Jason Kitcat calls on Labour to join forces and help push through city budget

Jason Kitcat

Warren Morgan

Jason Kitcat calls on Labour to join forces and help push through city budget

First published in News by

Council leader Jason Kitcat has called on opposition councillors to join forces with him and push through the city’s budget.

The Green party leader of Brighton and Hove City Council called on the city’s Labour group to “stop blocking our proposals” and instead “work with us to find a way forward” to help agree a city budget for 2014/15.

Town hall bosses failed to reach a compromise at a budget council meeting on Thursday.

The Green administration wants to increase council tax by 4.75% – which would require a city-wide referendum – to help balance the books in the face of government cuts.

Labour, led by Councillor Warren Morgan, is proposing a 2% council tax increase while the city’s Conservatives, led by Councillor Geoffrey Theobald, want a council tax freeze.

Coun Kitcat said: “Enough is enough.”

He added: “We accept that the Conservatives, committed to freezing budgets and dismantling local government, would never support our proposals.

“But we appeal to Labour – whose own councillors repeatedly condemned the high level of coalition cuts in our city – to stop blocking our proposals and instead work with us to find a way forward.

“Blocking our proposals means the council hasn’t been able to set a budget.

“So our door is open at any time – let’s build on the useful negotiations we've had so far. We need to work together to help the city continue to care properly for those in need while we face down the coalition government’s biting austerity cuts.”

Labour’s Warren Morgan said his group’s proposed 2% increase was the only compromise position between a 4.75% Green increase and a Tory freeze.

In an open letter to his counterparts Coun Kitcat and Coun Theobald, Coun Morgan said: “I would hope that even if you and your councillors cannot support this compromise position, you will at least ask your councillors to abstain rather than oppose, and allow my councillors to pass a lawful, balanced budget as we are required to do by law.

“The public expect that responsible and sensible action from us.

“The consequences for the city council and Brighton and Hove of us not passing a budget would be very serious indeed. At best it will cost the council a great deal in both lost money and damaged reputation.

“At worst the Government would step in and take over, with terrible implications for local services.”

Coun Theobald told The Argus yesterday: “My appeal to the Labour Party would be to join with us.

“If they would like to join with us and have a freeze then I would welcome that. I’ve been appealing with the other two parties to follow our lead rather than inflicting their increases upon our residents.”

The council has to come to a budget decision before March 11 or face government intervention.

Comments (54)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:24am Mon 3 Mar 14

Dealing with idiots says...

I think Jasons recent comment to a local business owner of 'I am so broken hearted' when told that his policies had cost the business more than 20k will come back to haunt him. The tar and feathers are ready ( metaphorically of course ). Preserve some shred of your dignity and leave office now Jace and take your creature Jars with you.
I think Jasons recent comment to a local business owner of 'I am so broken hearted' when told that his policies had cost the business more than 20k will come back to haunt him. The tar and feathers are ready ( metaphorically of course ). Preserve some shred of your dignity and leave office now Jace and take your creature Jars with you. Dealing with idiots
  • Score: 36

7:29am Mon 3 Mar 14

simonk says...

Unfortunately the Labour Party in B&H is only acting in its own interests and effectively created this scenario by jumping into bed with the Tories in 2012 with their council tax freeze. We all know that party politics can be dirty, but frankly for Labour to play with the most vulnerable in society is quite frankly disgusting.

BTW I don't even know who I'll vote for next year, before you all start ;-)
Unfortunately the Labour Party in B&H is only acting in its own interests and effectively created this scenario by jumping into bed with the Tories in 2012 with their council tax freeze. We all know that party politics can be dirty, but frankly for Labour to play with the most vulnerable in society is quite frankly disgusting. BTW I don't even know who I'll vote for next year, before you all start ;-) simonk
  • Score: -28

7:47am Mon 3 Mar 14

HJarrs says...

You have no chance Jason. Warren Morgan scents votes and his labour councillors will obediently follow. We are talking about someone who has already cost the city millions in lost council tax just for a bit of publicity and who wasted £100000 on a parking initiative before Xmas that achieved nothing. He even has the cheek to complain about the cuts that are necessary due to his own actions!

It is Warren Morgan first, the city a distant second.
You have no chance Jason. Warren Morgan scents votes and his labour councillors will obediently follow. We are talking about someone who has already cost the city millions in lost council tax just for a bit of publicity and who wasted £100000 on a parking initiative before Xmas that achieved nothing. He even has the cheek to complain about the cuts that are necessary due to his own actions! It is Warren Morgan first, the city a distant second. HJarrs
  • Score: -38

7:55am Mon 3 Mar 14

fred clause says...

