/p][/quote]Yes, well done to the Greens on this one I'm H Jarrs and I can't stand cars!
  • Score: 1

8:14am Tue 21 Jan 14

HJarrs says...

Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
[quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come! HJarrs
  • Score: -4

9:52am Tue 21 Jan 14

Richada says...

HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
[quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us. Richada
  • Score: 4

10:51am Tue 21 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

Richada wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?
[quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.[/p][/quote]Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...? Gribbet
  • Score: -3

11:24am Tue 21 Jan 14

Richada says...

Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?
What about them?

The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now?

Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax.

The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash.

Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on.

In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this.

Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition.

Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent?

Vote Green - get chaos and spin.
[quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.[/p][/quote]Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?[/p][/quote]What about them? The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now? Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax. The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash. Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on. In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this. Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition. Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent? Vote Green - get chaos and spin. Richada
  • Score: 4

11:30am Tue 21 Jan 14

the red head says...

Gribbet wrote:
the red head wrote:
To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now...
People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects.
Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology.
Yes, such a shame this turned into a more balanced and informed debate than the usual coarse, one-sided, under-informed, over-opinionated, anti-everything discussions we normally see. This thread is also heavily lacking in the usual personal insults and disguised foul language that people normally like to use to force their message home.
Which is why, I presume, you chose to ignore everything I wrote and open a discussion about the issue I'd made points on, and instead chose my post to get a personal gripe across? Um yeah, ok.
[quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]the red head[/bold] wrote: To summarise all I have said in previous posts, which to be honest we're a lot more sensible before the sudden influx (and perhaps another dying gasp of a dying council) pro greeners who seem to flood each council report on the argus now... People of Brighton and hove who are hanging by a thread financially should not be subject to this rise. I work for the council and have had a 1% pay rise in four years. The administration is plagued by in fighting, backstabbing and flailing for the next power show. This city is plagued by their legacy of bin strikes, rising crime, falling standards in services and general despondency in local business. We are discouraging tourism by upping parking charges, failing to support events such as white night, burning of the clocks and pride. Instead money has been ploughed into vanity projects for road traffic management which has backfired with inefficient street lighting, the massive majority of car users 'breaking the law' with the police standing by because even they don't believe in the 20mph (thank goodness) and even though that money was from a separate grant, the people in this city see it as a slap in the face that they are suffering while these vast amounts if money are seemingly used for vanity projects. Get real and get the greens out. They are a disaster and should not be allowed to use the people of this town as a perverse experiment for their tinpot ideology.[/p][/quote]Yes, such a shame this turned into a more balanced and informed debate than the usual coarse, one-sided, under-informed, over-opinionated, anti-everything discussions we normally see. This thread is also heavily lacking in the usual personal insults and disguised foul language that people normally like to use to force their message home.[/p][/quote]Which is why, I presume, you chose to ignore everything I wrote and open a discussion about the issue I'd made points on, and instead chose my post to get a personal gripe across? Um yeah, ok. the red head
  • Score: 1

12:05pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Brighton1000 says...

Richada wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?
What about them?

The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now?

Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax.

The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash.

Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on.

In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this.

Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition.

Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent?

Vote Green - get chaos and spin.
Best post Ive read, Perfectly put!
[quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.[/p][/quote]Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?[/p][/quote]What about them? The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now? Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax. The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash. Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on. In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this. Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition. Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent? Vote Green - get chaos and spin.[/p][/quote]Best post Ive read, Perfectly put! Brighton1000
  • Score: 4

12:30pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

Richada wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?
What about them?

The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now?

Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax.

The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash.

Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on.

In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this.

Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition.

Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent?

Vote Green - get chaos and spin.
Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then.
[quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.[/p][/quote]Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?[/p][/quote]What about them? The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now? Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax. The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash. Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on. In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this. Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition. Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent? Vote Green - get chaos and spin.[/p][/quote]Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then. Gribbet
  • Score: 0

1:08pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Brighton1000 says...

Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?
What about them?

The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now?

Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax.

The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash.

Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on.

In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this.

Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition.

Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent?

Vote Green - get chaos and spin.
Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then.
'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet'

So WHY are you constantly saying it will result in cuts to the vulnerable of the city if you DONT yet know what it will look like anyway?

