The ArgusCouncillor slammed for resigning ahead of crunch fire cuts vote (From The Argus)

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

Councillor slammed for resigning ahead of crunch fire cuts vote

The Argus: Councillor resigns over "grim future" brought on by £7 million in fire cuts Councillor resigns over "grim future" brought on by £7 million in fire cuts

A COUNCILLOR has been slammed over his decision to resign as vice chairman of East Sussex Fire Authority rather than vote against £7 million of cuts to the fire service.

Green councillor Sven Rufus, announced his resignation in a statement that was posted on the Brighton and Hove Green Party website saying the proposed cuts will lead to a "grim future" for the service.

But his decision to resign hours before the crucial vote instead of staying in place in time to cast his vote has been branded an empty gesture by some councillors who have been left fuming at his decision.

Labour councillor Emma Daniel, who branded the move as "rubbish" on Twitter, said the move was nothing but an "empty gesture".

She said: "Today he could have, at the end of the meeting, said he was resigning because he didn't agree, but to not cast your vote? To not turn up to vote, it's fundamental really. I like Sven personally but I can't believe he wouldn't turn up to vote, I just think people who voted for him would have expected more.

"I'm very grateful the Green's voted the same way as us and that Phelim [Mac Cafferty] stepped in, but when someone says I'm protesting against the cuts instead of voting against them, it's not good enough."

Conservative councillor Garry Peltzer Dunn, who voted against the cuts, also questioned coun Rufus's decision to resign.

He said: "I think it's very sad he felt it necessary to resign. He has a lot of experience and he's an honourable man and I was disappointed not only did he resign the vice chairmanship but also from the authority.

"I would have thought he could just as reasonably voted against the proposals as did his colleagues and I don't think he's gained anything from resigning."

Councillor Rufus could not be reached for a comment but in his statement he said: “It’s with a heavy heart that I announce my resignation from the Vice Chair and as a representative on the ESFA today. I felt it was the only way to highlight the grim future for our fire service, thanks to the austerity plans of all major Westminster parties. As bad as it might seem now, continued cuts to the fire service will put more people's live in danger over the coming years.

"I've been serving on the ESFA for 7 years, and sadly most that time has been spent preparing for this situation. Over the years, the Greens have consistently sought to increase funding for local services through council tax. Only recently did Labour realise how essential this was and join us in voting for increases. Unfortunately it’s too late, and the financial black hole we face is even more severe than it might otherwise have been.

"I have huge respect for the firefighters working to keep us safe in the County and City - they do an extraordinary job in protecting us. However it is extraordinary to see some politicians joining their campaign so vociferously, when they belong to a party committed to imposing exactly the same level of cuts upon public services as the current government. Labour has promised to follow the same spending plans and cuts as the Coalition until 2020 - yet they lack the courage of their convictions in recognising the inevitable consequences of those cuts at a local level. It's an extraordinary display of bare-faced hypocrisy.

"It saddens me greatly that the Coalition’s austerity programme has pitted two parts of the same organisation, with common goals and values, against each other. Firefighters are understandably concerned for their own and the public's safety, and have proposed additional savings to offset the cuts. Not all of these are possible, although I believe there is still more that could be done.

"I fear that the damage being done to the ESFRS by the coalition cuts will only continue to get worse, no matter which party or parties form the next national government in 2015. It will soon become impossible to provide the service the public expect and deserve, as Labour and Tories heap more and more cuts upon the service. Through no fault of the firefighters or officers in the ESFRS, the service will become unsustainable”.

Comments (24)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

7:38pm Thu 5 Jun 14

hubby says...

Cut,cut,cut.
No other ideas then?
Bringing back slavery will be next on the agenda.
Cut,cut,cut. No other ideas then? Bringing back slavery will be next on the agenda. hubby
  • Score: 5

7:50pm Thu 5 Jun 14

angrymonkey says...

all the money they waste on other things and sending it over seas . Be nice for once the Government to use the money we have to keep are services and save the NHS one man last night might be dead now under the cutbacks. the people of East Sussex need to fight this .
all the money they waste on other things and sending it over seas . Be nice for once the Government to use the money we have to keep are services and save the NHS one man last night might be dead now under the cutbacks. the people of East Sussex need to fight this . angrymonkey
  • Score: 3

8:05pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Martha Gunn says...