Didnt Labour already offer a deal which The Greens ignored just sounds like more political fishing From Jason and Co.
Didnt Labour already offer a deal which The Greens ignored just sounds like more political fishing From Jason and Co. fred clause
  • Score: 32

8:38am Mon 3 Mar 14

HJarrs says...

fred clause wrote:
Didnt Labour already offer a deal which The Greens ignored just sounds like more political fishing From Jason and Co.
I think you will find every party has offered a deal to each party. But it is now time to knuckle down and get on with it.
[quote][p][bold]fred clause[/bold] wrote: Didnt Labour already offer a deal which The Greens ignored just sounds like more political fishing From Jason and Co.[/p][/quote]I think you will find every party has offered a deal to each party. But it is now time to knuckle down and get on with it. HJarrs
  • Score: -21

8:40am Mon 3 Mar 14

Quiterie says...

Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated.

The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City.

It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else.
Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated. The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City. It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else. Quiterie
  • Score: 41

9:16am Mon 3 Mar 14

Nobleox says...

Quiterie wrote:
Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated.

The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City.

It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else.
No, it will be a 1.90 % increase.
Any increase above that requires a refferendum.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated. The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City. It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else.[/p][/quote]No, it will be a 1.90 % increase. Any increase above that requires a refferendum. Nobleox
  • Score: 9

9:19am Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

Nobleox wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated.

The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City.

It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else.
No, it will be a 1.90 % increase.
Any increase above that requires a refferendum.
1.98%!
[quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated. The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City. It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else.[/p][/quote]No, it will be a 1.90 % increase. Any increase above that requires a refferendum.[/p][/quote]1.98%! mimseycal
  • Score: 9

10:02am Mon 3 Mar 14

Nobleox says...

mimseycal wrote:
Nobleox wrote:
Quiterie wrote:
Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated.

The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City.

It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else.
No, it will be a 1.90 % increase.
Any increase above that requires a refferendum.
1.98%!
.....well if you want to split hairs then the % is the nearest decimal point below 2%. And that is not 1.98%!
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: Look, even if Warren Morgan/Labour did support a 4.75% increase there is absolutely no point in prolonging this debate because if it went to a referendum such a high increase would be defeated. The Greens should stop grandstanding and get on with running the City. It is blindingly obvious what will eventually happen. The Greens want 4.75%, Labour want 2%, the Tories want a freeze. I know, you know and every single Councillor knows that we'll end up in the middle with the 2% increase. It's a complete waste of time discussing anything else.[/p][/quote]No, it will be a 1.90 % increase. Any increase above that requires a refferendum.[/p][/quote]1.98%![/p][/quote].....well if you want to split hairs then the % is the nearest decimal point below 2%. And that is not 1.98%! Nobleox
  • Score: 0

10:07am Mon 3 Mar 14

Warren Morgan says...

The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that. Warren Morgan
  • Score: 14

10:09am Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

I wasn't trying to split hairs. I seem to recall that was the increase last time ... before our illustrious green leaders (do you reckon they glow in the dark) decided that a referendum must be called for ;-)
I wasn't trying to split hairs. I seem to recall that was the increase last time ... before our illustrious green leaders (do you reckon they glow in the dark) decided that a referendum must be called for ;-) mimseycal
  • Score: 5

10:13am Mon 3 Mar 14

Rearrangethedeckchairs says...

1.999999999% for cash?
1.999999999% for cash? Rearrangethedeckchairs
  • Score: 8

10:24am Mon 3 Mar 14

Fight_Back says...

Kitcat is beginning to sound rather desperate. If he's so keen to discuss the situation and come to a compromise why did he and his fellow Greens vote to halt the meeting last week ?

I personally support the Conservative proposal but even I can see that the point of compromise is clearly a 2% increase. If the Greens really think they will get 4.75% then they are even more deluded than most of us gave them credit for.

You only need to look at HJarrs' posts and see how bitter and twisted they have become to see that the Greens are at last realising they are dead councillors walking.
Kitcat is beginning to sound rather desperate. If he's so keen to discuss the situation and come to a compromise why did he and his fellow Greens vote to halt the meeting last week ? I personally support the Conservative proposal but even I can see that the point of compromise is clearly a 2% increase. If the Greens really think they will get 4.75% then they are even more deluded than most of us gave them credit for. You only need to look at HJarrs' posts and see how bitter and twisted they have become to see that the Greens are at last realising they are dead councillors walking. Fight_Back
  • Score: 17

10:32am Mon 3 Mar 14

Martha Gunn says...

More Orwellian Greenspeak from Chaos Kitcat.

A compromise has already been offered by Labour.

The solution is on the table.
More Orwellian Greenspeak from Chaos Kitcat. A compromise has already been offered by Labour. The solution is on the table. Martha Gunn
  • Score: 17

10:46am Mon 3 Mar 14

roystony says...

Is there any other photos of him you can use? The one above is annoying!!
Is there any other photos of him you can use? The one above is annoying!! roystony
  • Score: 12

11:23am Mon 3 Mar 14

Nobleox says...

Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?
[quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan? Nobleox
  • Score: 0

11:26am Mon 3 Mar 14

Nobleox says...

Rearrangethedeckchai
rs
wrote:
1.999999999% for cash?
Near enough CORRECT.
[quote][p][bold]Rearrangethedeckchai rs[/bold] wrote: 1.999999999% for cash?[/p][/quote]Near enough CORRECT. Nobleox
  • Score: 0

11:29am Mon 3 Mar 14

Richada says...

Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
If they hand control to Pickles, at the end of the day what is the point of having LOCAL government at all?

It is time you all bit the bullet and worked together for the people you claim to represent - i.e. the council tax payers of Brighton and Hove who seem to have been completely forgotten along the way here.

2% IS the plainly obvious compromise - one that I understand Mr Kitcat himself was in favour of until mid-January.

It is a great pity that you councillors can't see this as we do - from the outside in - it's a farce, one that is heaping more and more shame on this city.
[quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]If they hand control to Pickles, at the end of the day what is the point of having LOCAL government at all? It is time you all bit the bullet and worked together for the people you claim to represent - i.e. the council tax payers of Brighton and Hove who seem to have been completely forgotten along the way here. 2% IS the plainly obvious compromise - one that I understand Mr Kitcat himself was in favour of until mid-January. It is a great pity that you councillors can't see this as we do - from the outside in - it's a farce, one that is heaping more and more shame on this city. Richada
  • Score: 9

11:41am Mon 3 Mar 14

Warren Morgan says...

Nobleox wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?
The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%.

At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere
ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.
[quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?[/p][/quote]The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%. At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want. Warren Morgan
  • Score: 7

12:32pm Mon 3 Mar 14

billy goat-gruff says...

It's time for Labour to be true to their roots and support the Green proposals instead of taking their dog in a manger approach, and voting with the tories. They have much more in common with the Greens. Of course, nobody likes paying more tax than they need to, but unless council tax goes up, job losses and cuts to vital sevices are inevitable.
It's time for Labour to be true to their roots and support the Green proposals instead of taking their dog in a manger approach, and voting with the tories. They have much more in common with the Greens. Of course, nobody likes paying more tax than they need to, but unless council tax goes up, job losses and cuts to vital sevices are inevitable. billy goat-gruff
  • Score: -15

12:33pm Mon 3 Mar 14

dickpagebrighton says...

Warren Morgan wrote:
Nobleox wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?
The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%.

At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere

ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.
Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday.
Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year).
It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say !
[quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?[/p][/quote]The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%. At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.[/p][/quote]Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday. Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year). It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say ! dickpagebrighton
  • Score: -10

12:36pm Mon 3 Mar 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Jason Kitcat proving once again that he does not listen.
Jason Kitcat proving once again that he does not listen. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 11

12:38pm Mon 3 Mar 14

menton says...

Jason, do please try to understand: WE DO NOT WANT YOU. Got that?
Jason, do please try to understand: WE DO NOT WANT YOU. Got that? menton
  • Score: 10

12:42pm Mon 3 Mar 14

wexler53 says...

Coun Kitcat said: “Enough is enough.”

**** right - leave now. And take your colleagues with you.
Coun Kitcat said: “Enough is enough.” **** right - leave now. And take your colleagues with you. wexler53
  • Score: 9

12:43pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Cave Johnson says...

Their reputation is already in tatters so don't worry about that. People don't expect the Greens to be sensible because of their previous behaviour.
Their reputation is already in tatters so don't worry about that. People don't expect the Greens to be sensible because of their previous behaviour. Cave Johnson
  • Score: 11

12:51pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Fight_Back says...

dickpagebrighton wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
Nobleox wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?
The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%.

At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere


ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.
Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday.
Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year).
It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say !
Good grief - you Greens really are VERY stupid aren't you ?

We, the taxpayers of B&H, DO NOT WANT A 4.75% INCREASE !!!!!!!!

If the Greens really want to spend £900k of tax payers money to find out the blatantly obvious then maybe they should fund it from party funds - they get a refund if the answer is yes ? Ah yes, then it's THEIR money so they wouldn't be quite so keen would they ?
[quote][p][bold]dickpagebrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?[/p][/quote]The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%. At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.[/p][/quote]Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday. Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year). It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say ![/p][/quote]Good grief - you Greens really are VERY stupid aren't you ? We, the taxpayers of B&H, DO NOT WANT A 4.75% INCREASE !!!!!!!! If the Greens really want to spend £900k of tax payers money to find out the blatantly obvious then maybe they should fund it from party funds - they get a refund if the answer is yes ? Ah yes, then it's THEIR money so they wouldn't be quite so keen would they ? Fight_Back
  • Score: 15

1:44pm Mon 3 Mar 14

dickpagebrighton says...

Fight_Back wrote:
dickpagebrighton wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
Nobleox wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?
The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%.

At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere



ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.
Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday.
Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year).
It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say !
Good grief - you Greens really are VERY stupid aren't you ?

We, the taxpayers of B&H, DO NOT WANT A 4.75% INCREASE !!!!!!!!

