National News Boris Johnson - Ousted Former PM

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...

I doubt Amazon are too concerned that multiple deliveries appeared on different routes.

"Online retail giant Amazon paid £293m in tax in the UK last year, while its sales surged 26% to £13.73bn.
The firm, which employs 33,000 people in the UK, said the taxes included business rates, corporation tax, stamp duty and other contributions."

Whereas our City Council (Labour) revenue budget report says:

"The Spending Review approach has served us well: savings of nearly £50m have been made since 2014, and left the Council with a relatively healthy level of reserves at the start of 2020/21 (compared to other authorities).

The budget gap for 2021/22 is £3m less than estimated in the draft budget published in December. This is largely the result of additional one-off funding being provided from central government, that reduces the gap for one year only."

So are our Council saying that the approach by Government is actually working and making them work efficiently?
 
I doubt Amazon are too concerned that multiple deliveries appeared on different routes.

"Online retail giant Amazon paid £293m in tax in the UK last year, while its sales surged 26% to £13.73bn.
The firm, which employs 33,000 people in the UK, said the taxes included business rates, corporation tax, stamp duty and other contributions."

Whereas our City Council (Labour) revenue budget report says:

"The Spending Review approach has served us well: savings of nearly £50m have been made since 2014, and left the Council with a relatively healthy level of reserves at the start of 2020/21 (compared to other authorities).

The budget gap for 2021/22 is £3m less than estimated in the draft budget published in December. This is largely the result of additional one-off funding being provided from central government, that reduces the gap for one year only."

So are our Council saying that the approach by Government is actually working and making them work efficiently?
Do you struggle with the fact that local government has to provide these services exactly because the private sector can't make a profit out of them (unless in some cases the public sector has stumped up the massive up front capital investment)?

Where's Sid?
 
  • React
Reactions: Ian
Do you struggle with the fact that local government has to provide these services exactly because the private sector can't make a profit out of them (unless in some cases the public sector has stumped up the massive up front capital investment)?

Where's Sid?

No struggle at all.
Local government does what local government does.
Doing it efficiently can create a surplus that can be reinvested.
Like I said our City Council tacitly agrees that how Government provides funding works.
Red Wall or Blue Carpet?
 

Attachments

  • 0905County.JPG
    0905County.JPG
    33.2 KB · Views: 2
No struggle at all.
Local government does what local government does.
Doing it efficiently can create a surplus that can be reinvested.
Like I said our City Council tacitly agrees that how Government provides funding works.
Red Wall or Blue Carpet?
Explain how they provide education at a profit.
 
Explain how they provide education at a profit.

I said, "Doing it efficiently can create a surplus that can be reinvested."

I also said, "Our City Council tacitly agrees that how Government provides funding works."

The best way to "profit" from education is to be good at it, the better a school performs the more people want their kids to go there.
In turn that drives up house prices and all kinds of community benefits.
;)
 
I said, "Doing it efficiently can create a surplus that can be reinvested."

I also said, "Our City Council tacitly agrees that how Government provides funding works."

The best way to "profit" from education is to be good at it, the better a school performs the more people want their kids to go there.
In turn that drives up house prices and all kinds of community benefits.
;)
You haven't answered the question. There is a different in 'profiting' from education and making a profit/surplus from education which was your original claim.

While you're at it also explain how you make a profit from road maintenance (when road tax goes to central government) and social care (where those receiving the service have no money, without overcharging those that pay).

I think we've covered the three biggest expenditure items there.
 
You haven't answered the question. There is a different in 'profiting' from education and making a profit/surplus from education which was your original claim.

While you're at it also explain how you make a profit from road maintenance (when road tax goes to central government) and social care (where those receiving the service have no money, without overcharging those that pay).

I think we've covered the three biggest expenditure items there.

By doing said tasks efficiently.

EG: Not having 8 blokes standing around a hole while another leans on his shovel thinking about it.



Sleep well....... ;)
 
not a single Tory seat on the Oxford City Council

and out in the 'Shire , its looking like the Torys will have lost overall control of Oxfordshire County Council?