Nothing sums up the uselessness and irrelevance of the Green Party like this pathetic display of empty political showboating.

Lucas and her Green Councillors must be driven out of office in our city.

Roll on 2015!
Nothing sums up the uselessness and irrelevance of the Green Party like this pathetic display of empty political showboating. Lucas and her Green Councillors must be driven out of office in our city. Roll on 2015! Martha Gunn
  • Score: 17

8:22pm Thu 5 Jun 14

fredflintstone1 says...

Further evidence of how the Greens cannot prioritise - either in terms of their personal responsibilities as elected individuals, or when it comes to spending public money responsibly. Has there been a party that has wasted more public money and council officers' time on vanity projects than the Greens?

Still, Cllr Lucas will now have more time to lobby Halfords on his personal crusade against pink-coloured bikes for girls, and the damage that he believes these are causing to our children.
Further evidence of how the Greens cannot prioritise - either in terms of their personal responsibilities as elected individuals, or when it comes to spending public money responsibly. Has there been a party that has wasted more public money and council officers' time on vanity projects than the Greens? Still, Cllr Lucas will now have more time to lobby Halfords on his personal crusade against pink-coloured bikes for girls, and the damage that he believes these are causing to our children. fredflintstone1
  • Score: 6

9:04pm Thu 5 Jun 14

FatherTed11 says...

Something seems to get 'slammed' every day in this newspaper.
Something seems to get 'slammed' every day in this newspaper. FatherTed11
  • Score: 5

9:12pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Fozborn says...

At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here.
For purposes of illustration I'll mention three.
1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum.
2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd.
3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce.
Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress.
So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do.
At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here. For purposes of illustration I'll mention three. 1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum. 2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd. 3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce. Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress. So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do. Fozborn
  • Score: 14

9:23pm Thu 5 Jun 14

what's going on says...

In a different post I wrote that the Greens were turning Blue for privatising the Learning disability service, now it appears they are turning yellow
In a different post I wrote that the Greens were turning Blue for privatising the Learning disability service, now it appears they are turning yellow what's going on
  • Score: 7

9:57pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Cllr Phelim MacCafferty attended as substitute for Sven so we saw the resignation of the Vice Chair from the authority in protest plus all 3 Green delegates voting together against the cuts. 3 Labour councillors voted against as well but we were outnumbered by the Conservative and UKIP councillors on the authority, propped up by a couple of Lib Dems so the cuts were carried.
Cllr Phelim MacCafferty attended as substitute for Sven so we saw the resignation of the Vice Chair from the authority in protest plus all 3 Green delegates voting together against the cuts. 3 Labour councillors voted against as well but we were outnumbered by the Conservative and UKIP councillors on the authority, propped up by a couple of Lib Dems so the cuts were carried. Eugenius
  • Score: -4

10:10pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Quiterie says...

With power comes responsibility, and it's quite clear that the Greens can't handle responsibility.

Rufus and the other Greens don't want any more austerity, but they ignore the fact that even with the current level of austerity the National Debt is growing and growing every single day.

So what's the alternative to austerity? If you want to increase public spending the only option is to increase taxes. You only have to look across the channel at France to see what a disaster increased taxes from their Socialist Government have been. It chokes economic recovery and France are lagging well behind the other EU countries in terms of economic growth.

The other thing that Rufus should have considered before falling on his sword is that auditors have found that Brighton & Hove Council spend more on providing services than other similar Councils. There are more efficiency savings to be made before frontline services are cut.