If the Greens really want to spend £900k of tax payers money to find out the blatantly obvious then maybe they should fund it from party funds - they get a refund if the answer is yes ? Ah yes, then it's THEIR money so they wouldn't be quite so keen would they ?
Dear "Fight_back",
There's no need to shout ! I am a tax payer who thinks £5 a month extra is worth paying to protect social care services for the elderly and disabled. Let's unite against the coalition government, which is punishing the majority of the population - unless it's people flooded near the Thames, when Cameron suddenly says "we are a rich country" ...
Unfortunately Eric Pickles dictates the way a referendum is done - trying to bribe councils never to do it - otherwise I'm sure we could have avoided the cost of council tax rebilling, for example.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dickpagebrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?[/p][/quote]The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%. At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.[/p][/quote]Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday. Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year). It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say ![/p][/quote]Good grief - you Greens really are VERY stupid aren't you ? We, the taxpayers of B&H, DO NOT WANT A 4.75% INCREASE !!!!!!!! If the Greens really want to spend £900k of tax payers money to find out the blatantly obvious then maybe they should fund it from party funds - they get a refund if the answer is yes ? Ah yes, then it's THEIR money so they wouldn't be quite so keen would they ?[/p][/quote]Dear "Fight_back", There's no need to shout ! I am a tax payer who thinks £5 a month extra is worth paying to protect social care services for the elderly and disabled. Let's unite against the coalition government, which is punishing the majority of the population - unless it's people flooded near the Thames, when Cameron suddenly says "we are a rich country" ... Unfortunately Eric Pickles dictates the way a referendum is done - trying to bribe councils never to do it - otherwise I'm sure we could have avoided the cost of council tax rebilling, for example. dickpagebrighton
  • Score: -6

1:49pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Fight_Back says...

dickpagebrighton wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
dickpagebrighton wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
Nobleox wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?
The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%.

At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere




ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.
Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday.
Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year).
It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say !
Good grief - you Greens really are VERY stupid aren't you ?

We, the taxpayers of B&H, DO NOT WANT A 4.75% INCREASE !!!!!!!!

If the Greens really want to spend £900k of tax payers money to find out the blatantly obvious then maybe they should fund it from party funds - they get a refund if the answer is yes ? Ah yes, then it's THEIR money so they wouldn't be quite so keen would they ?
Dear "Fight_back",
There's no need to shout ! I am a tax payer who thinks £5 a month extra is worth paying to protect social care services for the elderly and disabled. Let's unite against the coalition government, which is punishing the majority of the population - unless it's people flooded near the Thames, when Cameron suddenly says "we are a rich country" ...
Unfortunately Eric Pickles dictates the way a referendum is done - trying to bribe councils never to do it - otherwise I'm sure we could have avoided the cost of council tax rebilling, for example.
How exactly is charging local taxpayers more money fighting the cuts ? It isn't - it's political.
[quote][p][bold]dickpagebrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dickpagebrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?[/p][/quote]The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%. At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.[/p][/quote]Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday. Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year). It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say ![/p][/quote]Good grief - you Greens really are VERY stupid aren't you ? We, the taxpayers of B&H, DO NOT WANT A 4.75% INCREASE !!!!!!!! If the Greens really want to spend £900k of tax payers money to find out the blatantly obvious then maybe they should fund it from party funds - they get a refund if the answer is yes ? Ah yes, then it's THEIR money so they wouldn't be quite so keen would they ?[/p][/quote]Dear "Fight_back", There's no need to shout ! I am a tax payer who thinks £5 a month extra is worth paying to protect social care services for the elderly and disabled. Let's unite against the coalition government, which is punishing the majority of the population - unless it's people flooded near the Thames, when Cameron suddenly says "we are a rich country" ... Unfortunately Eric Pickles dictates the way a referendum is done - trying to bribe councils never to do it - otherwise I'm sure we could have avoided the cost of council tax rebilling, for example.[/p][/quote]How exactly is charging local taxpayers more money fighting the cuts ? It isn't - it's political. Fight_Back
  • Score: 9

1:50pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Warren Morgan says...

dickpagebrighton wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
Nobleox wrote:
Warren Morgan wrote:
The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now.

The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles.

It is as simple as that.
Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?
The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%.

At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere


ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.
Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday.
Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year).
It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say !
No, there are not three options on the table on Wednesday, only the 2% option that cllrs were left with at the end of Thursday's meeting after the Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze had been voted out.

The Green increase would have restored just over £2m to social care, offsetting the cuts they themselves had put in their budget proposals. Knowing that their rise would never get through council or a referendum, they have set aside £3m in the budget to cover the effect of those cuts.