This is the exact reason the public have lost confidence in you, You're obviously intelligent, Cant you see that?
[quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.[/p][/quote]Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?[/p][/quote]What about them? The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now? Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax. The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash. Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on. In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this. Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition. Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent? Vote Green - get chaos and spin.[/p][/quote]Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then.[/p][/quote]'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' So WHY are you constantly saying it will result in cuts to the vulnerable of the city if you DONT yet know what it will look like anyway? This is the exact reason the public have lost confidence in you, You're obviously intelligent, Cant you see that? Brighton1000
  • Score: 2

1:43pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

Brighton1000 wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?
What about them?

The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now?

Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax.

The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash.

Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on.

In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this.

Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition.

Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent?

Vote Green - get chaos and spin.
Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then.
'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet'

So WHY are you constantly saying it will result in cuts to the vulnerable of the city if you DONT yet know what it will look like anyway?

This is the exact reason the public have lost confidence in you, You're obviously intelligent, Cant you see that?
I've actually never said that myself, I don't work for the council either, but my thinking is that the cuts will hit many areas of life, not just social care. Be prepared to see a few more potholes with white circles painted round them in the coming years, who knows.

I am annoyed with our government though imposing these cuts while at the same time effectively blocking councils from doing anything meaningful about it by making it law to hold a referendum for increases of more than 2%. I don't like paying more money in taxes, but I remember increases of more than 10% a few years ago under Labour, and that was imposed without any public input towards the decision to increase.
[quote][p][bold]Brighton1000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.[/p][/quote]Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?[/p][/quote]What about them? The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now? Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax. The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash. Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on. In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this. Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition. Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent? Vote Green - get chaos and spin.[/p][/quote]Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then.[/p][/quote]'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' So WHY are you constantly saying it will result in cuts to the vulnerable of the city if you DONT yet know what it will look like anyway? This is the exact reason the public have lost confidence in you, You're obviously intelligent, Cant you see that?[/p][/quote]I've actually never said that myself, I don't work for the council either, but my thinking is that the cuts will hit many areas of life, not just social care. Be prepared to see a few more potholes with white circles painted round them in the coming years, who knows. I am annoyed with our government though imposing these cuts while at the same time effectively blocking councils from doing anything meaningful about it by making it law to hold a referendum for increases of more than 2%. I don't like paying more money in taxes, but I remember increases of more than 10% a few years ago under Labour, and that was imposed without any public input towards the decision to increase. Gribbet
  • Score: -1

2:39pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Residenttaxpayer says...

I'm fed up with paying for poor rubbish collection, poor bus service disrupted by so called road improvements that clearly are nothing of the sort, being ignored when it snows and being told to get on a bike. People who think there should be a rise should come clean about whether they actually pay council tax..... I suspect they don't. The city is not well run but run for people who live in the centre, on the flat, near shops, who don't need to travel to work ( or don't work), have no garden and have no children. I am horrified at the idea of wasting the hard earned money of residents who actually pay tax, on a referendum. They just don't care about us at all.
I'm fed up with paying for poor rubbish collection, poor bus service disrupted by so called road improvements that clearly are nothing of the sort, being ignored when it snows and being told to get on a bike. People who think there should be a rise should come clean about whether they actually pay council tax..... I suspect they don't. The city is not well run but run for people who live in the centre, on the flat, near shops, who don't need to travel to work ( or don't work), have no garden and have no children. I am horrified at the idea of wasting the hard earned money of residents who actually pay tax, on a referendum. They just don't care about us at all. Residenttaxpayer
  • Score: 6

3:12pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Richada says...

Residenttaxpayer wrote:
I'm fed up with paying for poor rubbish collection, poor bus service disrupted by so called road improvements that clearly are nothing of the sort, being ignored when it snows and being told to get on a bike. People who think there should be a rise should come clean about whether they actually pay council tax..... I suspect they don't. The city is not well run but run for people who live in the centre, on the flat, near shops, who don't need to travel to work ( or don't work), have no garden and have no children. I am horrified at the idea of wasting the hard earned money of residents who actually pay tax, on a referendum. They just don't care about us at all.
Very well put!

Over to you HJarrs, spin that!
[quote][p][bold]Residenttaxpayer[/bold] wrote: I'm fed up with paying for poor rubbish collection, poor bus service disrupted by so called road improvements that clearly are nothing of the sort, being ignored when it snows and being told to get on a bike. People who think there should be a rise should come clean about whether they actually pay council tax..... I suspect they don't. The city is not well run but run for people who live in the centre, on the flat, near shops, who don't need to travel to work ( or don't work), have no garden and have no children. I am horrified at the idea of wasting the hard earned money of residents who actually pay tax, on a referendum. They just don't care about us at all.[/p][/quote]Very well put! Over to you HJarrs, spin that! Richada
  • Score: 4

3:18pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Richada says...

