Residents urged to step into shoes of cash-strapped council

The Advertiser Series: Volunteers have started on what will become Britain's smallest park. Situated on a tint piece of land below a billboard near to Victoria Embankment in Darlington, the park is to be named Councollor Gerald Lee Park, after the town's Mayor. Local re Volunteers have started on what will become Britain's smallest park. Situated on a tint piece of land below a billboard near to Victoria Embankment in Darlington, the park is to be named Councollor Gerald Lee Park, after the town's Mayor. Local re

DARLINGTON will be left unkempt if residents don’t step into the shoes of its cash-strapped council, a councillor warned today (Monday, June 9).

Councillor Paul Harman is supporting a bid by local residents to create Britain’s smallest park on a small patch of land under a billboard in the town.

Councillor Gerald Lee Park – measuring around 25 square metres – is being created by members of the South Terrace Residents Association in conjunction with Guerilla Gardeners Darlington Division, who held a group dig at the weekend.

Coun Harman joined the group for the dig and said such projects would become invaluable throughout the community when council funding for maintenance is cut.

He said: “It’s very nice from the point of view of bringing the community together with a sense of purpose and that people enjoy making a difference to somewhere that was just a scruffy patch of land.

“But the serious thing that nobody has really woken up to yet is that the budget cuts coming into play in 2016 will mean the loss of all kinds of services.

“There are going to be severe cutbacks and people should be encouraged and empowered to take control of where they live.

“There are many areas where services will deteriorate including street cleaning and looking after green spaces.

“Where people are not prepared to step up and help, the standards will deteriorate quite considerably.”

He added: “Everywhere people can step in, they should because these services might not be there and if they don’t choose to, the town will be left looking scruffy.

“The council has about 350 small pieces of ground on corners and in back alleys, some quite substantial and it simply cannot afford to look after them anymore.

“It’s already having difficulties and it will get worse.”

Darlington mother Amanda Llewellyn is helping to co-ordinate the work on Councillor Gerald Lee Park, which is situated at the corner of South Feethams and Victoria Embankment.

She said: “I’m not into politics but people should get involved with things like this because we have so much fun doing it and it’s a good excuse to get to know your neighbours and fantastic for the community.

“Everyone should think about doing things like this as we have all of these spaces that shouldn’t be left to wrack and ruin.”

Comments (59)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

5:52pm Mon 9 Jun 14

NOTODDEN says...

When I see Bill Dixon and Ada Burns in their wellies clearing up one these areas I might feel motivated in doing the same. I now await for hell to freeze over
When I see Bill Dixon and Ada Burns in their wellies clearing up one these areas I might feel motivated in doing the same. I now await for hell to freeze over NOTODDEN
  • Score: 43

6:06pm Mon 9 Jun 14

BMD says...

Strange how the Council tax always increases (Just below the referendum limit) and the services decrease.
Strange how the Council tax always increases (Just below the referendum limit) and the services decrease. BMD
  • Score: 34

6:09pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Mistake says...

NOTODDEN wrote:
When I see Bill Dixon and Ada Burns in their wellies clearing up one these areas I might feel motivated in doing the same. I now await for hell to freeze over
Agreed, and cuts to services will continue to be hard to swallow while execs at the town hall continue to draw ludicrous salaries.

It's long past time that Ada, Bill and others showed some of this "in it together" spirit they're always so keen to laud when it's the wages of others they're cutting.
[quote][p][bold]NOTODDEN[/bold] wrote: When I see Bill Dixon and Ada Burns in their wellies clearing up one these areas I might feel motivated in doing the same. I now await for hell to freeze over[/p][/quote]Agreed, and cuts to services will continue to be hard to swallow while execs at the town hall continue to draw ludicrous salaries. It's long past time that Ada, Bill and others showed some of this "in it together" spirit they're always so keen to laud when it's the wages of others they're cutting. Mistake
  • Score: 36

6:50pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Darloresident says...

Totally agree with comments so far. I would add one more.Its plain to see that Puffing Billy Dixon and Ada (Big Bucks) Burns are not capable of running this town.
When you have to rely on the residents to do the job the council is supposed to do it really is time to ask themselves whether these so called leaders are up to the job.
Trying to make me feel guilty about not volunteering to clean the open spaces will not mask their wasteful inefficient and downright incompetent management of this once great town.
Totally agree with comments so far. I would add one more.Its plain to see that Puffing Billy Dixon and Ada (Big Bucks) Burns are not capable of running this town. When you have to rely on the residents to do the job the council is supposed to do it really is time to ask themselves whether these so called leaders are up to the job. Trying to make me feel guilty about not volunteering to clean the open spaces will not mask their wasteful inefficient and downright incompetent management of this once great town. Darloresident
  • Score: 29

8:13pm Mon 9 Jun 14

Homshaw1 says...

Darlington streets are dirty. I frequently go to areas covered by other councils that don't seem to have the same problem but must receive roughly the same level of funding.

Any decline in the situation is the result of a deliberate policy decision and a poor use of resources. I have no problem with people getting paid for doing a job but Darlington Borough Council have desperately poor managers.
Darlington streets are dirty. I frequently go to areas covered by other councils that don't seem to have the same problem but must receive roughly the same level of funding. Any decline in the situation is the result of a deliberate policy decision and a poor use of resources. I have no problem with people getting paid for doing a job but Darlington Borough Council have desperately poor managers. Homshaw1
  • Score: 38

7:44am Tue 10 Jun 14

oliviaden6 says...

Can only agree, this council is useless waste, mismanagement, hair brained schemes it goes on and on. One can only hope at the next election Bill and His Buddies will be kicked in to touch before this town is bankrupted by the present incumbents.
Can only agree, this council is useless waste, mismanagement, hair brained schemes it goes on and on. One can only hope at the next election Bill and His Buddies will be kicked in to touch before this town is bankrupted by the present incumbents. oliviaden6
  • Score: 25

8:13am Tue 10 Jun 14

tabby67 says...

Im lost for words and can only agree with all the comments above. I keep saying this every time but that bungling bill really needs to ship out now, it is clear he cant get the spending right for this town!
This council makes so many decisions that cost so much money and its usually things we don't need!
So if we all muck in and do our bit will the council tax drop...ermm no will it continue to rise ermmm YES!
Will the council provide a garden waste bin NO probably not, I already keep my gardens tidy. I refuse to do a job the council are meant to be doing like somebody said maybe they need to make staff cuts as well its disgraceful BILL NIXON you need to move elsewhere your killing this town off!!
Im lost for words and can only agree with all the comments above. I keep saying this every time but that bungling bill really needs to ship out now, it is clear he cant get the spending right for this town! This council makes so many decisions that cost so much money and its usually things we don't need! So if we all muck in and do our bit will the council tax drop...ermm no will it continue to rise ermmm YES! Will the council provide a garden waste bin NO probably not, I already keep my gardens tidy. I refuse to do a job the council are meant to be doing like somebody said maybe they need to make staff cuts as well its disgraceful BILL NIXON you need to move elsewhere your killing this town off!! tabby67
  • Score: 16

8:25am Tue 10 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

Tragedy of the commons.