If you need the arguments against holding a referendum costing up to £900k again, they are set out here: http://warrenmorgan.
wordpress.com/2014/0
2/28/a-labour-agenda
-for-local-governmen
t/?relatedposts_excl
ude=111
[quote][p][bold]dickpagebrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Nobleox[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Warren Morgan[/bold] wrote: The Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze were voted down on Thursday, neither is an option now. The budget on the table is the 2% increase. The Greens and Tories can either vote for the budget, abstain, or vote it down and hand control to Eric Pickles. It is as simple as that.[/p][/quote]Being 2% or over needs a referendum costing a lot of money then only a crackpot would support a 2% or more increase. Exactly what increase are you calling for Mr Morgan?[/p][/quote]The 1.9% increase, which allows for the PCC and Fire Authority precepts to be added without triggering a referendum. Most people are rounding up or referring to it as the "threshold budget". It isn't the "Labour position" as has been described throughout - it is the Budget prepared by officers over a course of months which the Greens chose to change a few weeks ago to 4.75%. At this point that increase IS the Budget. No other options are on the table. The 4.75%increase/refere ndum and the freeze were voted down last week. We can't keep returning to them in the hope that the Greens and Tories will somehow get what they want.[/p][/quote]Is Labour Cllr Morgan seriously still asking the other parties just to agree his 1.9 or 2% proposal ? That's not negotiating, it's just playing party politics. There are still the 3 options for Council to decide on Wednesday. Mr Morgan has not listened at any stage - he came out against the Greens' protecting services proposal as soon as it was made, but there are plenty of Labour supporters who don't want massive government cuts to social care (and it won't just be this year). It's not too late for Labour to rise above the politicking and allow residents to decide on such an important issue in the referendum. They don't have to be agreeing to the Greens 4.75% - just give us all a say ![/p][/quote]No, there are not three options on the table on Wednesday, only the 2% option that cllrs were left with at the end of Thursday's meeting after the Green 4.75% increase and the Tory freeze had been voted out. The Green increase would have restored just over £2m to social care, offsetting the cuts they themselves had put in their budget proposals. Knowing that their rise would never get through council or a referendum, they have set aside £3m in the budget to cover the effect of those cuts. If you need the arguments against holding a referendum costing up to £900k again, they are set out here: http://warrenmorgan. wordpress.com/2014/0 2/28/a-labour-agenda -for-local-governmen t/?relatedposts_excl ude=111 Warren Morgan
  • Score: 2

2:11pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Eugenius says...

Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%.

The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services.

With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?
Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%. The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services. With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city? Eugenius
  • Score: -12

2:17pm Mon 3 Mar 14

boristhespider says...

Forgive me for asking if this has already been answered, but what exactly would happen if no budget is agreed to and the Govt steps in to take control? Considering the Govt of the day is Tory/Lib Dem and they are advising nationally a tax freeze would this then be forced on us and severe cuts would have to be made?
Forgive me for asking if this has already been answered, but what exactly would happen if no budget is agreed to and the Govt steps in to take control? Considering the Govt of the day is Tory/Lib Dem and they are advising nationally a tax freeze would this then be forced on us and severe cuts would have to be made? boristhespider
  • Score: 3

2:20pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Fight_Back says...

Eugenius wrote:
Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%.

The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services.

With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?
Of course you could slash the traveller budget, slash the communications budget, make rubbish collections bi-weekly, cut councillors allowances by 25%, stop paying for sheep, sell either Hove Town Hall or Brighton Town Hall, transfer parking revenues to the general budget ( you do claim to be fighting government cuts so breaking the rules would seem reasonable ), prevent any council pay rises and cut salaries of anyone earning over £80k by 10% which all together would solve your problem.

That of course wouldn't allow you to make the political statement of "fighting government cuts" !

Oh, you could also reveal which Green councillor YOU really are but you appear too cowardly to do that. Thumbs up to Warren Morgan for at least doing so.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%. The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services. With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?[/p][/quote]Of course you could slash the traveller budget, slash the communications budget, make rubbish collections bi-weekly, cut councillors allowances by 25%, stop paying for sheep, sell either Hove Town Hall or Brighton Town Hall, transfer parking revenues to the general budget ( you do claim to be fighting government cuts so breaking the rules would seem reasonable ), prevent any council pay rises and cut salaries of anyone earning over £80k by 10% which all together would solve your problem. That of course wouldn't allow you to make the political statement of "fighting government cuts" ! Oh, you could also reveal which Green councillor YOU really are but you appear too cowardly to do that. Thumbs up to Warren Morgan for at least doing so. Fight_Back
  • Score: 15

2:45pm Mon 3 Mar 14

PETE OF QUEENS PARK says...

All I hope is that if some of the labour are prepared to back the useless greens then name and shame them before the local elections come round so we know who is who.
All I hope is that if some of the labour are prepared to back the useless greens then name and shame them before the local elections come round so we know who is who. PETE OF QUEENS PARK
  • Score: 3

2:48pm Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

Eugenius wrote:
Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%.

The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services.

With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?
The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ...
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%. The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services. With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?[/p][/quote]The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ... mimseycal
  • Score: 13

3:13pm Mon 3 Mar 14

dickpagebrighton says...

mimseycal wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%.

The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services.