It doesn't reflect very well on the previous Tory and Labour administrations in Brighton and Hove that the Council were so inefficient in the first place, but the Greens are now in power and they've got to play with the hand they've been dealt.
With power comes responsibility, and it's quite clear that the Greens can't handle responsibility. Rufus and the other Greens don't want any more austerity, but they ignore the fact that even with the current level of austerity the National Debt is growing and growing every single day. So what's the alternative to austerity? If you want to increase public spending the only option is to increase taxes. You only have to look across the channel at France to see what a disaster increased taxes from their Socialist Government have been. It chokes economic recovery and France are lagging well behind the other EU countries in terms of economic growth. The other thing that Rufus should have considered before falling on his sword is that auditors have found that Brighton & Hove Council spend more on providing services than other similar Councils. There are more efficiency savings to be made before frontline services are cut. It doesn't reflect very well on the previous Tory and Labour administrations in Brighton and Hove that the Council were so inefficient in the first place, but the Greens are now in power and they've got to play with the hand they've been dealt. Quiterie
  • Score: 6

10:12pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Martha Gunn says...

Pathetic attempt from Eugenius @9.57 to befuddle us with detail and mire the issue in Greenspeak.
When all is done the episode demonstrates yet again that the Green politics of La Lucas and her Councillors are an excrescence on our city and offer no solutions.

Let's get about the business of ridding us of this dreadful experiment that has been foisted on us.

Roll on 2015
Pathetic attempt from Eugenius @9.57 to befuddle us with detail and mire the issue in Greenspeak. When all is done the episode demonstrates yet again that the Green politics of La Lucas and her Councillors are an excrescence on our city and offer no solutions. Let's get about the business of ridding us of this dreadful experiment that has been foisted on us. Roll on 2015 Martha Gunn
  • Score: 10

10:26pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Fozborn wrote:
At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here.
For purposes of illustration I'll mention three.
1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum.
2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd.
3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce.
Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress.
So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do.
I notice you don't include the £25 billion cost of renewing Trident submarines and nuclear missiles in your list of poor choices of expenditure. I guess you would rather cuts were made to the fire service than defence.

The East Sussex fire service budget (and the budget of every service in the country) has been slashed by central government.

The Brighton and Hove transport projects you mention were largely grant funded by sustainable transport charities and awards from both the EU and the Department of Transport, not council tax.
[quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here. For purposes of illustration I'll mention three. 1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum. 2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd. 3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce. Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress. So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do.[/p][/quote]I notice you don't include the £25 billion cost of renewing Trident submarines and nuclear missiles in your list of poor choices of expenditure. I guess you would rather cuts were made to the fire service than defence. The East Sussex fire service budget (and the budget of every service in the country) has been slashed by central government. The Brighton and Hove transport projects you mention were largely grant funded by sustainable transport charities and awards from both the EU and the Department of Transport, not council tax. Eugenius
  • Score: -3

10:39pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Quiterie says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here.
For purposes of illustration I'll mention three.
1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum.
2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd.
3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce.
Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress.
So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do.
I notice you don't include the £25 billion cost of renewing Trident submarines and nuclear missiles in your list of poor choices of expenditure. I guess you would rather cuts were made to the fire service than defence.

The East Sussex fire service budget (and the budget of every service in the country) has been slashed by central government.

The Brighton and Hove transport projects you mention were largely grant funded by sustainable transport charities and awards from both the EU and the Department of Transport, not council tax.
And where does the EU and Dept of Transport money come from? Tax of course! And as you've mentioned defence, we spend close to the equivalent of the entire defence budget just paying the INTEREST on our National Debt. We can't keep adding to the National Debt indefinitely......
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here. For purposes of illustration I'll mention three. 1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum. 2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd. 3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce. Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress. So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do.[/p][/quote]I notice you don't include the £25 billion cost of renewing Trident submarines and nuclear missiles in your list of poor choices of expenditure. I guess you would rather cuts were made to the fire service than defence. The East Sussex fire service budget (and the budget of every service in the country) has been slashed by central government. The Brighton and Hove transport projects you mention were largely grant funded by sustainable transport charities and awards from both the EU and the Department of Transport, not council tax.[/p][/quote]And where does the EU and Dept of Transport money come from? Tax of course! And as you've mentioned defence, we spend close to the equivalent of the entire defence budget just paying the INTEREST on our National Debt. We can't keep adding to the National Debt indefinitely...... Quiterie
  • Score: 6

10:43pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Quiterie wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here.
For purposes of illustration I'll mention three.
1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum.
2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd.
3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce.
Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress.
So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do.
I notice you don't include the £25 billion cost of renewing Trident submarines and nuclear missiles in your list of poor choices of expenditure. I guess you would rather cuts were made to the fire service than defence.

