Another way..., £12m of savings, but frontline services protected Options

[GMR]

Why is it guff? It is an alternative to what the Tories have approved, and in my view is better than hitting services used by the elderly and young people.

According to all the economic indicators (including independents) their (Tories) way is right. According to Brown he would have hit everybody just as bad if he had won. As i said on another post, who got us into this mess?

[GMR]

In my opinion it is about time that NWN put a stop to Mr Garvie using this Forum as a vehicle to peddle socialist claptrap at every conceivable opportunity.
I for one am pretty sick of it and urge NWN to do something about it before the forum is ruined.
Thread after thread gets the "Labour is best" routine whenever he can slip it in.

As a free forum he has a right to voice his opinions and we have a right to correct him on those opinions. If the NWN stopped him then it would smack of BB. Then the real questions will start flying.

[dannyboy]

As a free forum he has a right to voice his opinions and we have a right to correct him on those opinions. If the NWN stopped him then it would smack of BB. Then the real questions will start flying.

not really.

[GMR]

not really.

What do you mean by 'not really'?

[dannyboy]

What do you mean by 'not really'?

there would be no questions.

it is a bit like the letters page - if one person writes endless letters on the same topic, the paper will stop publishing them.

no mystery.

[GMR]

there would be no questions.

Of course there would be... as there is now.

it is a bit like the letters page - if one person writes endless letters on the same topic, the paper will stop publishing them.

no mystery.

That would be a fair point, if that was true. But who is writing endless letters? I don't... I used to write one every blue moon.

[Richard Garvie]

According to all the economic indicators (including independents) their (Tories) way is right. According to Brown he would have hit everybody just as bad if he had won. As i said on another post, who got us into this mess?

Women, families with children and pensioners have been hit hardest by the spending review, why are we not chasing the bankers or getting them to do something? I know what Darling did was not nearly enough, but at least he did something. We now hear today that the government is "powerless" to act against the banks otherwise they would all go abroad. Are we really powerless, or there is just no real will to go after them?

The CSR was horrific for people who don't pay the higher rate tax. Tax credits, gone. EMA, gone. Tuition fees, hiked. Housing benefit, slashed. Education funding, cut. NHS frontline spending, cut. Cancer target, removed. Winter fuel payments, cut. Child trust fund, gone. New school buildings (like the one at St Barts), scheme abolished.

As you can see, pensioners and families were already paying for the financial meltdown that was caused by the collapse of Lehman Brothers bank (not Gordon Brown). Tories and Libs say we weren't tough on the banks... A couple of years ago, the Toties were screaming that there was too much regulation!!! As soon as we see storm clouds, and there is Cameron saying saying we need to be tougher. Labour made some mistakes, yes. I wasn't part of the party then, nor could I have changed any of them. Just like Graham Jones and Jeff Brooks can't be held to account for what is happening in London now.

Looking at local politics (which the Tories and the Libs are very much responsible), why did we keep blowing money on the non essentials? The fact is, locally at least, the Tories and the Libs are equally to blame for the mess we are in. They have failed to invest in infrastructure, failed to protect the vulnerable and instead hit those people hardest by axing day centre and slashing youth services.

Can we not talk about the topic of the thread, which is the alternative proposals we have suggested today?

[user23]

These are just meaningless numbers unless you explain how savings are going to be made. Let's take two at random.

How are you going to save £60k a year at Shaw House?
How are you going to save £150 a year from Customer service ?

If you can't explain how then you're just going to annoy people even more than you already have by posting your pointless political rhetoric.

[dannyboy]

Of course there would be... as there is now.



That would be a fair point, if that was true. But who is writing endless letters? I don't... I used to write one every blue moon.

RG - If he was writing as many letters as he starts threads. Do keep up.

[GMR]

Women, families with children and pensioners have been hit hardest by the spending review, why are we not chasing the bankers or getting them to do something? I know what Darling did was not nearly enough, but at least he did something. We now hear today that the government is "powerless" to act against the banks otherwise they would all go abroad. Are we really powerless, or there is just no real will to go after them?