With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?
The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ...
Here's to decent school places for all - all parties agree on that - and our city's exam results are good at present. Repairing roads is starved of cash by government - most of the funds from road tax go to the Highways Agency for motorways and trunk roads.
Whether we're residents or businesses, we have to contribute ... I'll vote for safer roads for all road users any day. I'm not aware of any "vanity projects"; the 360i is a loan from givernment backed by greens and conservatives, and should boost the visitor economy long-term.
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%. The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services. With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?[/p][/quote]The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ...[/p][/quote]Here's to decent school places for all - all parties agree on that - and our city's exam results are good at present. Repairing roads is starved of cash by government - most of the funds from road tax go to the Highways Agency for motorways and trunk roads. Whether we're residents or businesses, we have to contribute ... I'll vote for safer roads for all road users any day. I'm not aware of any "vanity projects"; the 360i is a loan from givernment backed by greens and conservatives, and should boost the visitor economy long-term. dickpagebrighton
  • Score: -6

4:07pm Mon 3 Mar 14

scoobysnax says...

Kittw@t wants a 4.75% tax increase to pay for his dodgy doughnut on stick.
So green they can't even recycle. They need more money to waste on more crap projects.

They make me just want to go out and kill politicians randomly.
My cognitive behavioral therapist tells me that these sorts of feelings
are normal and that sometimes she has them too.
Kittw@t wants a 4.75% tax increase to pay for his dodgy doughnut on stick. So green they can't even recycle. They need more money to waste on more crap projects. They make me just want to go out and kill politicians randomly. My cognitive behavioral therapist tells me that these sorts of feelings are normal and that sometimes she has them too. scoobysnax
  • Score: 7

4:20pm Mon 3 Mar 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

dickpagebrighton wrote:
mimseycal wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%.

The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services.

With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?
The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ...
Here's to decent school places for all - all parties agree on that - and our city's exam results are good at present. Repairing roads is starved of cash by government - most of the funds from road tax go to the Highways Agency for motorways and trunk roads.
Whether we're residents or businesses, we have to contribute ... I'll vote for safer roads for all road users any day. I'm not aware of any "vanity projects"; the 360i is a loan from givernment backed by greens and conservatives, and should boost the visitor economy long-term.
i360 "should boost the visitor economy long-term." What planet are you beaming from. It is a high risk gamble and it has very high chance of not delivering and leaving us all up the swanny.
[quote][p][bold]dickpagebrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%. The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services. With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?[/p][/quote]The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ...[/p][/quote]Here's to decent school places for all - all parties agree on that - and our city's exam results are good at present. Repairing roads is starved of cash by government - most of the funds from road tax go to the Highways Agency for motorways and trunk roads. Whether we're residents or businesses, we have to contribute ... I'll vote for safer roads for all road users any day. I'm not aware of any "vanity projects"; the 360i is a loan from givernment backed by greens and conservatives, and should boost the visitor economy long-term.[/p][/quote]i360 "should boost the visitor economy long-term." What planet are you beaming from. It is a high risk gamble and it has very high chance of not delivering and leaving us all up the swanny. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 12

4:41pm Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

thevoiceoftruth wrote:
dickpagebrighton wrote:
mimseycal wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%.

The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services.

With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?
The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ...
Here's to decent school places for all - all parties agree on that - and our city's exam results are good at present. Repairing roads is starved of cash by government - most of the funds from road tax go to the Highways Agency for motorways and trunk roads.
Whether we're residents or businesses, we have to contribute ... I'll vote for safer roads for all road users any day. I'm not aware of any "vanity projects"; the 360i is a loan from givernment backed by greens and conservatives, and should boost the visitor economy long-term.
i360 "should boost the visitor economy long-term." What planet are you beaming from. It is a high risk gamble and it has very high chance of not delivering and leaving us all up the swanny.
Without a paddle at that!
[quote][p][bold]thevoiceoftruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]dickpagebrighton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%. The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services. With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?[/p][/quote]The future I want for my city is a future that does not rely on vanity projects. A future that puts the residents and taxpayers of this city first. A future that prefers concentrating on the nuts and bolts of delivering services, repairing roads, providing decent school places for our youngsters ... I would want a city that leaves the business of business to business ...[/p][/quote]Here's to decent school places for all - all parties agree on that - and our city's exam results are good at present. Repairing roads is starved of cash by government - most of the funds from road tax go to the Highways Agency for motorways and trunk roads. Whether we're residents or businesses, we have to contribute ... I'll vote for safer roads for all road users any day. I'm not aware of any "vanity projects"; the 360i is a loan from givernment backed by greens and conservatives, and should boost the visitor economy long-term.[/p][/quote]i360 "should boost the visitor economy long-term." What planet are you beaming from. It is a high risk gamble and it has very high chance of not delivering and leaving us all up the swanny.[/p][/quote]Without a paddle at that! mimseycal
  • Score: 5

5:13pm Mon 3 Mar 14

PorkyChopper says...

Whatever the outcome, can the council find a few quid in it's budget to buy Jason Kitcat a chin as a leaving present.
Whatever the outcome, can the council find a few quid in it's budget to buy Jason Kitcat a chin as a leaving present. PorkyChopper
  • Score: 6

6:08pm Mon 3 Mar 14

rayellerton says...

@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board rayellerton
  • Score: 9

7:18pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Richada says...

Eugenius wrote:
Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%.

The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services.

