IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

2 Pages V  < 1 2  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Bus lane for A4
GMR
post Apr 2 2011, 02:53 PM
Post #21


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Apr 2 2011, 01:22 PM) *
That is the way of the world. Capital projects that look good get grant money and Councillor enthusiasm. Maintenance (revenue) is not sexy, so is at the bottom of the pile. I don't think money can be moved from maintenance to capital (and reverse) either, so money for a project cancelled cannot simply be used to resurface roads etc. I also believe it is so that it cannot be transferred to social care, especially as it is 'in year' allocation and social care is a rolling cost.



I agree that is the way it is; but it shouldn't be.... and who decides? Isn't the money that is used for the people by the people? If we have to tighten our belts then money should be moved around so it benefits the right people/ projects and not wasted because there is an excess in one area.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Apr 2 2011, 05:05 PM
Post #22


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (GMR @ Apr 2 2011, 02:53 PM) *
I agree that is the way it is; but it shouldn't be.... and who decides? Isn't the money that is used for the people by the people? If we have to tighten our belts then money should be moved around so it benefits the right people/ projects and not wasted because there is an excess in one area.


Agreed.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Apr 2 2011, 05:11 PM
Post #23


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (GMR @ Apr 2 2011, 03:53 PM) *
I agree that is the way it is; but it shouldn't be.... and who decides? Isn't the money that is used for the people by the people? If we have to tighten our belts then money should be moved around so it benefits the right people/ projects and not wasted because there is an excess in one area.


Local authorities spending money wisely....... wink.gif

You must obviously be living in the real world not the world of local authority politics? wink.gif


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Apr 2 2011, 06:38 PM
Post #24


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Apr 2 2011, 06:11 PM) *
Local authorities spending money wisely....... wink.gif

You must obviously be living in the real world not the world of local authority politics? wink.gif


Granted; there are two worlds. The voting publics' world and the politicians world...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Apr 2 2011, 08:06 PM
Post #25


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



I agree it is 'odd', but it is the way things are done in Central and local government. In many cases WBC feel stuck with it.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Apr 2 2011, 08:21 PM
Post #26


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Apr 2 2011, 09:06 PM) *
I agree it is 'odd', but it is the way things are done in Central and local government. In many cases WBC feel stuck with it.



Just because that is the way we’ve always done something doesn’t mean we have to slavishly continue to follow like demented sheep. Rules/ laws are set, or supposed to be, to benefit mankind, not just there to just piss them off. If they don't benefit and they are out dated then they should be changed.

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Apr 2 2011, 08:25 PM
Post #27


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (GMR @ Apr 2 2011, 09:21 PM) *
Just because that is the way we’ve always done something doesn’t mean we have to slavishly continue to follow like demented sheep. Rules/ laws are set, or supposed to be, to benefit mankind, not just there to just piss them off. If they don't benefit and they are out dated then they should be changed.


Agreed, but it is 'safe' and a whole generation (and more) of administrators have come to expect to operate that way. A common system is also easier to audit and more difficult to fiddle. Not that MPs or Councillors would do such a thing.....

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
GMR
post Apr 2 2011, 08:35 PM
Post #28


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,085
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury, Berkshire.
Member No.: 33



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Apr 2 2011, 09:25 PM) *
Agreed, but it is 'safe' and a whole generation (and more) of administrators have come to expect to operate that way. A common system is also easier to audit and more difficult to fiddle. Not that MPs or Councillors would do such a thing.....



Of course they wouldn't..... heavens above! (she said 'i know love).... our MPs and councillors are the most moral kind loving people one could image..... do you think we (ok, they) would vote in corrupt bastards? Never.... NEVER I SAY! We can trust our future in their hands.... and we know this because they told us..... so that is ok then!

So please... respect to our public servants. They are doing what they are doing for our benefit... not theirs.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Apr 2 2011, 08:46 PM
Post #29


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Apr 2 2011, 09:25 PM) *
Agreed, but it is 'safe' and a whole generation (and more) of administrators have come to expect to operate that way. A common system is also easier to audit and more difficult to fiddle. Not that MPs or Councillors would do such a thing.....


MP's, Councillors do not fiddle; they only make mistakes.

It is the plebs on benefits that fiddle and must be made an example of. wink.gif

Right back to checking my non domiciliary tax allowances!


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Richard Garvie
post Apr 2 2011, 10:06 PM
Post #30


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Apr 2 2011, 08:46 PM) *
Councillors do not fiddle;

Right back to checking my non domiciliary tax allowances!


You joke wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

2 Pages V  < 1 2
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 23rd April 2024 - 11:30 AM