Private property rights mean that areas are looked after which is why private household keep their own land in good order. Private businesses work to gain and satisfy customer satisfaction in order to expand. Institutionalised state services operate for the benefit of the staff and see customers as a problem. It results in rationing and the blame falling on the customers who are apparently not being robbed of sufficient money to satisfy the demands of a state monopoly.

What's being said here is that if we want clean streets we should vote for any Government which will reach even further into our pockets or we will be held to ransom.
Tragedy of the commons. Private property rights mean that areas are looked after which is why private household keep their own land in good order. Private businesses work to gain and satisfy customer satisfaction in order to expand. Institutionalised state services operate for the benefit of the staff and see customers as a problem. It results in rationing and the blame falling on the customers who are apparently not being robbed of sufficient money to satisfy the demands of a state monopoly. What's being said here is that if we want clean streets we should vote for any Government which will reach even further into our pockets or we will be held to ransom. The real liberal
  • Score: 7

8:39am Tue 10 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

So we are to be held to ransom unless we support a council and Government which wishes to steal ever more money from our pockets in order to fund its monopoly. If we don't comply then we have to do it ourselves ?

I'm all for community charity but the idea of a charity is to help those who can't work and not those who won't. These people are getting paid regardless of what they do. Just as in all state services the customer comes second and rationing is imposed.

The state sector runs itself for its own good and not those of its customers. A private company has to satisfy its customers before it gets paid. If it fails to satisfy demand or expectations, charges too much or produces a service of poor quality it will soon go out of business. Basically this council is in the business of extortion and the comments by Mr Harman clearly show that to be the case. The customer comes a poor second.
So we are to be held to ransom unless we support a council and Government which wishes to steal ever more money from our pockets in order to fund its monopoly. If we don't comply then we have to do it ourselves ? I'm all for community charity but the idea of a charity is to help those who can't work and not those who won't. These people are getting paid regardless of what they do. Just as in all state services the customer comes second and rationing is imposed. The state sector runs itself for its own good and not those of its customers. A private company has to satisfy its customers before it gets paid. If it fails to satisfy demand or expectations, charges too much or produces a service of poor quality it will soon go out of business. Basically this council is in the business of extortion and the comments by Mr Harman clearly show that to be the case. The customer comes a poor second. The real liberal
  • Score: 12

10:33am Tue 10 Jun 14

bambara says...

The Tories have deliberately manipulated the funding formula to take funding away from the North and from areas which are socially disadvantaged. That change has resulted in large cuts to the funding provided to councils like Darlington, and the impact of these centrally imposed cuts is what you are seeing.
Tory cuts impossed on the poor while the rich just keep getting on richer.

As the UK just barely starts to crawl out of the global recession (well behind many other countries) the only people who are really benefiting from the recovery are the rich. The top 1% of the population saw their wealth rise by 15% last year alone.
What a suprise a Tory government and it is only the Top 1% who are benefiting. A tory government and the rich get richer, while the right wing blame the pain on the poor, the unemployed and immigrants.

I quote from Cicero "Que Bono" - Who benefits?
A Latin adage that is used either to suggest a hidden motive or to indicate that the party responsible for something may not be who it appears at first to be. Cicero used that question to draw the attention of his audience to who the actual beneficiary of a policy is.
The right wing is blaming local councils for all the ills visited on local people by cuts to services. But who is it who is impossing the cuts to funding which mandate those cuts to services?
Que Bono? - Who benefits?
Do the councillors benefit by cutting services?
Do the central government politicians imposing cuts unequally on areas which do not vote for them gain?

Que Bono? - Who benefits?
Who benefits from Tory policy?
Have you benefitted? Do you feel better off since the Tory government came to power? Are you one of the 1% who saw their wealth rise by 15% last year, while the rest of the country struggled, while people needed to use food banks to provide even the basics?

Que Bono? - Who benefits?
Do the poor benefit? The unemployed? Those who have seen their wages stagnate while bills increase, their benefits cut while taxes on the wealthiest have fallen?

Que Bono? - Who benefits?
An adage that indicate that the party responsible for something may not be who it appears, follow the money and you see who benefits, and you see that they are attempting to deflect attention from themselves and to blame those who do not benefit.

Ask yourselves, Que Bono? The ordinary masses or the privilidged few, the wealthy elite the 1%?

Que Bono?
The Tories have deliberately manipulated the funding formula to take funding away from the North and from areas which are socially disadvantaged. That change has resulted in large cuts to the funding provided to councils like Darlington, and the impact of these centrally imposed cuts is what you are seeing. Tory cuts impossed on the poor while the rich just keep getting on richer. As the UK just barely starts to crawl out of the global recession (well behind many other countries) the only people who are really benefiting from the recovery are the rich. The top 1% of the population saw their wealth rise by 15% last year alone. What a suprise a Tory government and it is only the Top 1% who are benefiting. A tory government and the rich get richer, while the right wing blame the pain on the poor, the unemployed and immigrants. I quote from Cicero "Que Bono" - Who benefits? A Latin adage that is used either to suggest a hidden motive or to indicate that the party responsible for something may not be who it appears at first to be. Cicero used that question to draw the attention of his audience to who the actual beneficiary of a policy is. The right wing is blaming local councils for all the ills visited on local people by cuts to services. But who is it who is impossing the cuts to funding which mandate those cuts to services? Que Bono? - Who benefits? Do the councillors benefit by cutting services? Do the central government politicians imposing cuts unequally on areas which do not vote for them gain? Que Bono? - Who benefits? Who benefits from Tory policy? Have you benefitted? Do you feel better off since the Tory government came to power? Are you one of the 1% who saw their wealth rise by 15% last year, while the rest of the country struggled, while people needed to use food banks to provide even the basics? Que Bono? - Who benefits? Do the poor benefit? The unemployed? Those who have seen their wages stagnate while bills increase, their benefits cut while taxes on the wealthiest have fallen? Que Bono? - Who benefits? An adage that indicate that the party responsible for something may not be who it appears, follow the money and you see who benefits, and you see that they are attempting to deflect attention from themselves and to blame those who do not benefit. Ask yourselves, Que Bono? The ordinary masses or the privilidged few, the wealthy elite the 1%? Que Bono? bambara
  • Score: -17

10:41am Tue 10 Jun 14

Spy Boy says...