The Tories were a minority administration (had 29 needed 32) as they didn't have an overall majority and were reliant on Independents to get policy through or work with the others. After this election they are still the biggest party with 22* but if the Lib Dems (21) and Labour (15) want to go into Coalition then they'd have a majority. The Greens have 3 seats.

*Banbury Ruscote, where the Tories gained the seat from Labour, the result is being challenged by Labour. Apparently according to a tweet on the Oxford Mail live coverage, the turnout seems very low for normal/compared to other Banbury seats.
 
By doing said tasks efficiently.

EG: Not having 8 blokes standing around a hole while another leans on his shovel thinking about it.



Sleep well....... ;)
You've explained how you reduce the cost not how you make a profit. From your postings of the last couple of days I can only conclude you are financially illiterate.
 
Why should we?

We should be prouder of the good people of the entire United Kingdom, once again rejecting socialism, divisive identity politics and anti-science wokeism.

I'll raise a glass to that QR

2nd funniest post of the day, bravo!
 
The Tories were a minority administration (had 29 needed 32) as they didn't have an overall majority and were reliant on Independents to get policy through or work with the others. After this election they are still the biggest party with 22* but if the Lib Dems (21) and Labour (15) want to go into Coalition then they'd have a majority. The Greens have 3 seats.

*Banbury Ruscote, where the Tories gained the seat from Labour, the result is being challenged by Labour. Apparently according to a tweet on the Oxford Mail live coverage, the turnout seems very low for normal/compared to other Banbury seats.
Indeed they were a minority (the torys ) with independants chosing to not be independant by proping them up


Banbury ruscote could be an interesting one should there be a an investigation ....or recount
 
By doing said tasks efficiently.

EG: Not having 8 blokes standing around a hole while another leans on his shovel thinking about it.



Sleep well....... ;)


Spending on youth services in England and Wales has been cut by 70% in real terms in less than a decade.

Every region of England has each seen funding for youth services cut by more than 60% since 2010, with some of the most severely affected experiencing average area cuts of as much as 74% in the North West, 76% in the North East, and 80% in the West Midlands.


Denise Hatton, Chief Executive of YMCA England & Wales, said:

“Youth services exist to provide a sense of belonging, a safe space, and the opportunity for young people to enjoy being young. However, for almost a decade now local authorities have struggled under the weight of funding pressures, meaning youth services are being forced to endure continued and damaging cuts.

“No part of society could be expected to suffer almost a billion-pounds worth of real term cuts and for there to be no consequences across our communities. However, young people’s needs continue to be brushed aside by decision makers as unworthy of support.

“The reality behind these figures is that since 2010 more than 4,500 youth work jobs have been cut and 760 youth centres have closed. We believe this is unacceptable. Without drastic action to protect funding and significantly re-invest in youth services, we are condemning young people to become a lonely, lost generation with nowhere to turn.”


Youth services are crucial to communities across the UK. By building trusting and supportive relationships with young people, helping them make decisions about their lives, and developing their confidence and resilience, youth workers and youth support workers are invaluable in ensuring young people can play a positive role in society.

These services also prevent a variety of problems occurring further down the line,
which saves other parts of the public sector and the wider economy large amounts of
money. Youth services help with employment, training and education, potential mental
health issues, and act to prevent alcohol and substance abuse, as well as crime and antisocial behaviour.


@Essexyellows , forget the money for a moment. Please explain to those who disagree with reducing local government budgets, why is it a benefit to society to cut Youth Services - closing youth centres, etc.
 
Spending on youth services in England and Wales has been cut by 70% in real terms in less than a decade.

Every region of England has each seen funding for youth services cut by more than 60% since 2010, with some of the most severely affected experiencing average area cuts of as much as 74% in the North West, 76% in the North East, and 80% in the West Midlands.


Denise Hatton, Chief Executive of YMCA England & Wales, said:

“Youth services exist to provide a sense of belonging, a safe space, and the opportunity for young people to enjoy being young. However, for almost a decade now local authorities have struggled under the weight of funding pressures, meaning youth services are being forced to endure continued and damaging cuts.

