National News Boris Johnson - Ousted Former PM

So if they do know what they're voting for explain this.

Explain the hearsay opinion of one person? Where does the person live? Are they from the estates? You've just picked out a quote and decided it's representative of the entire group of 10s of thousands of people I was talking about.

Your question is flawed so I can't really answer it
 
Yes thanks. Very briefly: The money provided to enable the provision of the legally required services.
If you don`t this might help you... https://www.gov.uk/government/news/government-announces-new-funding-boost-for-councils
A number of years ago the Tory government wondered how they could cut local government funding whilst claiming that either they weren't or that the cuts were less than they actual were. It achieved this by no longer referring to government funding but by introducing the term 'core spending'. So what's the difference?

Core spending is the sum of government funding and the amount a council could raise in income if it increasing its council tax by the maximum permissable (before the need for a referendum). So now you can have the government cutting its funding but claiming 'core funding' is increasing (or not reducing as much as it actually is) . Whilst being able to put the boot into councils for simultaneously increasing their council tax above the rate of inflation and cutting services.

But that not the end of the deceit because each year's assumed maximum increase in council tax is built into the following year's core funding calculations EVEN IF THE COUNCIL DIDN'T INCREASE THEIR COUNCIL TAX BY THE MAXIMUM PERMISSABLE.

It's a con designed to fool people such as yourself. It demonstrably works.
 
A number of years ago the Tory government wondered how they could cut local government funding whilst claiming that either they weren't or that the cuts were less than they actual were. It achieved this by no longer referring to government funding but by introducing the term 'core spending'. So what's the difference?

Core spending is the sum of government funding and the amount a council could raise in income if it increasing its council tax by the maximum permissable (before the need for a referendum). So now you can have the government cutting its funding but claiming 'core funding' is increasing (or not reducing as much as it actually is) . Whilst being able to put the boot into councils for simultaneously increasing their council tax above the rate of inflation and cutting services.

But that not the end of the deceit because each year's assumed maximum increase in council tax is built into the following year's core funding calculations EVEN IF THE COUNCIL DIDN'T INCREASE THEIR COUNCIL TAX BY THE MAXIMUM PERMISSABLE.

It's a con designed to fool people such as yourself. It demonstrably works.

If they are that concerned then trigger the referendum.

Councils have always been money sponges, as previously mentioned they need to be more business-like and efficient.
The standing joke has always been that a gang of council workers has 5 watching and 1 working.
That needs to be fixed and if turning off the tap a little bit fixes it then so be it...................
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Ian
If they are that concerned then trigger the referendum.

Councils have always been money sponges, as previously mentioned they need to be more business-like and efficient.
The standing joke has always been that a gang of council workers has 5 watching and 1 working.
That needs to be fixed and if turning off the tap a little bit fixes it then so be it...................

Generalisations are great.
 
  • React
Reactions: Ian
If they are that concerned then trigger the referendum.

Councils have always been money sponges, as previously mentioned they need to be more business-like and efficient.
The standing joke has always been that a gang of council workers has 5 watching and 1 working.
That needs to be fixed and if turning off the tap a little bit fixes it then so be it...................
Did you see the size of that f*****g SQUIRREL!!!!!

You talk about an increase in 'core funding' (sic), I demonstrate you haven't got a clue what you are talking about and you start going on about referenda!

Just so you understand such referenda are an afrout to democracy. Three reasons; (i) the government know they are unwinnable as you will never get a majority to vote for tax rises (the selfish gene and all that), (ii) the cost of referenda is too financially damaging for small councils who demonstrably already are in a tight financial place, as they can't afford to lose they can't afford to risk a referenda and (iii) the relevant body has already been elected via a democratic process. I don't recall a referenda being run when the chancellor wanted to for example, put vat up to 20‰. No because (as you'll tell me) he had been elected along with others to run the government.

I await your next SQUIRREL!!
 
Generalisations are great.

I`m not allowed to give examples I have seen as @QR says it doesn`t happen so, therefore you`ll get generalisations.