I am really getting fed up with this council's ways. They get rid of the workers that do all these jobs and put pressure onto people to do it all for nothing. They have lied their way through austerity, cut services and jobs, but have yet to let one single overpaid exec be made redundant. They have cut salaries and stopped pay rises. The execs have been pegged too, but they get a nice, undisclosed bonus to cover this. Quo Bono? The council benefit every time. They disgust me.
I am really getting fed up with this council's ways. They get rid of the workers that do all these jobs and put pressure onto people to do it all for nothing. They have lied their way through austerity, cut services and jobs, but have yet to let one single overpaid exec be made redundant. They have cut salaries and stopped pay rises. The execs have been pegged too, but they get a nice, undisclosed bonus to cover this. Quo Bono? The council benefit every time. They disgust me. Spy Boy
  • Score: 21

1:50pm Tue 10 Jun 14

Homshaw1 says...

Bambara. Your argument might be valid if DBC did not provide a much worse service than surrounding councils.
Bambara. Your argument might be valid if DBC did not provide a much worse service than surrounding councils. Homshaw1
  • Score: 17

7:28pm Tue 10 Jun 14

pensioner2 says...

Well if memory serves, Darlington Borough Council turned down a few million quid from Central Government, because they wanted to INCREASE OUR RATES (council tax) BY MORE THAN A CERTAIN AMOUNT, but just below the level at which they could have been punished.- for the last 4 YEARS!

QUOTE- http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-england-256
84811 The government has promised a council tax freeze - but many local authorities don't appear ready to deliver it.

A number of northern councils in particular say they simply can't afford to leave bills unchanged.

Darlington is one of those preparing to increase council tax by 2%.

It's the fourth year in a row that the council has rejected a government offer of extra money in return for freezing the bill.

The Labour authority says the sums just don't add up.

If the council agrees to a freeze Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles will hand Darlington the equivalent of a 1% rise in council tax.
Well if memory serves, Darlington Borough Council turned down a few million quid from Central Government, because they wanted to INCREASE OUR RATES (council tax) BY MORE THAN A CERTAIN AMOUNT, but just below the level at which they could have been punished.- for the last 4 YEARS! QUOTE- http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-england-256 84811 The government has promised a council tax freeze - but many local authorities don't appear ready to deliver it. A number of northern councils in particular say they simply can't afford to leave bills unchanged. Darlington is one of those preparing to increase council tax by 2%. It's the fourth year in a row that the council has rejected a government offer of extra money in return for freezing the bill. The Labour authority says the sums just don't add up. If the council agrees to a freeze Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles will hand Darlington the equivalent of a 1% rise in council tax. pensioner2
  • Score: 10

9:38pm Tue 10 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

Bambara you are confusing two separate issues. Cutting funding has nothing to do with the rich elite. Councils manage local services and have continually expanded these away from the core service offering. Other councils manage adequately and have learned to cut costs and services appropriately.

It is becoming clear that Darlington council are cutting services that have the most obvious impact on the general population of the town. From Mr Harmans quotation it appears as an attempt to show the coalition as the nasty party in order to massage the fortunes of the Labour Party.

The expansionary monetary policy promoted by all parties on the right or left is responsible for the drift of fortunes to the elite ( and not the 1% but the 0.01%).

The rich getting richer isn't an issue, but the cost of living has been rising steadily with the central banks insistence on maintaining a minimum of 2% inflation ( according to official figures, but if true house prices and shrinkflation is accorded for then this is likely much higher- shrinkflation being in the reduction in size or material quality of goods and services ). Inflation is what hurts those on low wages, fixed incomes, pensions or living on savings.

Though labour bleat about the cost of living crisis there has never been any attempt to hold the coalition to account on the monetary policy that is pure monetary expansion through low/ non existent interest rates. Why is that I wonder ?
Bambara you are confusing two separate issues. Cutting funding has nothing to do with the rich elite. Councils manage local services and have continually expanded these away from the core service offering. Other councils manage adequately and have learned to cut costs and services appropriately. It is becoming clear that Darlington council are cutting services that have the most obvious impact on the general population of the town. From Mr Harmans quotation it appears as an attempt to show the coalition as the nasty party in order to massage the fortunes of the Labour Party. The expansionary monetary policy promoted by all parties on the right or left is responsible for the drift of fortunes to the elite ( and not the 1% but the 0.01%). The rich getting richer isn't an issue, but the cost of living has been rising steadily with the central banks insistence on maintaining a minimum of 2% inflation ( according to official figures, but if true house prices and shrinkflation is accorded for then this is likely much higher- shrinkflation being in the reduction in size or material quality of goods and services ). Inflation is what hurts those on low wages, fixed incomes, pensions or living on savings. Though labour bleat about the cost of living crisis there has never been any attempt to hold the coalition to account on the monetary policy that is pure monetary expansion through low/ non existent interest rates. Why is that I wonder ? The real liberal
  • Score: 5

4:10pm Wed 11 Jun 14

D. Hop says...

How dare they! Threaten us for a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return???
How dare they! Threaten us for a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return??? D. Hop
  • Score: 13

4:10pm Wed 11 Jun 14

D. Hop says...

How dare they! Threaten us for a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return???
How dare they! Threaten us for a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return??? D. Hop
  • Score: 1

4:10pm Wed 11 Jun 14

D. Hop says...

How dare they! Threaten us for a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return???
How dare they! Threaten us for a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return??? D. Hop
  • Score: 2

4:11pm Wed 11 Jun 14

D. Hop says...

How dare they! Threaten us over a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return???
How dare they! Threaten us over a service they are paid to do, and are accountable for!!! Unbelievable. If you want charity from us then it should go without saying that you offer something in return??? D. Hop
  • Score: 1

6:27pm Wed 11 Jun 14

behonest says...

This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers.

But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.
This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers. But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons. behonest
  • Score: 23

7:26pm Wed 11 Jun 14

thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth says...

behonest wrote:
This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers.

But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.
Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage.

Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers. But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.[/p][/quote]Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage. Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies. thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth
  • Score: 17

9:11pm Wed 11 Jun 14

D. Hop says...

apologies for the multiple posts, must have been a glitch on the Echo website!
apologies for the multiple posts, must have been a glitch on the Echo website! D. Hop
  • Score: 5

9:27pm Wed 11 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

thetruthyoucanthandl
ethetruth
wrote:
behonest wrote:
This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers.

But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.
Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage.

Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.
Its Government policy and the media is entitled not to allow comments if it wants.

You can apply any analysis as to why they have not allowed comment but its a big stretch to suggest it has anything to do with collusion and you are making an unsupported accusation.

Better to stick with the facts as it improves credibility.

Just my advice of course, you are free to ignore it if you wish :-)
[quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers. But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.[/p][/quote]Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage. Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.[/p][/quote]Its Government policy and the media is entitled not to allow comments if it wants. You can apply any analysis as to why they have not allowed comment but its a big stretch to suggest it has anything to do with collusion and you are making an unsupported accusation. Better to stick with the facts as it improves credibility. Just my advice of course, you are free to ignore it if you wish :-) The real liberal
  • Score: 0

10:29pm Wed 11 Jun 14

thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth says...