The East Sussex fire service budget (and the budget of every service in the country) has been slashed by central government.

The Brighton and Hove transport projects you mention were largely grant funded by sustainable transport charities and awards from both the EU and the Department of Transport, not council tax.
And where does the EU and Dept of Transport money come from? Tax of course! And as you've mentioned defence, we spend close to the equivalent of the entire defence budget just paying the INTEREST on our National Debt. We can't keep adding to the National Debt indefinitely......
Sure but that grant money in the national pot would be going to another council if we didn't bid for it.
[quote][p][bold]Quiterie[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: At the end of the day it's all about priorities. We as a country cannot keep spending money we haven't got. Money gets wasted left right and centre by local authorities and central government and nowhere more so than in our Green and Labour run Brighton & Hove. There are numerous examples and certainly more than I could possibly mention here. For purposes of illustration I'll mention three. 1) Grotesque over payment of Directors at the council. I simply cannot believe there is any job done inside the walls of the council buildings that can justify a salary of over say £65k per annum. 2) Vanity projects like the bike lanes on The Drive & Old Shoreham Rd and the bus/bike lanes along the Lewes Rd. 3) The £m's spent on the 20mph zone that everyone ignores and the police don't enforce. Now I can already hear the tedious little miscreants like Eugenius and H Jarrs clearing their throats to pipe up that the bike and bus lanes were part funded by some European grant money or whatever. It's still our money and attitudes like that are what have led our country to run an enormous budget deficit that will financially cripple future generations. By the way does anybody else picture the snake from the cartoon version of Robin Hood every time they read a post by Eugenius?? But I digress. So if we continue to allow our councils and government to spend money on the things that don't matter they will have to continue to make cuts in areas that do.[/p][/quote]I notice you don't include the £25 billion cost of renewing Trident submarines and nuclear missiles in your list of poor choices of expenditure. I guess you would rather cuts were made to the fire service than defence. The East Sussex fire service budget (and the budget of every service in the country) has been slashed by central government. The Brighton and Hove transport projects you mention were largely grant funded by sustainable transport charities and awards from both the EU and the Department of Transport, not council tax.[/p][/quote]And where does the EU and Dept of Transport money come from? Tax of course! And as you've mentioned defence, we spend close to the equivalent of the entire defence budget just paying the INTEREST on our National Debt. We can't keep adding to the National Debt indefinitely......[/p][/quote]Sure but that grant money in the national pot would be going to another council if we didn't bid for it. Eugenius
  • Score: -1

10:49pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Martha Gunn says...

Spectacular new outbreak of bonkers Green Party thinking @10.26.

Now Green Eugenius claims the reduction of one fire appliance at Preston Circus is the consequence of retaining a nuclear submarine in Scotland.

Now I'm no great enthusiast of Trident, but really this shows the lack of any clear or quality thinking from the Green Party.

Our city has become the laughing stock of the country for putting up with the nonsense of Lucas and her Councillors.

Let's put an end to it in 2015!
Spectacular new outbreak of bonkers Green Party thinking @10.26. Now Green Eugenius claims the reduction of one fire appliance at Preston Circus is the consequence of retaining a nuclear submarine in Scotland. Now I'm no great enthusiast of Trident, but really this shows the lack of any clear or quality thinking from the Green Party. Our city has become the laughing stock of the country for putting up with the nonsense of Lucas and her Councillors. Let's put an end to it in 2015! Martha Gunn
  • Score: 8

11:01pm Thu 5 Jun 14

ourcoalition says...