Brighton1000 wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
HJarrs wrote:
Maxwell's Ghost wrote:
HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office.
A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases.
You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you.
You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members.
It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.
Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance.

The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come!
I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he?

We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf.

We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it.

We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services.

This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government.

Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has.

Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.
Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?
What about them?

The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now?

Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax.

The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash.

Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on.

In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this.

Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition.

Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent?

Vote Green - get chaos and spin.
Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then.
'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet'

So WHY are you constantly saying it will result in cuts to the vulnerable of the city if you DONT yet know what it will look like anyway?

This is the exact reason the public have lost confidence in you, You're obviously intelligent, Cant you see that?
There are none so blind as those who won't see.
[quote][p][bold]Brighton1000[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]HJarrs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Maxwell's Ghost[/bold] wrote: HJarrs, I wouldn't care if a monkey walked into the council and shook your lot out of office. A monkey would have more morals and monkeys create communities and they don't issue lies in press releases. You lived in London, left the Labour Party in a hissy fit and moved down here and joined the Greens and now we have another mess which has followed you. You seem to be a poor judge of character or perhaps you are part of the problem in local politics, poor quality candidates and party members. It's all over. Move somewhere else and try another party. If you keep doing all this desperate free PR without question, some other party will have you.[/p][/quote]Yawn, I take your post as an admission that you accept the inaccuracy of your previous comments and to deflect attention away from the forthcoming cuts, which you clearly don't (as you might say) give a monkey's. However, the issue here is not about a personal ding dong between us, we are facing decisions of national importance. The choice is clear, do the council meekly lie down and accept government cuts or do we fight back in the only way open to the council. If the city held a referendum and if that referendum were to be won (two very big ifs I admit), councils up and down the land would be emboldened to follow suit and put the skids under a cynical policy of destroying local services and democracy. Sadly, the control freakery and opportunism of the Local and national Labour Party stands in the way, not only that, they actually support cuts for years to come![/p][/quote]I don't know about the rest of "his" party, but HJarrs simply doesn't "get" this does he? We, the council tax payers of Brighton & Hove, didn't elect a LOCAL council - of any colour - to wage war on the national government on our behalf. We did not vote for this embarrasing political "experiment" that has been going on here and we do NOT want to throw further good money after bad in continuing to finance it. We elected a local government to provide our services - for ALL the inhabitents of this city, rather than the small minority who have done very well at the expense of the majority in terms of abandoned services. This is LOCAL government that we are discussing here - once again, this fiasco has proven that party politics is a BAD way to run local government. Yes I am an in-bred member of the moanerati - and yes, I WOULD be moaning about ANY council, no matter what political colour, should they fail so spectacularly in their duties as this one has. Asking us to stump up a further 4.75% - especially when we've had such a taster already of how it will be administered, let alone spent, really is the final insult for many of us.[/p][/quote]Ok, but what about the prickly unforseen issue of the £24 million government imposed cuts this city is facing this year (and next year etc. etc.)...?[/p][/quote]What about them? The administration couldn't run it WITH these funds, what on earth makes you think things will, miraculously, improve now? Had we "enjoyed" a decent, acceptable even, service from the council, then maybe, just maybe, more than 20% might be inclined to support a 4.75% increase in council tax. The current administration has been in "power" (a laughable term for the shambles we've all witnessed I know) for long enough for the average tax payer / voter to come to their own conclusion about how this administration spends our cash. Many of us in the private sector have had a very hard time indeed of it over the last decade, we have had to adapt - quickly - to changing markets, beyond all, in order to stay afloat, we have had to cut our cloth according to our reduced means. In the private sector we have no tax payers - who, ultimately, have little choice in what they pay, to fall back on. In this specific thread, the government cuts you speak of here are at best a red herring - an attempt to deflect from my point that we did not mandate a LOCAL council to go to war with the national government. Support the government or not, and clearly very many local councils do not - B&HC is, so far, the ONLY council to attempt this. Bearing in mind their record, under the circumstances, this could be interpreted by the world at large as the last desperate publicity stunt of a totally failed administraition. Can you not see that in continuing this line you risk fatally damaging the very party you claim to represent? Vote Green - get chaos and spin.[/p][/quote]Ok, but emotions and principles aside, this is what it all boils down to, doesn't matter which colour party you support. The issue of the £24 million can be ignored (as it largely has been in the debate), but it isn't going to go away and we don't know what the fallout from this cut will look like yet. It sure as hell isn't going to be good for the town we call home. Lets hope for the best then.[/p][/quote]'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' So WHY are you constantly saying it will result in cuts to the vulnerable of the city if you DONT yet know what it will look like anyway? This is the exact reason the public have lost confidence in you, You're obviously intelligent, Cant you see that?[/p][/quote]There are none so blind as those who won't see. Richada
  • Score: 4

3:30pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Richada says...