The real liberal wrote:
thetruthyoucanthandl

ethetruth
wrote:
behonest wrote:
This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers.

But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.
Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage.

Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.
Its Government policy and the media is entitled not to allow comments if it wants.

You can apply any analysis as to why they have not allowed comment but its a big stretch to suggest it has anything to do with collusion and you are making an unsupported accusation.

Better to stick with the facts as it improves credibility.

Just my advice of course, you are free to ignore it if you wish :-)
If it waddles and quacks like a duck.

Chances are......
[quote][p][bold]The real liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers. But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.[/p][/quote]Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage. Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.[/p][/quote]Its Government policy and the media is entitled not to allow comments if it wants. You can apply any analysis as to why they have not allowed comment but its a big stretch to suggest it has anything to do with collusion and you are making an unsupported accusation. Better to stick with the facts as it improves credibility. Just my advice of course, you are free to ignore it if you wish :-)[/p][/quote]If it waddles and quacks like a duck. Chances are...... thetruthyoucanthandlethetruth
  • Score: 2

10:32pm Wed 11 Jun 14

NOTODDEN says...

D. Hop wrote:
apologies for the multiple posts, must have been a glitch on the Echo website!
No prob you made your point so thank you
[quote][p][bold]D. Hop[/bold] wrote: apologies for the multiple posts, must have been a glitch on the Echo website![/p][/quote]No prob you made your point so thank you NOTODDEN
  • Score: 3

10:53pm Wed 11 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

thetruthyoucanthandl
ethetruth
wrote:
The real liberal wrote:
thetruthyoucanthandl


ethetruth
wrote:
behonest wrote:
This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers.

But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.
Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage.

Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.
Its Government policy and the media is entitled not to allow comments if it wants.

You can apply any analysis as to why they have not allowed comment but its a big stretch to suggest it has anything to do with collusion and you are making an unsupported accusation.

Better to stick with the facts as it improves credibility.

Just my advice of course, you are free to ignore it if you wish :-)
If it waddles and quacks like a duck.

Chances are......
That it Might be a Duck ? :-)

However what we have here is a local councillor (Paul Harman ) hijacking a voluntary community project as a platform to score political points. The people involved in creation of the a Garden have specifically made the point that this is nothing to do with council cuts "I am not political......" The quote by the lady who organised the digging clearly indicates that this was not a political stunt and seemed keen to dissociate herself from that position.

There is no direct quote from DBC officials supporting Mr Harman's position.
So there is no reason that DBC should not have cleaned up the travellers site.

As for the collusion with the Northern Echo.....come up with the evidence.

That's not to say what you have concluded isn't correct but its too easy to make 2+2=5 why not ask the the paper why they didn't allow comments ? Maybe they were worried it would create problems for them directly ? I don't know the answer but no one does except the paper itself.
[quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]The real liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers. But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.[/p][/quote]Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage. Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.[/p][/quote]Its Government policy and the media is entitled not to allow comments if it wants. You can apply any analysis as to why they have not allowed comment but its a big stretch to suggest it has anything to do with collusion and you are making an unsupported accusation. Better to stick with the facts as it improves credibility. Just my advice of course, you are free to ignore it if you wish :-)[/p][/quote]If it waddles and quacks like a duck. Chances are......[/p][/quote]That it Might be a Duck ? :-) However what we have here is a local councillor (Paul Harman ) hijacking a voluntary community project as a platform to score political points. The people involved in creation of the a Garden have specifically made the point that this is nothing to do with council cuts "I am not political......" The quote by the lady who organised the digging clearly indicates that this was not a political stunt and seemed keen to dissociate herself from that position. There is no direct quote from DBC officials supporting Mr Harman's position. So there is no reason that DBC should not have cleaned up the travellers site. As for the collusion with the Northern Echo.....come up with the evidence. That's not to say what you have concluded isn't correct but its too easy to make 2+2=5 why not ask the the paper why they didn't allow comments ? Maybe they were worried it would create problems for them directly ? I don't know the answer but no one does except the paper itself. The real liberal
  • Score: 3

11:02pm Wed 11 Jun 14

Red rose lad says...

There does seem to be a consensus of opinion on this thread. As there's only one indoctrinated lemming making excuses for them, I take it that the vast silent majority must be satisfied with the level of service they are receiving. If you're going to vote them in again despite this lunacy please stand up and tell us why. If you can't clean the streets and you're wasting money on roundabouts and multi-storey car parks then something has gone drastically wrong. This Council should be in special measures or realigned with all other services in the County - Durham & Darlington. They've proved that unitary status doesn't work for the people of this town.
There does seem to be a consensus of opinion on this thread. As there's only one indoctrinated lemming making excuses for them, I take it that the vast silent majority must be satisfied with the level of service they are receiving. If you're going to vote them in again despite this lunacy please stand up and tell us why. If you can't clean the streets and you're wasting money on roundabouts and multi-storey car parks then something has gone drastically wrong. This Council should be in special measures or realigned with all other services in the County - Durham & Darlington. They've proved that unitary status doesn't work for the people of this town. Red rose lad
  • Score: 6

11:13pm Wed 11 Jun 14

spragger says...

Nothing will change, all those who pay no Council Tax will vote for the Party who spends other peoples money like its going out of fashion
Nothing will change, all those who pay no Council Tax will vote for the Party who spends other peoples money like its going out of fashion spragger
  • Score: 8

9:15am Thu 12 Jun 14

LUSTARD says...

behonest wrote:
This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers.

But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.
getting hit, right on, also an old woman walking past avalon yesterday was nearlly killed when the letter n fell off above the pub missing her head by a hairs thickness, two foot square metal letter. looking up the road i could see the pot on gurus stack leaning at an angle, and the town rangers in the new hospice shop on high row chatting to the staff over a nice cuppa. the sun was out though and binns have had all their paving pressure washed down, at least one shop knows how to look presentable.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers. But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.[/p][/quote]getting hit, right on, also an old woman walking past avalon yesterday was nearlly killed when the letter n fell off above the pub missing her head by a hairs thickness, two foot square metal letter. looking up the road i could see the pot on gurus stack leaning at an angle, and the town rangers in the new hospice shop on high row chatting to the staff over a nice cuppa. the sun was out though and binns have had all their paving pressure washed down, at least one shop knows how to look presentable. LUSTARD
  • Score: 7

9:44am Thu 12 Jun 14

bambara says...

"The rich getting richer isn't an issue, but the cost of living has been rising steadily with the central banks insistence on maintaining a minimum of 2% inflation "

The rich getting richer isn't an issue! It isn't an issue yet they are getting richer at the expense of all of the rest of us.

A minimumum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council.

The government offered an increase in funding equivalent to 1% if the council made a 0% increase.
So a 1% (plus inflation level above 2%) cut to council budgets, in addition to the central funding changes that have been heavily biased towards affluent (Tory) areas (10 most deprived areas in the country saw decreases of approx 25% in central funding.