Did you see the size of that f*****g SQUIRREL!!!!!

You talk about an increase in 'core funding' (sic), I demonstrate you haven't got a clue what you are talking about and you start going on about referenda!

Just so you understand such referenda are an afrout to democracy. Three reasons; (i) the government know they are unwinnable as you will never get a majority to vote for tax rises (the selfish gene and all that), (ii) the cost of referenda is too financially damaging for small councils who demonstrably already are in a tight financial place, as they can't afford to lose they can't afford to risk a referenda and (iii) the relevant body has already been elected via a democratic process. I don't recall a referenda being run when the chancellor wanted to for example, put vat up to 20‰. No because (as you'll tell me) he had been elected along with others to run the government.

I await your next SQUIRREL!!

Boring........... just because you can not accept the reality that councils have been historically wasteful with taxpayers money and now they are more accountable.

We spend £2,549 a year on Council Tax, I want to know it is being spent efficiently and without waste so that people get the services they pay for and need.

It`s not a difficult concept.
 
I`m not allowed to give examples I have seen as @QR says it doesn`t happen so, therefore you`ll get generalisations.



Boring........... just because you can not accept the reality that councils have been historically wasteful with taxpayers money and now they are more accountable.

We spend £2,549 a year on Council Tax, I want to know it is being spent efficiently and without waste so that people get the services they pay for and need.

It`s not a difficult concept.
Yeah, fight facts with political rhetoric. So passe.
 
I`m not allowed to give examples I have seen as @QR says it doesn`t happen so, therefore you`ll get generalisations.



Boring........... just because you can not accept the reality that councils have been historically wasteful with taxpayers money and now they are more accountable.

We spend £2,549 a year on Council Tax, I want to know it is being spent efficiently and without waste so that people get the services they pay for and need.

It`s not a difficult concept.


Which text books do you consider to have been wasteful?

It's very easy to claim wastefulness in the public sector. But why stop there, and not point out in inefficiencies in the private sector? We don't need to look at railway franchises or the multiple delivery vehicles from many private companies that are driving up and down and up and down the same streets... I've had three Amazon orders come by three different drivers on the same day! Incredibly inefficient!

There are people working for councils that do need critique. This is supposed to be done by elected representatives, but how many take the time to do proper scrutiny? Many are there to get paid, look after their interests, feel important, and... are there for the "entertainment". It's a recreational activity for them.

They can get away with this because people vote for political party brands, and not the competencies of candidates. Just look at the Tory cabinet...
 
Or so we hoped in 1985 ☹️☹️☹️


How this resonates 36 years on.
 
We should all be proud of the great people of Oxford.

Wow. Stunning and brave.

It's not often that you see such a display of strength in the face of Tory fascism.

I truly am a proud man this morning. Proud of the fact that the majority of our councillors are affiliated with Labour.

Finally, I can put my bins out in the knowledge that no Tory councillor has had any part in arranging their collection.

Keep up the good fight comrade.
 
Wow. Stunning and brave.

It's not often that you see such a display of strength in the face of Tory fascism.

I truly am a proud man this morning. Proud of the fact that the majority of our councillors are affiliated with Labour.

Finally, I can put my bins out in the knowledge that no Tory councillor has had any part in arranging their collection.

Keep up the good fight comrade.
So do local authorities make decisions on local investment in jobs or economic prosperity or not [emoji848]

At least you Tories ought to try and get your story straight...do they just do bins, streetlights and potholes or do they enable their citizens to have jobs and prosperity?

#AskingforafriendinHartlepool
 
  • React
Reactions: QR
So do local authorities make decisions on local investment in jobs or economic prosperity or not [emoji848]

At least you Tories ought to try and get your story straight...do they just do bins, streetlights and potholes or do they enable their citizens to have jobs and prosperity?

#AskingforafriendinHartlepool
Not a Tory so I suppose I'm not shackled to any particular message.

They do bins and they are also supposed to do potholes. Not sure if they've forgotten about the latter 👍
 
Back
Top Bottom