Good for Sven and the others - someone has to stand up for us, rather than the racist UKIPers and the Banker loving Tories.
Good for Sven and the others - someone has to stand up for us, rather than the racist UKIPers and the Banker loving Tories. ourcoalition
  • Score: -6

11:11pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Martha Gunn wrote:
Spectacular new outbreak of bonkers Green Party thinking @10.26.

Now Green Eugenius claims the reduction of one fire appliance at Preston Circus is the consequence of retaining a nuclear submarine in Scotland.

Now I'm no great enthusiast of Trident, but really this shows the lack of any clear or quality thinking from the Green Party.

Our city has become the laughing stock of the country for putting up with the nonsense of Lucas and her Councillors.

Let's put an end to it in 2015!
You're missing the point - the coalition is slashing fire service budgets around the country having commissioned Sir Ken Knight to come up with a report suggesting how the most money possible could be taken out of the national fire budget.

Unfortunately this is a cost driven exercise which doesn't pay much notice to the likely increase in fire fatalities and the likelihood that if the fire brigade is no longer to get to fires as quickly because of being overstretched then home owners will pay a forfeit in higher home insurance premiums.

With the money being cut from the local budgets it is then down to the regional Fire Authorities to try and find a way to deliver a Fire Service for a lot less money that doesn't kill too many residents or put fire fighters lives at risk.

It's going to take a national campaign to fight back against these cuts.
When pressed on the matter Shadow Fire Minister Lyn Brown confirmed that Labour would not restore the funding to the fire service if they form the next government.
[quote][p][bold]Martha Gunn[/bold] wrote: Spectacular new outbreak of bonkers Green Party thinking @10.26. Now Green Eugenius claims the reduction of one fire appliance at Preston Circus is the consequence of retaining a nuclear submarine in Scotland. Now I'm no great enthusiast of Trident, but really this shows the lack of any clear or quality thinking from the Green Party. Our city has become the laughing stock of the country for putting up with the nonsense of Lucas and her Councillors. Let's put an end to it in 2015![/p][/quote]You're missing the point - the coalition is slashing fire service budgets around the country having commissioned Sir Ken Knight to come up with a report suggesting how the most money possible could be taken out of the national fire budget. Unfortunately this is a cost driven exercise which doesn't pay much notice to the likely increase in fire fatalities and the likelihood that if the fire brigade is no longer to get to fires as quickly because of being overstretched then home owners will pay a forfeit in higher home insurance premiums. With the money being cut from the local budgets it is then down to the regional Fire Authorities to try and find a way to deliver a Fire Service for a lot less money that doesn't kill too many residents or put fire fighters lives at risk. It's going to take a national campaign to fight back against these cuts. When pressed on the matter Shadow Fire Minister Lyn Brown confirmed that Labour would not restore the funding to the fire service if they form the next government. Eugenius
  • Score: -7

11:14pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Fozborn says...

Oh Eugenius you tedious person.
You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue.
As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things.
Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.
Oh Eugenius you tedious person. You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue. As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things. Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate. Fozborn
  • Score: 7

11:25pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Fozborn wrote:
Oh Eugenius you tedious person.
You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue.
As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things.
Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.
If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans.

Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay:

Reducing senior management spend:
The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade.

Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid:
We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.
[quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh Eugenius you tedious person. You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue. As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things. Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.[/p][/quote]If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans. Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay: Reducing senior management spend: The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade. Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid: We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades. Eugenius
  • Score: -4

11:50pm Thu 5 Jun 14

Fozborn says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Oh Eugenius you tedious person.
You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue.
As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things.
Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.
If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans.

Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay:

Reducing senior management spend:
The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade.

Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid:
We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.
Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated.
Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh Eugenius you tedious person. You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue. As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things. Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.[/p][/quote]If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans. Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay: Reducing senior management spend: The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade. Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid: We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.[/p][/quote]Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated. Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut. Fozborn
  • Score: 6

12:32am Fri 6 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Fozborn wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Oh Eugenius you tedious person.
You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue.
As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things.
Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.
If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans.

Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay:

Reducing senior management spend:
The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade.

Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid:
We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.
Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated.
Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.
Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process.

I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding.

I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced.

Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding.
[quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh Eugenius you tedious person. You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue. As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things. Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.[/p][/quote]If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans. Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay: Reducing senior management spend: The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade. Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid: We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.[/p][/quote]Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated. Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.[/p][/quote]Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process. I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding. I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced. Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding. Eugenius
  • Score: -3

8:12am Fri 6 Jun 14

Fozborn says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Oh Eugenius you tedious person.
You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue.
As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things.
Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.
If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans.

Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay:

Reducing senior management spend:
The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade.

Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid:
We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.
Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated.
Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.
Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process.

I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding.

I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced.

Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding.
Quick grab the cash and spend it quickly before somebody else does!! It doesn't really matter what on just spend, spend, spend!
If somebody else does something wrong does that give you carte blanche to do the same? How about doing the right thing and acting responsibly? Then there would be more money in other budgets for things that matter. Don't you understand how everything is ultimately connected and that there will be a day of reckoning when the bills have to be paid?
Incidentally your own day of reckoning will be on 5th May next year.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh Eugenius you tedious person. You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue. As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things. Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.[/p][/quote]If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans. Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay: Reducing senior management spend: The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade. Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid: We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.[/p][/quote]Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated. Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.[/p][/quote]Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process. I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding. I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced. Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding.[/p][/quote]Quick grab the cash and spend it quickly before somebody else does!! It doesn't really matter what on just spend, spend, spend! If somebody else does something wrong does that give you carte blanche to do the same? How about doing the right thing and acting responsibly? Then there would be more money in other budgets for things that matter. Don't you understand how everything is ultimately connected and that there will be a day of reckoning when the bills have to be paid? Incidentally your own day of reckoning will be on 5th May next year. Fozborn
  • Score: 3

8:14am Fri 6 Jun 14

We love Red Billy says...

Eugenius wrote:
Cllr Phelim MacCafferty attended as substitute for Sven so we saw the resignation of the Vice Chair from the authority in protest plus all 3 Green delegates voting together against the cuts. 3 Labour councillors voted against as well but we were outnumbered by the Conservative and UKIP councillors on the authority, propped up by a couple of Lib Dems so the cuts were carried.
Ha Ha Phlegm the fireman comes to the rescue. LOL @gzunder
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: Cllr Phelim MacCafferty attended as substitute for Sven so we saw the resignation of the Vice Chair from the authority in protest plus all 3 Green delegates voting together against the cuts. 3 Labour councillors voted against as well but we were outnumbered by the Conservative and UKIP councillors on the authority, propped up by a couple of Lib Dems so the cuts were carried.[/p][/quote]Ha Ha Phlegm the fireman comes to the rescue. LOL @gzunder We love Red Billy
  • Score: 4

8:33am Fri 6 Jun 14

Eugenius says...

Fozborn wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Oh Eugenius you tedious person.
You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue.
As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things.
Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.
If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans.

Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay:

Reducing senior management spend:
The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade.

Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid:
We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.
Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated.
Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.
Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process.

I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding.

I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced.

Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding.
Quick grab the cash and spend it quickly before somebody else does!! It doesn't really matter what on just spend, spend, spend!
If somebody else does something wrong does that give you carte blanche to do the same? How about doing the right thing and acting responsibly? Then there would be more money in other budgets for things that matter. Don't you understand how everything is ultimately connected and that there will be a day of reckoning when the bills have to be paid?
Incidentally your own day of reckoning will be on 5th May next year.
You are such as silly billy. The fact that it is a competitive process means that the grant funder is selecting projects based on merit, ie the benefit they will bring to local residents and their confidence in the soundness of the project plan submitted.