Que Bono? The Affluent Tory shires
Que Bono? The Tory government who wish to blame local councils for the cuts.
Que Bono? The Tory ideologs who wish to impose Tory council policies on areas which have voted for Labour councils.

Que Bono? The Tory shires and the south of England who see 20 times the investment in transport and infrastructure per head of population compared to the North of England.

Que Bono? The Tory bankers and investment fund managers who are sold the shares of our public services at knock down prices and who benefit from the fat profits made by those companies hiking prices and cutting services.
"The rich getting richer isn't an issue, but the cost of living has been rising steadily with the central banks insistence on maintaining a minimum of 2% inflation " The rich getting richer isn't an issue! It isn't an issue yet they are getting richer at the expense of all of the rest of us. A minimumum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council. The government offered an increase in funding equivalent to 1% if the council made a 0% increase. So a 1% (plus inflation level above 2%) cut to council budgets, in addition to the central funding changes that have been heavily biased towards affluent (Tory) areas (10 most deprived areas in the country saw decreases of approx 25% in central funding. Que Bono? The Affluent Tory shires Que Bono? The Tory government who wish to blame local councils for the cuts. Que Bono? The Tory ideologs who wish to impose Tory council policies on areas which have voted for Labour councils. Que Bono? The Tory shires and the south of England who see 20 times the investment in transport and infrastructure per head of population compared to the North of England. Que Bono? The Tory bankers and investment fund managers who are sold the shares of our public services at knock down prices and who benefit from the fat profits made by those companies hiking prices and cutting services. bambara
  • Score: -7

10:52am Thu 12 Jun 14

DarloXman says...

We are going to get more and more of this from the Council - "we can't be bothered to do it so if you want it done do it yourself." - see...

http://www.thenorthe
rnecho.co.uk/news/lo
cal/darlington/11271
100.Library_encourag
es_residents_to_pick
_up_litter_along_wit
h_books/

As I said on that thread as well as litter picking it will be grass cutting and pot hole filling for the volunteering residents next.

I'm more than happy to do my bit - just need for my exhorbitant council tax to be reduced by an appropriate amount! But of course this won't happen - I am forced to contribute to the useless Ms Burns' OBSCENE £186,0000 salary!!!
We are going to get more and more of this from the Council - "we can't be bothered to do it so if you want it done do it yourself." - see... http://www.thenorthe rnecho.co.uk/news/lo cal/darlington/11271 100.Library_encourag es_residents_to_pick _up_litter_along_wit h_books/ As I said on that thread as well as litter picking it will be grass cutting and pot hole filling for the volunteering residents next. I'm more than happy to do my bit - just need for my exhorbitant council tax to be reduced by an appropriate amount! But of course this won't happen - I am forced to contribute to the useless Ms Burns' OBSCENE £186,0000 salary!!! DarloXman
  • Score: 6

1:04pm Thu 12 Jun 14

behonest says...

bambara:
"A minimum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council."

Too simplistic, to the point of being wrong. This assumes that all council costs; wages, contracts, services, etc, all increase by the rate of inflation each year. I'm sure many council workers can confirm that they have not received inflation-level (or above) wage rises in recent years; and if council contracts officers have agreed in recent years to increase annual contract values at or above the rate of inflation then they should be sacked for incompetence.

If councils receive a 1% increase to their budget from government and then cut their cost base by more than 1%, which should be achievable, this means an income increase, not reduction.
bambara: "A minimum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council." Too simplistic, to the point of being wrong. This assumes that all council costs; wages, contracts, services, etc, all increase by the rate of inflation each year. I'm sure many council workers can confirm that they have not received inflation-level (or above) wage rises in recent years; and if council contracts officers have agreed in recent years to increase annual contract values at or above the rate of inflation then they should be sacked for incompetence. If councils receive a 1% increase to their budget from government and then cut their cost base by more than 1%, which should be achievable, this means an income increase, not reduction. behonest
  • Score: 1

2:09pm Thu 12 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

bambara wrote:
"The rich getting richer isn't an issue, but the cost of living has been rising steadily with the central banks insistence on maintaining a minimum of 2% inflation "

The rich getting richer isn't an issue! It isn't an issue yet they are getting richer at the expense of all of the rest of us.

A minimumum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council.

The government offered an increase in funding equivalent to 1% if the council made a 0% increase.
So a 1% (plus inflation level above 2%) cut to council budgets, in addition to the central funding changes that have been heavily biased towards affluent (Tory) areas (10 most deprived areas in the country saw decreases of approx 25% in central funding.

Que Bono? The Affluent Tory shires
Que Bono? The Tory government who wish to blame local councils for the cuts.
Que Bono? The Tory ideologs who wish to impose Tory council policies on areas which have voted for Labour councils.

Que Bono? The Tory shires and the south of England who see 20 times the investment in transport and infrastructure per head of population compared to the North of England.

Que Bono? The Tory bankers and investment fund managers who are sold the shares of our public services at knock down prices and who benefit from the fat profits made by those companies hiking prices and cutting services.
Inflation is just the other end of public spending. You don't get anything for nothing. There isn't a magic money tree.

If you want more services then there will be higher taxation and/or more inflation. The greater the inflation and tax burden the more people find themselves struggling to make ends meet because of higher prices or find a job that pays enough to live on. Those who have been prudent savers will see their savings burnt to ash as their money becomes worthless. It destroys independence and liberty.

It also creates bubbles which eventually burst and cause even more misery. It locks the young out of jobs and property ownership.

Government spending is the problem and always has been. Stealing from Peter to give to a Paul has never been a good foundation for peaceful living and wealth creation no matter how noble the cause seems to be.

As for bankers. Well they make their money from loans. Loans to Governments are very safe. Particularly when the Government will threaten to use its guns in order to collect that debt on their behalf. That much of that money finds its way into the hands of cronies with Government contracts is just another reason to keep the scam going.