The CSR was horrific for people who don't pay the higher rate tax. Tax credits, gone. EMA, gone. Tuition fees, hiked. Housing benefit, slashed. Education funding, cut. NHS frontline spending, cut. Cancer target, removed. Winter fuel payments, cut. Child trust fund, gone. New school buildings (like the one at St Barts), scheme abolished.

As you can see, pensioners and families were already paying for the financial meltdown that was caused by the collapse of Lehman Brothers bank (not Gordon Brown). Tories and Libs say we weren't tough on the banks... A couple of years ago, the Toties were screaming that there was too much regulation!!! As soon as we see storm clouds, and there is Cameron saying saying we need to be tougher. Labour made some mistakes, yes. I wasn't part of the party then, nor could I have changed any of them. Just like Graham Jones and Jeff Brooks can't be held to account for what is happening in London now.

Looking at local politics (which the Tories and the Libs are very much responsible), why did we keep blowing money on the non essentials? The fact is, locally at least, the Tories and the Libs are equally to blame for the mess we are in. They have failed to invest in infrastructure, failed to protect the vulnerable and instead hit those people hardest by axing day centre and slashing youth services.

Can we not talk about the topic of the thread, which is the alternative proposals we have suggested today?

I agree that there are issues here, but should we really be condemning the Tories for the mess they inherited? There are many arguments to which way is best, a lot of independent economists have said that Cameron's way is best. We will only know when we reach the end of the tunnel.

And as i also said; don't forget what Brown would have done. In Blair's book he criticises Brown for overspending.

[GMR]

RG - If he was writing as many letters as he starts threads. Do keep up.

Of course your honour!!!

[Strafin]

Rukes of the forum,
5. You warrant agree and undertake that:
(a) you will not post any material which is obscene, defamatory, or which otherwise is in breach of the law or in breach of the rights of any third party;
(b)you will not post any material which is or is likely to be in any way offensive, insulting, threatening or upsetting to other users;
© you will not make any commercial or business use of the site or post any material which comprises advertising promotional or marketing material of any kind, nor will you set up any links from the Forums site to any other site;
I am looking at © mainly, as the Labour party is a legitimate business are these posts becoming a bit too much?

[Richard Garvie]

I agree that there are issues here, but should we really be condemning the Tories for the mess they inherited? There are many arguments to which way is best, a lot of independent economists have said that Cameron's way is best. We will only know when we reach the end of the tunnel.

And as i also said; don't forget what Brown would have done. In Blair's book he criticises Brown for overspending.

Totally agree that if Labour were in Government, there would be some very tough choices to make. Labour did overspend to a degree, but on rebuilding our country after the Thatcher and Major years of no investment. At least Labour concentrated on the making it a better place to live. What is the purpose of the tory cuts? Where is the growth? We have chosen the same way as Ireland, and look what happened there this week. I really hope that you are right and that we are not about to get into some deep trouble, no matter what you think about me and the fact I'm a labour member, I don't want to see us back in recession.

Once again, this is about local issues and spending here in West Berks. The Tories have once again shown that they would rather slash frontline spending rather than their supposed "war on waste"... isn't that what we were promised? We were also promised decentralisation, which I am all for. So why are the Government now regulating council tax increases and the like? I just get miffed when people slate Labour because of the financial crisis and a couple of other god awful decisions. The Tories have made three times as many bad decisions in half a year!!!

[user23]

Totally agree that if Labour were in Government, there would be some very tough choices to make. Labour did overspend to a degree, but on rebuilding our country after the Thatcher and Major years of no investment. At least Labour concentrated on the making it a better place to live. What is the purpose of the tory cuts? Where is the growth? We have chosen the same way as Ireland, and look what happened there this week. I really hope that you are right and that we are not about to get into some deep trouble, no matter what you think about me and the fact I'm a labour member, I don't want to see us back in recession.

Once again, this is about local issues and spending here in West Berks. The Tories have once again shown that they would rather slash frontline spending rather than their supposed "war on waste"... isn't that what we were promised? We were also promised decentralisation, which I am all for. So why are the Government now regulating council tax increases and the like? I just get miffed when people slate Labour because of the financial crisis and a couple of other god awful decisions. The Tories have made three times as many bad decisions in half a year!!!