Of course our recent success in winning lots of grants is mainly down to the dedication and skill of the officers at the council who work on the bid submissions but I like to think we have created the necessary atmosphere of innovation and ambition for the city to encourage them.
[quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh Eugenius you tedious person. You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue. As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things. Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.[/p][/quote]If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans. Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay: Reducing senior management spend: The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade. Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid: We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.[/p][/quote]Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated. Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.[/p][/quote]Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process. I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding. I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced. Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding.[/p][/quote]Quick grab the cash and spend it quickly before somebody else does!! It doesn't really matter what on just spend, spend, spend! If somebody else does something wrong does that give you carte blanche to do the same? How about doing the right thing and acting responsibly? Then there would be more money in other budgets for things that matter. Don't you understand how everything is ultimately connected and that there will be a day of reckoning when the bills have to be paid? Incidentally your own day of reckoning will be on 5th May next year.[/p][/quote]You are such as silly billy. The fact that it is a competitive process means that the grant funder is selecting projects based on merit, ie the benefit they will bring to local residents and their confidence in the soundness of the project plan submitted. Of course our recent success in winning lots of grants is mainly down to the dedication and skill of the officers at the council who work on the bid submissions but I like to think we have created the necessary atmosphere of innovation and ambition for the city to encourage them. Eugenius
  • Score: -2

10:15am Fri 6 Jun 14

Fozborn says...

Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Eugenius wrote:
Fozborn wrote:
Oh Eugenius you tedious person.
You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue.
As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things.
Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.
If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans.

Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay:

Reducing senior management spend:
The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade.

Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid:
We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.
Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated.
Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.
Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process.

I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding.

I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced.

Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding.
Quick grab the cash and spend it quickly before somebody else does!! It doesn't really matter what on just spend, spend, spend!
If somebody else does something wrong does that give you carte blanche to do the same? How about doing the right thing and acting responsibly? Then there would be more money in other budgets for things that matter. Don't you understand how everything is ultimately connected and that there will be a day of reckoning when the bills have to be paid?
Incidentally your own day of reckoning will be on 5th May next year.
You are such as silly billy. The fact that it is a competitive process means that the grant funder is selecting projects based on merit, ie the benefit they will bring to local residents and their confidence in the soundness of the project plan submitted.