Welfare or warfare the bankers/financiers win. Its the inevitable conclusion to voting for more Government. It feeds the beast.
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: "The rich getting richer isn't an issue, but the cost of living has been rising steadily with the central banks insistence on maintaining a minimum of 2% inflation " The rich getting richer isn't an issue! It isn't an issue yet they are getting richer at the expense of all of the rest of us. A minimumum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council. The government offered an increase in funding equivalent to 1% if the council made a 0% increase. So a 1% (plus inflation level above 2%) cut to council budgets, in addition to the central funding changes that have been heavily biased towards affluent (Tory) areas (10 most deprived areas in the country saw decreases of approx 25% in central funding. Que Bono? The Affluent Tory shires Que Bono? The Tory government who wish to blame local councils for the cuts. Que Bono? The Tory ideologs who wish to impose Tory council policies on areas which have voted for Labour councils. Que Bono? The Tory shires and the south of England who see 20 times the investment in transport and infrastructure per head of population compared to the North of England. Que Bono? The Tory bankers and investment fund managers who are sold the shares of our public services at knock down prices and who benefit from the fat profits made by those companies hiking prices and cutting services.[/p][/quote]Inflation is just the other end of public spending. You don't get anything for nothing. There isn't a magic money tree. If you want more services then there will be higher taxation and/or more inflation. The greater the inflation and tax burden the more people find themselves struggling to make ends meet because of higher prices or find a job that pays enough to live on. Those who have been prudent savers will see their savings burnt to ash as their money becomes worthless. It destroys independence and liberty. It also creates bubbles which eventually burst and cause even more misery. It locks the young out of jobs and property ownership. Government spending is the problem and always has been. Stealing from Peter to give to a Paul has never been a good foundation for peaceful living and wealth creation no matter how noble the cause seems to be. As for bankers. Well they make their money from loans. Loans to Governments are very safe. Particularly when the Government will threaten to use its guns in order to collect that debt on their behalf. That much of that money finds its way into the hands of cronies with Government contracts is just another reason to keep the scam going. Welfare or warfare the bankers/financiers win. Its the inevitable conclusion to voting for more Government. It feeds the beast. The real liberal
  • Score: 2

3:03pm Thu 12 Jun 14

D. Hop says...

We don't want more services, just the ones we've always had. We should not be punished for the councils ineptitude which has resulted in their government handouts being dramatically cut.
We don't want more services, just the ones we've always had. We should not be punished for the councils ineptitude which has resulted in their government handouts being dramatically cut. D. Hop
  • Score: 8

4:02pm Thu 12 Jun 14

settheworldonfire says...

thetruthyoucanthandl
ethetruth
wrote:
behonest wrote:
This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers.

But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.
Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage.

Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.
The Northern Echo is far too pie and key.....loving......
........The echo should allow comments on all reported stories....But no...The echo big wigs stop comments that may upset the thieving, robbing, dirty scum that like driving around in vans and caravans making everyone's lives a misery...SHAME ON THE ECHO.....OH...BY THE WAY I SAW THE MAN BILLY WELCH READING A NEWSPAPER AT APPLEBY HORSE FAIR ON THE WEEKEND.....SO MUCH FOR HIM NOT BEING ABLE TO READ...I SUPPOSE HE COULD HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THE PICTURES...MY **** !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!
[quote][p][bold]thetruthyoucanthandl ethetruth[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: This Labour council has just sent paid council workers to the Springfield area to clean up the mess left by travellers, who contribute nothing to council coffers. But the same council expects local people, who they hit with the maximum council tax rise every year, to clean up after themselves. Says all you need to know about this PC bunch of Labour loons.[/p][/quote]Excellent spot! It's a bloody outrage. Anyone else notice how comments weren't allowed on that particular article the other day. This council and newspaper are definitely in the pocket of the Gypsies.[/p][/quote]The Northern Echo is far too pie and key.....loving...... ........The echo should allow comments on all reported stories....But no...The echo big wigs stop comments that may upset the thieving, robbing, dirty scum that like driving around in vans and caravans making everyone's lives a misery...SHAME ON THE ECHO.....OH...BY THE WAY I SAW THE MAN BILLY WELCH READING A NEWSPAPER AT APPLEBY HORSE FAIR ON THE WEEKEND.....SO MUCH FOR HIM NOT BEING ABLE TO READ...I SUPPOSE HE COULD HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THE PICTURES...MY **** !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!! settheworldonfire
  • Score: 4

4:17pm Thu 12 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

D. Hop wrote:
We don't want more services, just the ones we've always had. We should not be punished for the councils ineptitude which has resulted in their government handouts being dramatically cut.
It's the ones we have had that caused the problem in the first place. Too much was being spent and now the tax raking potential is insufficient to cover what was spent and the cost of borrowing additional funds ( defecit ) is piling on the pressure.

Considering the situation the country is in there has been little in the way of cuts or austerity and debt continues to pile up. Cuts have to be made. Most won't countenance reducing funding for health or education.

Unfortunately public service delivery has no accountability beyond the setting of budgets by central Government. The result is inefficiency, waste, poor service and rationing. Its caused by having no competition or price structure.

A public service doesn't risk its own capital and cannot go bankrupt, it has no incentive to be competetive or efficient beyond some central government chastisement. If it spends too much it will get a slap on the risk, but in the end it won't be allowed to fail and more than likely its budget will be increased.

Its this continual sliding of budgets upwards and ever more promises made by Governments to the baying of the electorate for its 'share' that has resulted in the present mess. The Coalition is trying to reduce spending but every attempt at holding down expanding costs is met with belligerent councils and sour faced socialism.

The best thing to do is to privatise the council services and get rid of council tax and central funding. Let competition for services prevail. Those that use most will pay for most. That's fair.
[quote][p][bold]D. Hop[/bold] wrote: We don't want more services, just the ones we've always had. We should not be punished for the councils ineptitude which has resulted in their government handouts being dramatically cut.[/p][/quote]It's the ones we have had that caused the problem in the first place. Too much was being spent and now the tax raking potential is insufficient to cover what was spent and the cost of borrowing additional funds ( defecit ) is piling on the pressure. Considering the situation the country is in there has been little in the way of cuts or austerity and debt continues to pile up. Cuts have to be made. Most won't countenance reducing funding for health or education. Unfortunately public service delivery has no accountability beyond the setting of budgets by central Government. The result is inefficiency, waste, poor service and rationing. Its caused by having no competition or price structure. A public service doesn't risk its own capital and cannot go bankrupt, it has no incentive to be competetive or efficient beyond some central government chastisement. If it spends too much it will get a slap on the risk, but in the end it won't be allowed to fail and more than likely its budget will be increased. Its this continual sliding of budgets upwards and ever more promises made by Governments to the baying of the electorate for its 'share' that has resulted in the present mess. The Coalition is trying to reduce spending but every attempt at holding down expanding costs is met with belligerent councils and sour faced socialism. The best thing to do is to privatise the council services and get rid of council tax and central funding. Let competition for services prevail. Those that use most will pay for most. That's fair. The real liberal
  • Score: 6

7:41pm Thu 12 Jun 14

bambara says...

behonest wrote:
bambara: "A minimum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council." Too simplistic, to the point of being wrong. This assumes that all council costs; wages, contracts, services, etc, all increase by the rate of inflation each year. I'm sure many council workers can confirm that they have not received inflation-level (or above) wage rises in recent years; and if council contracts officers have agreed in recent years to increase annual contract values at or above the rate of inflation then they should be sacked for incompetence. If councils receive a 1% increase to their budget from government and then cut their cost base by more than 1%, which should be achievable, this means an income increase, not reduction.
Central government funding to the council is a cut whichever way you want to look at it bedisingenous. The difference of 1% only reduces the amount of that cut it does not reverse it.
The average cut to council funding across England and Wales for 2014-15 is 2.9%.
For poorer and more disadvantaged areas that cut is again higher than it is for wealthier areas. The cut for the poorest areas is anything up to 6.9%

So Darlington council with a 2% council tax rise will still be facing an overall cut to it's budget, on top of the cut last year, and the cut the year before.