With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?
Brighton is NOT Milton Keynes or Wolverhampton.......
and I'm not sure how to explain this to you, but 1999 was 15 years ago.

You seen to forget that part of the reason that you're getting nowhere with this 4.75% and referendum trick is because you represent the most hated administration in Brighton's (quite possibly nationwide for all I know) history.

We don't trust your figures.

We don't trust your spin......

.....and you've already proven that you cannot run basic services properly here.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: Back in 1999, Labour-controlled Milton Keynes held a referendum and the people voted for a tax rise of 9.8%. The difference is that these days Labour are borrowing the Tories' clothes, too cowardly to make the case for decent investment in public services. With the council's main grant being cut by £10m a year and council tax having already fallen far behind inflation we are heading for a crisis in care services in the next couple of years. If we don't act now then the only way this will be averted is by closing down some services altogether, with massive job losses. Look at Labour-controlled Wolverhampton planning to axe 2000 jobs to deliver Tory cuts - is that the sort of future we want for our city?[/p][/quote]Brighton is NOT Milton Keynes or Wolverhampton....... and I'm not sure how to explain this to you, but 1999 was 15 years ago. You seen to forget that part of the reason that you're getting nowhere with this 4.75% and referendum trick is because you represent the most hated administration in Brighton's (quite possibly nationwide for all I know) history. We don't trust your figures. We don't trust your spin...... .....and you've already proven that you cannot run basic services properly here. Richada
  • Score: 5

7:27pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Fight_Back says...

rayellerton wrote:
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green !
[quote][p][bold]rayellerton[/bold] wrote: @ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board[/p][/quote]To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green ! Fight_Back
  • Score: 4

10:09pm Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

There are but very few councillors I respect ... Kevin Allen, Warren Morgan and Dawn Barnett are the three that always stand out for me. There were a couple of others but they are no longer councillors.
There are but very few councillors I respect ... Kevin Allen, Warren Morgan and Dawn Barnett are the three that always stand out for me. There were a couple of others but they are no longer councillors. mimseycal
  • Score: 3

10:15pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Richada says...

mimseycal wrote:
There are but very few councillors I respect ... Kevin Allen, Warren Morgan and Dawn Barnett are the three that always stand out for me. There were a couple of others but they are no longer councillors.
Could it be that we respect them because they show a certain amount of respect towards those who voted for them?

I'm of the (hopeful) opinion that those who have trashed (figuratively and literally!) the electorate of Brighton and Hove will reap their just rewards in just over a years time - if this shambles doesn't shake us out of our collective apathy then nothing can!
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: There are but very few councillors I respect ... Kevin Allen, Warren Morgan and Dawn Barnett are the three that always stand out for me. There were a couple of others but they are no longer councillors.[/p][/quote]Could it be that we respect them because they show a certain amount of respect towards those who voted for them? I'm of the (hopeful) opinion that those who have trashed (figuratively and literally!) the electorate of Brighton and Hove will reap their just rewards in just over a years time - if this shambles doesn't shake us out of our collective apathy then nothing can! Richada
  • Score: 5

10:20pm Mon 3 Mar 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Say what you like about Warren Morgan, but he is the only one brave enough to post on here using his real name and he certainly seems more in tune with the feelings of the electorate than the other parties. Labour may well get my vote.
Say what you like about Warren Morgan, but he is the only one brave enough to post on here using his real name and he certainly seems more in tune with the feelings of the electorate than the other parties. Labour may well get my vote. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 2

10:37pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Eugenius says...

These Argus comment threads always degenerate to the same conclusion - a bunch of Labour shills talking amongst themselves.

And that includes "Ania Green"
These Argus comment threads always degenerate to the same conclusion - a bunch of Labour shills talking amongst themselves. And that includes "Ania Green" Eugenius
  • Score: -2

10:47pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Ania Green says...

Fight_Back wrote:
rayellerton wrote:
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green !
Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with.

To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.
[quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayellerton[/bold] wrote: @ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board[/p][/quote]To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green ![/p][/quote]Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with. To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward. Ania Green
  • Score: -5

10:48pm Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

roystony wrote:
Is there any other photos of him you can use? The one above is annoying!!
Preferably a backview with the object slouching dejectedly off into the far horizon!
[quote][p][bold]roystony[/bold] wrote: Is there any other photos of him you can use? The one above is annoying!![/p][/quote]Preferably a backview with the object slouching dejectedly off into the far horizon! mimseycal
  • Score: 4

10:48pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Eugenius says...

Ania Green wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
rayellerton wrote:
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green !
Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with.

To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.
See what I mean? : )
[quote][p][bold]Ania Green[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayellerton[/bold] wrote: @ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board[/p][/quote]To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green ![/p][/quote]Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with. To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.[/p][/quote]See what I mean? : ) Eugenius
  • Score: 1

10:59pm Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

Ania Green wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
rayellerton wrote:
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green !
Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with.