“No part of society could be expected to suffer almost a billion-pounds worth of real term cuts and for there to be no consequences across our communities. However, young people’s needs continue to be brushed aside by decision makers as unworthy of support.

“The reality behind these figures is that since 2010 more than 4,500 youth work jobs have been cut and 760 youth centres have closed. We believe this is unacceptable. Without drastic action to protect funding and significantly re-invest in youth services, we are condemning young people to become a lonely, lost generation with nowhere to turn.”


Youth services are crucial to communities across the UK. By building trusting and supportive relationships with young people, helping them make decisions about their lives, and developing their confidence and resilience, youth workers and youth support workers are invaluable in ensuring young people can play a positive role in society.

These services also prevent a variety of problems occurring further down the line,
which saves other parts of the public sector and the wider economy large amounts of
money. Youth services help with employment, training and education, potential mental
health issues, and act to prevent alcohol and substance abuse, as well as crime and antisocial behaviour.


@Essexyellows , forget the money for a moment. Please explain to those who disagree with reducing local government budgets, why is it a benefit to society to cut Youth Services - closing youth centres, etc.

Local authorities choose where they spend the money.
"There is a duty on local authorities to secure sufficient youth services in their area. This guidance focuses on the positive role local authorities can play in the provision of those services. A priority for all local authorities should be to strengthen and maintain the quality of youth services to support young people’s wellbeing. Government is expected to hold local authorities to account where services are not functioning to a sufficient level and base-line of quality provision."

Source: https://nya.org.uk/static/ee06e7a62...ole-and-Sufficiency-of-Youth-Services-V06.pdf

There are also others providing youth services.

Our local youth hub (The Venny!) asked for practical support, rather than money, and got it in bucketloads, and has been phenomenally successful in supporting those less fortunate throughout the pandemic.
They have engaged with the local community, council, police and schools.
Kind of proves that it isn`t just about money.
Maybe that's the big society Cameron was so keen on?
 
Local authorities choose where they spend the money.
"There is a duty on local authorities to secure sufficient youth services in their area. This guidance focuses on the positive role local authorities can play in the provision of those services. A priority for all local authorities should be to strengthen and maintain the quality of youth services to support young people’s wellbeing. Government is expected to hold local authorities to account where services are not functioning to a sufficient level and base-line of quality provision."

Source: https://nya.org.uk/static/ee06e7a62...ole-and-Sufficiency-of-Youth-Services-V06.pdf

There are also others providing youth services.

Our local youth hub (The Venny!) asked for practical support, rather than money, and got it in bucketloads, and has been phenomenally successful in supporting those less fortunate throughout the pandemic.
They have engaged with the local community, council, police and schools.
Kind of proves that it isn`t just about money.
Maybe that's the big society Cameron was so keen on?


Are you saying that key services should be provided by charities? AI bit like Food banks?

One minute you'll be saying that services that society needs should be provided by volunteers, and then you'll move on to saying that the welfare money paid to those in need, (perhaps unemployed, or on disability support) should be cut otherwise people won't work...
 
Local authorities choose where they spend the money.
"There is a duty on local authorities to secure sufficient youth services in their area. This guidance focuses on the positive role local authorities can play in the provision of those services. A priority for all local authorities should be to strengthen and maintain the quality of youth services to support young people’s wellbeing. Government is expected to hold local authorities to account where services are not functioning to a sufficient level and base-line of quality provision."

Source: https://nya.org.uk/static/ee06e7a62...ole-and-Sufficiency-of-Youth-Services-V06.pdf

There are also others providing youth services.

Our local youth hub (The Venny!) asked for practical support, rather than money, and got it in bucketloads, and has been phenomenally successful in supporting those less fortunate throughout the pandemic.
They have engaged with the local community, council, police and schools.
Kind of proves that it isn`t just about money.
Maybe that's the big society Cameron was so keen on?

Authorities can't choose to not spend on statutory requirements.
 
Back
Top Bottom