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-politics-25
429562

So while the Tory government has impossed pay freezes on ordinary working people, and this year a below inflation 1% pay rise on the council staff, they have not even funded that pay rise for the council.
The Tory government have awarded the workers a pay rise AND cut the budget of the council so that the hole in the council budget is even bigger than it would have been.

Oh and the cost of Gas, Electricity, Petrol/Deisel, water and all those other bills the council is not immune to, they have gone up as well and not by inflation. Add to that the increased cost of maintenance of equipment they can't afford to replace, increases to the cost of providing services for an increasing elderly and sick population...

Tory policy, cut it till it fails and then blame the people who had the cuts impossed on them.
[quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: bambara: "A minimum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council." Too simplistic, to the point of being wrong. This assumes that all council costs; wages, contracts, services, etc, all increase by the rate of inflation each year. I'm sure many council workers can confirm that they have not received inflation-level (or above) wage rises in recent years; and if council contracts officers have agreed in recent years to increase annual contract values at or above the rate of inflation then they should be sacked for incompetence. If councils receive a 1% increase to their budget from government and then cut their cost base by more than 1%, which should be achievable, this means an income increase, not reduction.[/p][/quote]Central government funding to the council is a cut whichever way you want to look at it bedisingenous. The difference of 1% only reduces the amount of that cut it does not reverse it. The average cut to council funding across England and Wales for 2014-15 is 2.9%. For poorer and more disadvantaged areas that cut is again higher than it is for wealthier areas. The cut for the poorest areas is anything up to 6.9% So Darlington council with a 2% council tax rise will still be facing an overall cut to it's budget, on top of the cut last year, and the cut the year before. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-politics-25 429562 So while the Tory government has impossed pay freezes on ordinary working people, and this year a below inflation 1% pay rise on the council staff, they have not even funded that pay rise for the council. The Tory government have awarded the workers a pay rise AND cut the budget of the council so that the hole in the council budget is even bigger than it would have been. Oh and the cost of Gas, Electricity, Petrol/Deisel, water and all those other bills the council is not immune to, they have gone up as well and not by inflation. Add to that the increased cost of maintenance of equipment they can't afford to replace, increases to the cost of providing services for an increasing elderly and sick population... Tory policy, cut it till it fails and then blame the people who had the cuts impossed on them. bambara
  • Score: -5

10:28pm Thu 12 Jun 14

Red rose lad says...

Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. Red rose lad
  • Score: 10

12:31am Fri 13 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

bambara wrote:
behonest wrote:
bambara: "A minimum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council." Too simplistic, to the point of being wrong. This assumes that all council costs; wages, contracts, services, etc, all increase by the rate of inflation each year. I'm sure many council workers can confirm that they have not received inflation-level (or above) wage rises in recent years; and if council contracts officers have agreed in recent years to increase annual contract values at or above the rate of inflation then they should be sacked for incompetence. If councils receive a 1% increase to their budget from government and then cut their cost base by more than 1%, which should be achievable, this means an income increase, not reduction.
Central government funding to the council is a cut whichever way you want to look at it bedisingenous. The difference of 1% only reduces the amount of that cut it does not reverse it.
The average cut to council funding across England and Wales for 2014-15 is 2.9%.
For poorer and more disadvantaged areas that cut is again higher than it is for wealthier areas. The cut for the poorest areas is anything up to 6.9%

So Darlington council with a 2% council tax rise will still be facing an overall cut to it's budget, on top of the cut last year, and the cut the year before.

http://www.bbc.co.uk

/news/uk-politics-25

429562

So while the Tory government has impossed pay freezes on ordinary working people, and this year a below inflation 1% pay rise on the council staff, they have not even funded that pay rise for the council.
The Tory government have awarded the workers a pay rise AND cut the budget of the council so that the hole in the council budget is even bigger than it would have been.

Oh and the cost of Gas, Electricity, Petrol/Deisel, water and all those other bills the council is not immune to, they have gone up as well and not by inflation. Add to that the increased cost of maintenance of equipment they can't afford to replace, increases to the cost of providing services for an increasing elderly and sick population...

Tory policy, cut it till it fails and then blame the people who had the cuts impossed on them.
If your local coffee shop sold lukewarm drinks and left dirty crockery all over the tables and the floors swimming in muck and filth because they felt you were not paying enough for their service and wanted to pay their staff/pay rising overheads more what would you do ?

I would find another coffee shop. It isn't my problem if a company wants to pay its staff more money, wants to put up its prices, leave the place like a rubbish dump or serve cold coffee.....but I can choose not to give them my custom.

The council have a monopoly. The only protection we have from this malicious mafia is the Governments tenuous control of budgets and standards. We can't find another supplier, the best we can hope for is to vote out the incumbents and pray that the new gang members are a bit less harsh.
The chances of that are slim, but at least the other lot are more fiscally prudent though its still a bitter victory.
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]behonest[/bold] wrote: bambara: "A minimum 2% inflation rate, and that is the MAXIMUM that any council can increase council tax by. By definition with inflation minimum 2% and council tax increases maximum 2% then ANY inflation above 2% is a cut to the income of the council." Too simplistic, to the point of being wrong. This assumes that all council costs; wages, contracts, services, etc, all increase by the rate of inflation each year. I'm sure many council workers can confirm that they have not received inflation-level (or above) wage rises in recent years; and if council contracts officers have agreed in recent years to increase annual contract values at or above the rate of inflation then they should be sacked for incompetence. If councils receive a 1% increase to their budget from government and then cut their cost base by more than 1%, which should be achievable, this means an income increase, not reduction.[/p][/quote]Central government funding to the council is a cut whichever way you want to look at it bedisingenous. The difference of 1% only reduces the amount of that cut it does not reverse it. The average cut to council funding across England and Wales for 2014-15 is 2.9%. For poorer and more disadvantaged areas that cut is again higher than it is for wealthier areas. The cut for the poorest areas is anything up to 6.9% So Darlington council with a 2% council tax rise will still be facing an overall cut to it's budget, on top of the cut last year, and the cut the year before. http://www.bbc.co.uk /news/uk-politics-25 429562 So while the Tory government has impossed pay freezes on ordinary working people, and this year a below inflation 1% pay rise on the council staff, they have not even funded that pay rise for the council. The Tory government have awarded the workers a pay rise AND cut the budget of the council so that the hole in the council budget is even bigger than it would have been. Oh and the cost of Gas, Electricity, Petrol/Deisel, water and all those other bills the council is not immune to, they have gone up as well and not by inflation. Add to that the increased cost of maintenance of equipment they can't afford to replace, increases to the cost of providing services for an increasing elderly and sick population... Tory policy, cut it till it fails and then blame the people who had the cuts impossed on them.[/p][/quote]If your local coffee shop sold lukewarm drinks and left dirty crockery all over the tables and the floors swimming in muck and filth because they felt you were not paying enough for their service and wanted to pay their staff/pay rising overheads more what would you do ? I would find another coffee shop. It isn't my problem if a company wants to pay its staff more money, wants to put up its prices, leave the place like a rubbish dump or serve cold coffee.....but I can choose not to give them my custom. The council have a monopoly. The only protection we have from this malicious mafia is the Governments tenuous control of budgets and standards. We can't find another supplier, the best we can hope for is to vote out the incumbents and pray that the new gang members are a bit less harsh. The chances of that are slim, but at least the other lot are more fiscally prudent though its still a bitter victory. The real liberal
  • Score: 2

8:14am Fri 13 Jun 14

Jonn says...