Of course our recent success in winning lots of grants is mainly down to the dedication and skill of the officers at the council who work on the bid submissions but I like to think we have created the necessary atmosphere of innovation and ambition for the city to encourage them.
There we go again: "Winning lots of grants". Yet another game show style phrase.
Come on down Cllr Eugenius - the grant money price is right! Super, smashing, great!
Lets just analyse how this bidding process works:
1) A load of people who work for quangos and consultancies dependent on government money get themselves elected (I accept that not all come form this sort of background but hey most do).
2) They then employ a load of people on high salaries to bid for tax payer money from other people on high government salaries whilst using further consultants to advise them who are - yes you've guessed it - on high salaries (forgive me: technically consultancy fees but that doesn't scan quite as well!)
3) What little money is left over at the end of this process is then allocated to be spent on projects that are aimed at winning awards form EU officials - yep - also on high salaries - rather than things that really matter and that would improve peoples lives.
4) The net result is a white elephant project that few people want and is claimed to have cost say £5m has in fact really cost £25m because of all the officialdom involved.
5) The people in point 1 above who got themselves elected in the first place then have themselves photographed alongside the white elephant project in the hope that there are enough naïve people out there to re elect them. In the meantime important things run out of money but the local politicians claim its not their fault and blame others for not giving them even more money to spend.
6) Meanwhile in this illustration £20m has flowed into the coffers of the political and administrative elite allowing them to fund purchases of organic mung beans, Birkenstock sandals and Guardian subscriptions. Amongst other things.
[quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Eugenius[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Fozborn[/bold] wrote: Oh Eugenius you tedious person. You hear but you don't listen. You simply switch to Green Party press release/spin doctor mode. I listed 3 local examples because this is the website of a local paper where normal people are interested in local issues. But then I don't expect you to understand normal people's interests and concerns. Why would you? You're just another ideologue. As predicted you went on about the money for the transport projects coming from EU coffers or whatever. And how do you think it got there? By growing on trees?? How dare you and your chums spend our hard earned cash on such vanity projects and then not take responsibility when money runs out for more important things. Maybe my visual image of you as the snake from Robin Hood is wrong, Squeeler from Animal Farm is far more appropriate.[/p][/quote]If the Department for transport has created a grant fund for transport infrastructure projects then than money is up for grabs, dozens if not hundreds of councils will put in bids, it's not the case that it somehow won't be spent and then the cash will be refunded to the taxpayer! The same goes for the EU grants and the charity grants eg Sustrans. Annoyed at myself for neglecting to your answer about management pay: Reducing senior management spend: The council now spends less on senior management than it has in a decade. Reducing ratio between the highest and lowest paid: We’ve brought down the ratio between the highest and lowest paid council staff to just over 10:1 by significantly reducing the Chief Executive’s salary and increasing the lowest pay grades.[/p][/quote]Geez I think I've just been sick in my mouth. "The money is up for grabs"!!! If ever a phrase illustrated the arrogance of our political class then that is surely it! This is real life not some TV game show. It's this attitude to tax payer money that needs to be eradicated. Well done on making the first steps to reducing management pay (and I trust you are not simply manipulating statistics) but could you perhaps share with us readers how many earn over £65k per annum in the town hall/Kings Hse. That way we can understand how many snouts are in the troff whilst fireman's jobs are being cut.[/p][/quote]Explain to me how not bidding for grant money is a good idea? Central government allocates the local authority budget in different ways, most of it is dished out according to a fixed formula (which somehow seems to favour rural areas over metropolitan areas with higher running costs) but some of it (mainly for capital projects) is subject to a competitive bidding process. I know certain people on here like to complain all the time about the Greens' sustainable transport programme but the Department of Transport must think we have a good track record for delivery because they keep giving us funding. I don't have data on number of senior managers paid over £65k - suggest you submit an FOI request for that one. An FOI request in 2011 revealed that there were 20 staff paid £80,000 or more but that included 8 head teachers and four strategic directors - 3 of the latter were let go and not replaced. Not sure why you are confusing council budgets with fire service budgets - they are separate organisations with separate funding.[/p][/quote]Quick grab the cash and spend it quickly before somebody else does!! It doesn't really matter what on just spend, spend, spend! If somebody else does something wrong does that give you carte blanche to do the same? How about doing the right thing and acting responsibly? Then there would be more money in other budgets for things that matter. Don't you understand how everything is ultimately connected and that there will be a day of reckoning when the bills have to be paid? Incidentally your own day of reckoning will be on 5th May next year.[/p][/quote]You are such as silly billy. The fact that it is a competitive process means that the grant funder is selecting projects based on merit, ie the benefit they will bring to local residents and their confidence in the soundness of the project plan submitted. Of course our recent success in winning lots of grants is mainly down to the dedication and skill of the officers at the council who work on the bid submissions but I like to think we have created the necessary atmosphere of innovation and ambition for the city to encourage them.[/p][/quote]There we go again: "Winning lots of grants". Yet another game show style phrase. Come on down Cllr Eugenius - the grant money price is right! Super, smashing, great! Lets just analyse how this bidding process works: 1) A load of people who work for quangos and consultancies dependent on government money get themselves elected (I accept that not all come form this sort of background but hey most do). 2) They then employ a load of people on high salaries to bid for tax payer money from other people on high government salaries whilst using further consultants to advise them who are - yes you've guessed it - on high salaries (forgive me: technically consultancy fees but that doesn't scan quite as well!) 3) What little money is left over at the end of this process is then allocated to be spent on projects that are aimed at winning awards form EU officials - yep - also on high salaries - rather than things that really matter and that would improve peoples lives. 4) The net result is a white elephant project that few people want and is claimed to have cost say £5m has in fact really cost £25m because of all the officialdom involved. 5) The people in point 1 above who got themselves elected in the first place then have themselves photographed alongside the white elephant project in the hope that there are enough naïve people out there to re elect them. In the meantime important things run out of money but the local politicians claim its not their fault and blame others for not giving them even more money to spend. 6) Meanwhile in this illustration £20m has flowed into the coffers of the political and administrative elite allowing them to fund purchases of organic mung beans, Birkenstock sandals and Guardian subscriptions. Amongst other things. Fozborn
  • Score: 2

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