Brighton1000 says.........

'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do.

That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management.

No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves.

If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date.
Brighton1000 says......... 'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do. That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management. No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves. If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date. Richada
  • Score: 4

6:35pm Tue 21 Jan 14

jimpy762 says...

Eugenius wrote:
mimseycal wrote:
greenpaws wrote:
Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%.

Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation.

The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse.

The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less.
The rate of inflation has very little bearing on the spending capacity of the average wage earner. Inflation measures the aggregate or general price level within an economy. It does not measure the disposable income in an economy.

Given that wages and disposable income on average has failed to rise, what with weak wage growth and the rising cost of utilities; even where a loaf of bread would be no more then 10p, if you have but 5p in your pocket, the price of a loaf of bread would be beyond you.
This is a good point, which is why we are being careful not to describe it as a modest or trivial increase. But if we put it to a referendum then it does become a personal spending choice. Taking Green and Labour votes together, there is a majority in this city who did not vote for austerity in 2010 or 2011 so I have some faith that, presented with the facts, a narrow majority will vote for a tax rise this year to plug the gap made by the Coalition's cuts.
There's a majority who didn't vote for your kind of lunacy either mate. The cuts are designed to reign in profligacy and waste. Your whole attitude towards that fact pegs you out as the kind of operator the taxpaying public could well do without.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]greenpaws[/bold] wrote: Inflation since the Greens came into administration has been 9.1% but Council Tax has gone up by only 1.96%. Even with a 4.75% rise, it will still be 1.4% LESS than inflation. The value of caring for the vulnerable has got much better and the railways, energy companies and water companies have got much worse. The government cuts councils more than their spending to lay the blame at local politicians. Following this, it doesn't matter how efficient you become, after a short time, you cannot do more for continually less.[/p][/quote]The rate of inflation has very little bearing on the spending capacity of the average wage earner. Inflation measures the aggregate or general price level within an economy. It does not measure the disposable income in an economy. Given that wages and disposable income on average has failed to rise, what with weak wage growth and the rising cost of utilities; even where a loaf of bread would be no more then 10p, if you have but 5p in your pocket, the price of a loaf of bread would be beyond you.[/p][/quote]This is a good point, which is why we are being careful not to describe it as a modest or trivial increase. But if we put it to a referendum then it does become a personal spending choice. Taking Green and Labour votes together, there is a majority in this city who did not vote for austerity in 2010 or 2011 so I have some faith that, presented with the facts, a narrow majority will vote for a tax rise this year to plug the gap made by the Coalition's cuts.[/p][/quote]There's a majority who didn't vote for your kind of lunacy either mate. The cuts are designed to reign in profligacy and waste. Your whole attitude towards that fact pegs you out as the kind of operator the taxpaying public could well do without. jimpy762
  • Score: 7

6:49pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Drew18 says...

To those opposed to the referendum and council tax rise, speak to the people who actually work in adult social care. Services are already cut to the bone due to savings made in the past few years. Staff are now going off sick as they have to cover shortfall. This is why both Unison and GMB support the referendum.

Both Labour and Tory councils increased council tax above inflation in previous years. Labour colluded with the Tories to oppose a 3.5% rise two years ago which meant there was a freeze. If council tax had gone up then the situation would now not be as dire and there would be no need to spend money on a this referendum.

Council budgets are ring fenced. If a loan is made to the 360 project it will come from an entirely different budged to adult social care. It makes no sense to compare the two.

Yes, times are tough and for a lot of people an extra £5 a month will be hard to find but the poorest will be protected. On the other hand there are parts of Brighton & Hove that are very wealthy. Many people are living in properties worth £500M or more. Some of these will have accountants helping them reduce their income tax liabilities. £5 a month to the likes of them is peanuts!
To those opposed to the referendum and council tax rise, speak to the people who actually work in adult social care. Services are already cut to the bone due to savings made in the past few years. Staff are now going off sick as they have to cover shortfall. This is why both Unison and GMB support the referendum. Both Labour and Tory councils increased council tax above inflation in previous years. Labour colluded with the Tories to oppose a 3.5% rise two years ago which meant there was a freeze. If council tax had gone up then the situation would now not be as dire and there would be no need to spend money on a this referendum. Council budgets are ring fenced. If a loan is made to the 360 project it will come from an entirely different budged to adult social care. It makes no sense to compare the two. Yes, times are tough and for a lot of people an extra £5 a month will be hard to find but the poorest will be protected. On the other hand there are parts of Brighton & Hove that are very wealthy. Many people are living in properties worth £500M or more. Some of these will have accountants helping them reduce their income tax liabilities. £5 a month to the likes of them is peanuts! Drew18
  • Score: -3

8:40pm Tue 21 Jan 14

Richada says...