Richard, stop posting stuff you've pasted off the Labour Party website and answer the question. These are just meaningless numbers unless you explain how savings are going to be made. Let's take two at random.

How are you going to save £60k a year at Shaw House?
How are you going to save £150 a year from Customer service ?

[Richard Garvie]

Without looking at the documentation, I believe the customer service savings would be through redundancies. Shaw House would involve one redundancy and an alteration of working practices, but once we get the detail we have requested is there a reason to prevent customer services absorbing the contact centre and for Shaw House to be run as a trust with the council renting the bits they require?

[GMR]

Totally agree that if Labour were in Government, there would be some very tough choices to make. Labour did overspend to a degree, but on rebuilding our country after the Thatcher and Major years of no investment. At least Labour concentrated on the making it a better place to live. What is the purpose of the tory cuts? Where is the growth? We have chosen the same way as Ireland, and look what happened there this week. I really hope that you are right and that we are not about to get into some deep trouble, no matter what you think about me and the fact I'm a labour member, I don't want to see us back in recession.

Once again, this is about local issues and spending here in West Berks. The Tories have once again shown that they would rather slash frontline spending rather than their supposed "war on waste"... isn't that what we were promised? We were also promised decentralisation, which I am all for. So why are the Government now regulating council tax increases and the like? I just get miffed when people slate Labour because of the financial crisis and a couple of other god awful decisions. The Tories have made three times as many bad decisions in half a year!!!

you say 'what is the purpose of the Tory cuts' but I am not an economist, and I doubt you are either (and if you are then there would be many better ones arguing against you) who would disagree with your comments. You must remember that we were put in this difficulty by Labour and while under their watch. Now they are out and a coalition is in trying to undo what Labour created, or contributed to. The best you can do is support their decision, if they fail then criticise... but you've had your chance and the people kicked you out.

[Simon Kirby]

These are just meaningless numbers unless you explain how savings are going to be made. Let's take two at random.

How are you going to save £60k a year at Shaw House?
How are you going to save £150 a year from Customer service ?

There were some specific costed ideas, but User makes a good point. Is it possible for the relevant managers to cut their coat accordingly if you just cuth their budget? I'd be more convinced that the cuts were right, or at least would work, if there was some more detail.

Obviously, if WBC isn't cooperating in giving you the detail then you're stymied, and I think it's clear why they would want to do that.

Labour's made some specific proposals - what have the ConDems to say for themselves?

[Richard Garvie]

But this is it. Labour have said they will support what is needed provided it is thought out and fair. The bits Labour object to nationally are not fair, whilst there is so much going through without comment because we are not opposing it.

Again, locally they had the chance to review what is waste or cut frontline services. They chose frontline services. It's an easy option, and as I said earlier, I can't make decisions about national policy but I can and I am willing to take them locally if Graham Jones and others don't want to do it.

[Iommi]

I agree with you Bloggo. The NWN needs to have a stern word with Garvie to stop his crude propaganda campaign. There are other forums on the internet to discuss politics. This forum has the odd political position but it is now being DOMINATED by Garvie's party politics. It is getting me mad now.

I don't see the problem. Most of his posts and threads are refuted anyway.

[Richard Garvie]

There were some specific costed ideas, but User makes a good point. Is it possible for the relevant managers to cut their coat accordingly if you just cuth their budget? I'd be more convinced that the cuts were right, or at least would work, if there was some more detail.

Obviously, if WBC isn't cooperating in giving you the detail then you're stymied, and I think it's clear why they would want to do that.

Labour's made some specific proposals - what have the ConDems to say for themselves?

We have based these decisions on the vague data and research that we have done over TWO MONTHS. It was going to be part of our manifesto, but I believe it is important for people to realise that what we are doing is trying to establish a way forward to get West Berks on an even keel and also how we can meet the groth of the district with limited funds. It's not off the cuff, which is why we are in a position to publish what we would do differently now. What I don't get is that the Libs and the Tories get paid to represent us, yet have no interest it would seem in planning or reasearch within their party otherwise they would have spoken out. I really hope we get a number of independents and a few greens and maybe a couple of others, in addition to a fairly even number of Tories, Libs and Labour members. That way we will see who really has the best interests of the district at heart.