I have. I'm talking incinerators, and the refreshing juxtaposition of a company that wants to cut my tax bill and ones like Kennet Shopping which like to subsidise developments with my taxes.

If energy projects are financially beneficial in lean times, surely WBC should be encouraging more of them, instead of trying to blow them out of the water before an application is lodged.

Should WBC change it's stance on this incinerator now that WBC can collect £1m a year in tax from the facility, plus a further £125k a year for charities/schools etc.

After the shameful dealings with Standard Life, the council have a chance to stop the cuts to Mencap/Shopmobility etc.

What's not to like?

I think it's a bit harsh on Left-Hook. He's doing well on the Sandleford campaign. What's more strange about this is that Northcroft councillor Tony Vickers is also providing free professional planning advice.

Especially as the northern half of his ward abuts the alternative to the Sandleford site, I would have thought these people should be serving their own nimbies before helping out on the other side of town.

So there we have it...only beneficiaries of a taxpayer-funded charity have a right to comment on said charity.

But that would suggest that crime is going up. It's not. And if you remember that Labour passed more than 500 laws since 1997....plus police now dealing with domestic violence etc, and it's getting better.

Mind you....one of Newbury's crims has just got out of prison on early release.

But that would suggest that crime is going up. It's not. And if you remember that Labour passed more than 500 laws since 1997....plus police now dealing with domestic violence etc, and it's getting better.

Mind you....one of Newbury's crims has just got out of prison on early release.

Thanks for that Jack..but I wouldn't feel "responsible" for my comments....I (and everyone else who lives here) have been asked by WBC whether I agree with their proposal to cut the grant by 30%.

WBC wants to cut the grant AND has already asked the bureau to charge for it.


If there's around 5500 provided a year, and an £8000 shortfall, that suggests £1.50 a day on average (say £1 for wheelchairs and £2 for motorised scooters).

So should the disabled pay for this?

Thanks again Jack, I can now answer the consultation with a better understanding. It's now clear that WBC have failed TWO government rules in this case.

Best value - Eric Pickles has decreed that the burden of funding cuts to the voluntary sector should be in proportion to the cuts WBC have to deliver (ie 8% a year for 3 years). A 30% cut is therefore contrary to this guidance.

Transparency - WBC has a duty to clearly publish individual grants to voluntary groups and social enterprises. I cannot find this list anywhere...and when we had a similar discussion on funding the TCP, I had to find the payment details in the spreadsheet by checking every invoice paid by WBC (month by month) to find the amount paid.

I feel cheated. Shall we ask Mr Pickles to come to Newbury and see how his political chums at WBC are managing the cuts?

How do we get WBC to play by the rules?

Nearly every other shopmobility scheme charges £1-£3 a day to hire a scooter. Ours are still free.

Ha. You sound like Chemical Ali. Death to the Western pigdogs!

Sounds like the ideal place to build.

A good news story.

Crime in Newbury town centre has fallen 25% since the summer.

Yep, while other places are rioting, here in Newbury we've had four straight months of crime going DOWN.

The drop in burglaries is particularly impressive (although I hear the Hogshead was burgled at the weekend so there's more than enough going on), as is the fall in shoplifting the month Parkway opened.

So what's going on?

Are our criminals not very good?
Are our new CCTV cameras doing a great job?
Is the arrival of routinely armed police in Newbury keeping everyone indoors?

You can't have it both ways RG.

You moan about them claiming mileage and then moan when they don't bother attending!

I don't normally jump to the defence of WBC, but I think they're right to look into this.

Take the shopmobility scooters. WBC give the Volunteer Bureau £24k p.a of our money to fund this (or £500 a week if you prefer), and want to cut this by £8k a year.

Now, the Volunteer Bureau does a great job, especially with only 4 staff on the books (incidentally, they pay WBC £10k a year in rent). But they are sat on £130k of reserves. It doesn't look likely that either the service or the organisation will be jeopardised by these cuts.

I know there will be other areas of waste or perceived lesser causes that are not being cut by 33% in one go, but does there really need to be a fall in standards?

What do others think?

Agreed. And don't forget the retail park, college, and south facing slopes. Sounds like WBC have found the best spot in Sandleford.

@RG. West Berks businesses pay much more in than we get back, which is then diverted to the north. Although this was shameless gerrymandering in the dark days of Labour, the Coalition had promised that councils would be able to keep all they raised. (Sadly this policy is just hot air).

So Simon is right. We've already paid for it, and if the Government would stop thieving this local tax (or better still, we do away with it), then there will be plenty to sort out flooding/funding BIDs etc etc.

Complex problems like flooding need to be tackled by everyone involved. We're all responsible, not just the EA.

Hmmm...this might have something to do with it.

There's enough water for all of us on the planet, it's just in the wrong place and too heavy to transport around.

When the water industry was privatised, they gave each of these companies a regional monopoly, instead of creating a market where we pay for what we use.

I'll certainly bear it in mind. However, I prefer to post them directly to the forum so EVERYONE can see where it's come from.

I have lots of interesting documents which I'm sure you'd like to see. But the problem is the file size limit is too small (500kb).

Any chance you can increase it....I'm sure you won't be disappointed.

Divide and rule. Just what the Tories want

Quite. I believe one of them is the Community Furniture Project, where the man in charge collects £60k a year with final salary pension scheme to re-sell old furniture.

Nothing yet on the stabbing in Newbury on Saturday night? I'm keen to know if the guy is alright.

Sorry about that.

Like many, I don't buy the paper version.

Yes indeedy...as many are finding out....government is not the doctor, it's the disease.

Good work

Here's a few more to follow up on.

Are our schools not as great as WBC would have us believe?

Local woman gets MBE

Local bank branch shuts

Rural doctors' surgery to close

I suppose many find the theft of some gates in Thatcham more interesting than a new uranium factory being built on your doorstep,

No. Just trying to think of reasons why they STILL need all this extra money?

In reality, they have £10.5bn turnover, so even a bit of bad Euro debt shouldn't make a difference. I was just trying to rack my brains thinking of a reason why SLI need this extra money.

I don't accept that "we'll never know". RG has done well lifting the lid, it's now up to others to continue.

A small group of us could use Community right to buy to take the car parks off WBC and run them in the local interest (perhaps on a not-for-profit basis).

It's difficult as I am interested in the transfer of assets rather than leasing the car parks from WBC. This way, the remaining car parks can be saved from the Vision.

Put simply, too many old women HAVEN'T paid into the system because many haven't worked for decades before they hit 60. They then expect there to be a first class service they haven't contributed to waiting for them when they hit their 80s.