Drew18 wrote:
To those opposed to the referendum and council tax rise, speak to the people who actually work in adult social care. Services are already cut to the bone due to savings made in the past few years. Staff are now going off sick as they have to cover shortfall. This is why both Unison and GMB support the referendum.

Both Labour and Tory councils increased council tax above inflation in previous years. Labour colluded with the Tories to oppose a 3.5% rise two years ago which meant there was a freeze. If council tax had gone up then the situation would now not be as dire and there would be no need to spend money on a this referendum.

Council budgets are ring fenced. If a loan is made to the 360 project it will come from an entirely different budged to adult social care. It makes no sense to compare the two.

Yes, times are tough and for a lot of people an extra £5 a month will be hard to find but the poorest will be protected. On the other hand there are parts of Brighton & Hove that are very wealthy. Many people are living in properties worth £500M or more. Some of these will have accountants helping them reduce their income tax liabilities. £5 a month to the likes of them is peanuts!
£500M or more? What? Where on earth is there a £500M property in Brighton or Hove?

i360, bicycle lanes, wild flowers on bowling greens, equality training for councillors, coaching for council officers paid in excess of £80,000 a year........

Empathise with you as many of us do, with all of this going on, the council spending a further £230,000 of OUR money in an attempt to blackmail us with empoversihing essential services - as you describe above - unfortunately falls on ever deafer ears.
[quote][p][bold]Drew18[/bold] wrote: To those opposed to the referendum and council tax rise, speak to the people who actually work in adult social care. Services are already cut to the bone due to savings made in the past few years. Staff are now going off sick as they have to cover shortfall. This is why both Unison and GMB support the referendum. Both Labour and Tory councils increased council tax above inflation in previous years. Labour colluded with the Tories to oppose a 3.5% rise two years ago which meant there was a freeze. If council tax had gone up then the situation would now not be as dire and there would be no need to spend money on a this referendum. Council budgets are ring fenced. If a loan is made to the 360 project it will come from an entirely different budged to adult social care. It makes no sense to compare the two. Yes, times are tough and for a lot of people an extra £5 a month will be hard to find but the poorest will be protected. On the other hand there are parts of Brighton & Hove that are very wealthy. Many people are living in properties worth £500M or more. Some of these will have accountants helping them reduce their income tax liabilities. £5 a month to the likes of them is peanuts![/p][/quote]£500M or more? What? Where on earth is there a £500M property in Brighton or Hove? i360, bicycle lanes, wild flowers on bowling greens, equality training for councillors, coaching for council officers paid in excess of £80,000 a year........ Empathise with you as many of us do, with all of this going on, the council spending a further £230,000 of OUR money in an attempt to blackmail us with empoversihing essential services - as you describe above - unfortunately falls on ever deafer ears. Richada
  • Score: 6

1:19am Wed 22 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

Richada wrote:
Brighton1000 says.........

'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do.

That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management.

No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves.

If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date.
That's lovely, but while obsessing over the usual 'I hate the Greens' issues, the elephant in the room (£24 in cuts from central government) ain't going away.

It really boils down to a simple choice:

a) look out for number one.

b) look out for your local community.
[quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: Brighton1000 says......... 'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do. That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management. No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves. If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date.[/p][/quote]That's lovely, but while obsessing over the usual 'I hate the Greens' issues, the elephant in the room (£24 in cuts from central government) ain't going away. It really boils down to a simple choice: a) look out for number one. b) look out for your local community. Gribbet
  • Score: -4

1:21am Wed 22 Jan 14

Gribbet says...

Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
Brighton1000 says.........

'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do.

That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management.

No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves.

If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date.
That's lovely, but while obsessing over the usual 'I hate the Greens' issues, the elephant in the room (£24 in cuts from central government) ain't going away.