To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.
In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ...
[quote][p][bold]Ania Green[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayellerton[/bold] wrote: @ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board[/p][/quote]To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green ![/p][/quote]Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with. To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.[/p][/quote]In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ... mimseycal
  • Score: 2

11:06pm Mon 3 Mar 14

Eugenius says...

mimseycal wrote:
Ania Green wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
rayellerton wrote:
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green !
Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with.

To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.
In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ...
Correct, just an ordinary Green party member and "Ania" is just another juvenile Labour party member making mischief.

It's good that Warren posts here (and lucky for him his friends are here to give him a warm reception), but as someone else pointed out the Green councillors hang out on Twitter instead.
[quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ania Green[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayellerton[/bold] wrote: @ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board[/p][/quote]To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green ![/p][/quote]Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with. To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.[/p][/quote]In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ...[/p][/quote]Correct, just an ordinary Green party member and "Ania" is just another juvenile Labour party member making mischief. It's good that Warren posts here (and lucky for him his friends are here to give him a warm reception), but as someone else pointed out the Green councillors hang out on Twitter instead. Eugenius
  • Score: -2

11:17pm Mon 3 Mar 14

mimseycal says...

Whereever the Green Councillors hang out ... it is too close to home for me.
Whereever the Green Councillors hang out ... it is too close to home for me. mimseycal
  • Score: 1

8:11am Tue 4 Mar 14

Richada says...

Eugenius wrote:
mimseycal wrote:
Ania Green wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
rayellerton wrote:
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green !
Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with.

To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.
In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ...
Correct, just an ordinary Green party member and "Ania" is just another juvenile Labour party member making mischief.

It's good that Warren posts here (and lucky for him his friends are here to give him a warm reception), but as someone else pointed out the Green councillors hang out on Twitter instead.
How very appropriate - the Twiterati.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ania Green[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayellerton[/bold] wrote: @ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board[/p][/quote]To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green ![/p][/quote]Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with. To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.[/p][/quote]In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ...[/p][/quote]Correct, just an ordinary Green party member and "Ania" is just another juvenile Labour party member making mischief. It's good that Warren posts here (and lucky for him his friends are here to give him a warm reception), but as someone else pointed out the Green councillors hang out on Twitter instead.[/p][/quote]How very appropriate - the Twiterati. Richada
  • Score: 4

12:21pm Tue 4 Mar 14

thevoiceoftruth says...

Eugenius wrote:
mimseycal wrote:
Ania Green wrote:
Fight_Back wrote:
rayellerton wrote:
@ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board
To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green !
Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with.

To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.
In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ...
Correct, just an ordinary Green party member and "Ania" is just another juvenile Labour party member making mischief.

It's good that Warren posts here (and lucky for him his friends are here to give him a warm reception), but as someone else pointed out the Green councillors hang out on Twitter instead.
What you don't seem to realise, is that he has gained respect from posting on here. It's not a case of people being Labour supporters and just giving him a thumbs up. There are plenty of different political views aired on this site and we all disagree on lots of things. So assuming everyone is a Labour supporter just makes you look really silly.

However, I do suspect you are a councillor - simply because you know so much about what is going on behind the scenes. What a shame you spend all your time on Twitter. It's pretty hard to have a debate using only 140 characters - maybe that's why the Greens like it so much. The Argus is our local paper and you will get a much better idea of residents feelings from what is written on here, rather than listening to all those loving tweets from other green party members across the world.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]mimseycal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Ania Green[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fight_Back[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]rayellerton[/bold] wrote: @ Eugenius... you pop up on EVERY story regarding council matters, any chance of revealing your real name? at least Councillor Morgan does not hide behind a pseudonym...and i am nor a Labour supporter, i just believe in being above board[/p][/quote]To be frank - Eugenius is too much of a coward to do that, it comes with being a Green ![/p][/quote]Eugenius is a fine councilor and a one of the most hardworking and conscientious people I have had the pleasure to work with. To resort to name calling on here while hiding behind yiur username just shows you up to be the coward.[/p][/quote]In that case Eugenius may also be rather economical with the truth as I recollect quite clearly Eugenius claiming on one of these threads just being a ordinairy Green party member who happens to be privy to some stuff he could not disclose as he was there merely due to the fact that Kitkat managed to gain some concessions ...[/p][/quote]Correct, just an ordinary Green party member and "Ania" is just another juvenile Labour party member making mischief. It's good that Warren posts here (and lucky for him his friends are here to give him a warm reception), but as someone else pointed out the Green councillors hang out on Twitter instead.[/p][/quote]What you don't seem to realise, is that he has gained respect from posting on here. It's not a case of people being Labour supporters and just giving him a thumbs up. There are plenty of different political views aired on this site and we all disagree on lots of things. So assuming everyone is a Labour supporter just makes you look really silly. However, I do suspect you are a councillor - simply because you know so much about what is going on behind the scenes. What a shame you spend all your time on Twitter. It's pretty hard to have a debate using only 140 characters - maybe that's why the Greens like it so much. The Argus is our local paper and you will get a much better idea of residents feelings from what is written on here, rather than listening to all those loving tweets from other green party members across the world. thevoiceoftruth
  • Score: 4

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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