It really boils down to a simple choice:

a) look out for number one.

b) look out for your local community.
*Wish it was just £24, but I meant £24 million, soz
[quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: Brighton1000 says......... 'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do. That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management. No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves. If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date.[/p][/quote]That's lovely, but while obsessing over the usual 'I hate the Greens' issues, the elephant in the room (£24 in cuts from central government) ain't going away. It really boils down to a simple choice: a) look out for number one. b) look out for your local community.[/p][/quote]*Wish it was just £24, but I meant £24 million, soz Gribbet
  • Score: -2

11:22am Wed 22 Jan 14

Richada says...

Gribbet wrote:
Gribbet wrote:
Richada wrote:
Brighton1000 says.........

'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do.

That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management.

No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves.

If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date.
That's lovely, but while obsessing over the usual 'I hate the Greens' issues, the elephant in the room (£24 in cuts from central government) ain't going away.

It really boils down to a simple choice:

a) look out for number one.

b) look out for your local community.
*Wish it was just £24, but I meant £24 million, soz
Quite the contrary, I don't hate the Greens - in many respects I was already "green" long before the majority of them ever set foot in our city.

They offered, at the time, what looked like a real, viable, alternative to the same old - same old party political in-fighting. In not being allied to either the national ruling party OR the opposition, they appeared at the time to offer real hope for a change in the right direction for local government.

Sadly, since, we have discovered that they have neither the experience, maturity or indeed, responsibility to carry out what needs to be done in order to serve the city of Brighton and Hove.

The current administration has found plenty of funds for projects that have made them extremely unpopular in the city, claiming that the needy will be impoverished, whilst agreeing to loan huge sums of money (oh yes, of course that's from a different budget) to a private company in order to construct the i360 is not making people inclined to want to see another £230,000 spent on a referendum, which is highly unlikely to back the cause for a 4.75% increase.

Unfortunately the current administration have done the cause far more harm than good. I repeat what I have said elsewhere, had they been doing a good job, had the citizens of B&H been happy then all of us would be standing in line behind them against the government, we would not see 4.75% as an unreasonable increase - the referendum itself would still be a waste of money, but for totally different reasons.

Sadly, in many eyes, all they have done is proven the government correct in its aim to reduce profligate waste in local government. Equally sadly, for my own part, thanks to the terrible reputation it has gained, I think the current administration has also badly damaged the cause for change in local government.
[quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Gribbet[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Richada[/bold] wrote: Brighton1000 says......... 'We dont know what the fallout will look like yet' - oh but as one surrounded in almost a months' rubbish before it was cleared I think I do. That wasn't though the fallout, that was sheer incompetence and existing bad management. No referendum in the world, no coaching, no 4.75% increase in tax, no "equality training" in the world is going to sort out this completely broken administration who can't even hold it together amongst themselves. If I want melons or magos I'll carry on getting them from the supermarket thank you - at Kings House they are altogether too expensive and now well past their sell-by date.[/p][/quote]That's lovely, but while obsessing over the usual 'I hate the Greens' issues, the elephant in the room (£24 in cuts from central government) ain't going away. It really boils down to a simple choice: a) look out for number one. b) look out for your local community.[/p][/quote]*Wish it was just £24, but I meant £24 million, soz[/p][/quote]Quite the contrary, I don't hate the Greens - in many respects I was already "green" long before the majority of them ever set foot in our city. They offered, at the time, what looked like a real, viable, alternative to the same old - same old party political in-fighting. In not being allied to either the national ruling party OR the opposition, they appeared at the time to offer real hope for a change in the right direction for local government. Sadly, since, we have discovered that they have neither the experience, maturity or indeed, responsibility to carry out what needs to be done in order to serve the city of Brighton and Hove. The current administration has found plenty of funds for projects that have made them extremely unpopular in the city, claiming that the needy will be impoverished, whilst agreeing to loan huge sums of money (oh yes, of course that's from a different budget) to a private company in order to construct the i360 is not making people inclined to want to see another £230,000 spent on a referendum, which is highly unlikely to back the cause for a 4.75% increase. Unfortunately the current administration have done the cause far more harm than good. I repeat what I have said elsewhere, had they been doing a good job, had the citizens of B&H been happy then all of us would be standing in line behind them against the government, we would not see 4.75% as an unreasonable increase - the referendum itself would still be a waste of money, but for totally different reasons. Sadly, in many eyes, all they have done is proven the government correct in its aim to reduce profligate waste in local government. Equally sadly, for my own part, thanks to the terrible reputation it has gained, I think the current administration has also badly damaged the cause for change in local government. Richada
  • Score: 8

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