I know this Council are cr@p but do you know anyone who is happy with their Council? Isn't this an ideal opportunity for people to support David Camerons Big Society?
People of the right wing persuasion desire a shrinking state, less interference from Government and Councils yet when given the opportunity, they complain that it's the Councils job.
My streets residents pick up rubbish, weed and keep it tidy.
Get out there right wingers and start practicing your ideology.
I know this Council are cr@p but do you know anyone who is happy with their Council? Isn't this an ideal opportunity for people to support David Camerons Big Society? People of the right wing persuasion desire a shrinking state, less interference from Government and Councils yet when given the opportunity, they complain that it's the Councils job. My streets residents pick up rubbish, weed and keep it tidy. Get out there right wingers and start practicing your ideology. Jonn
  • Score: 3

9:23am Fri 13 Jun 14

bambara says...

Red rose lad wrote:
Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
Ah personnal insult, smear and unsubstantiated allegations.
The stock in trade of the right wing.

I have NO links of any kind to any Darlington councilor.
I am NOT a member of any political party.
I am NOT on benefits of any kind.
I do NOT work in the public sector.

Now for some additional points

Darlington council had budget cuts of 19.9% imposed on it from central government from 2010/11 to 2013/14.
It is predicted that Government grant will reduce by a further £24m by 2020 in addition to the £13.9m already lost since 2010.

A net Tory cut of £38 million pounds a year in a budget of approx £100 million. So in 10 years rather than increasing with inflation (At say 2% per year compound) to £120 million the budget that Darlington will have to provide all the services will have been cut to £62 million. Approximately halved in real terms.

The Council’s main sources of income are Council Tax and Business Rates. The ability to increase income to protect services and mitigate the damage done by these Tory cuts is limited by the Government. The Council may only increase tax by 2% each year unless a public referendum is held. The level of business rates is set by the Government, and the council has no control over that.

Now compare that to the equivalent cuts impossed on Tory areas, which amount to approximately 10% of the above. That is correct the cuts imposed on Darlington are 10 times as severe as those imposed on Tory councils.

Assuming the Tories were to again be elected (perish the thought) in 2015 the cumulative effect on Darlington council for 2010 to 2020 would be a cut of central government by 87%.

But hey that is fine because central government can use all that money to fund the overspend on the £20Billion pound high speed rail link vanity project that will cut 20 minutes off the journey from London to Birmingham.
[quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.[/p][/quote]Ah personnal insult, smear and unsubstantiated allegations. The stock in trade of the right wing. I have NO links of any kind to any Darlington councilor. I am NOT a member of any political party. I am NOT on benefits of any kind. I do NOT work in the public sector. Now for some additional points Darlington council had budget cuts of 19.9% imposed on it from central government from 2010/11 to 2013/14. It is predicted that Government grant will reduce by a further £24m by 2020 in addition to the £13.9m already lost since 2010. A net Tory cut of £38 million pounds a year in a budget of approx £100 million. So in 10 years rather than increasing with inflation (At say 2% per year compound) to £120 million the budget that Darlington will have to provide all the services will have been cut to £62 million. Approximately halved in real terms. The Council’s main sources of income are Council Tax and Business Rates. The ability to increase income to protect services and mitigate the damage done by these Tory cuts is limited by the Government. The Council may only increase tax by 2% each year unless a public referendum is held. The level of business rates is set by the Government, and the council has no control over that. Now compare that to the equivalent cuts impossed on Tory areas, which amount to approximately 10% of the above. That is correct the cuts imposed on Darlington are 10 times as severe as those imposed on Tory councils. Assuming the Tories were to again be elected (perish the thought) in 2015 the cumulative effect on Darlington council for 2010 to 2020 would be a cut of central government by 87%. But hey that is fine because central government can use all that money to fund the overspend on the £20Billion pound high speed rail link vanity project that will cut 20 minutes off the journey from London to Birmingham. bambara
  • Score: -4

9:42am Fri 13 Jun 14

bambara says...

For anyone interested the details of Darlingtons budget is available here:
http://www.darlingto
n.gov.uk/PublicMinut
es/Cabinet/November%
2013%202013/131113%2
0Resources%20MTFP.pd
f

It outlines in detail the numbers I refer to above.

It also highlights that the 1% rise available for a 0% council tax rise is a 1 off 1% payment. It is funded for 1 year only.

For Darlington the government have imposed another £5million of cuts this year alone, have increased the staff salaries by 1% and not funded this to the council.

The right wing want you to blame the local council for this, for the problems that these cuts will, and are already causing, but the people impossing these cuts are Tory central government.
An 87% cut in central funding over 10 years.

How would you deal with an 87% cut to your main income?
For anyone interested the details of Darlingtons budget is available here: http://www.darlingto n.gov.uk/PublicMinut es/Cabinet/November% 2013%202013/131113%2 0Resources%20MTFP.pd f It outlines in detail the numbers I refer to above. It also highlights that the 1% rise available for a 0% council tax rise is a 1 off 1% payment. It is funded for 1 year only. For Darlington the government have imposed another £5million of cuts this year alone, have increased the staff salaries by 1% and not funded this to the council. The right wing want you to blame the local council for this, for the problems that these cuts will, and are already causing, but the people impossing these cuts are Tory central government. An 87% cut in central funding over 10 years. How would you deal with an 87% cut to your main income? bambara
  • Score: -5

10:09am Fri 13 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

Jonn wrote:
I know this Council are cr@p but do you know anyone who is happy with their Council? Isn't this an ideal opportunity for people to support David Camerons Big Society?
People of the right wing persuasion desire a shrinking state, less interference from Government and Councils yet when given the opportunity, they complain that it's the Councils job.
My streets residents pick up rubbish, weed and keep it tidy.
Get out there right wingers and start practicing your ideology.
It is the councils job. We pay them to do it. If they don't wish to do that anymore then that's fine. Stop charging us and let the private sector take over with open competition to provide the services.

I don't know what Cameron's big society is all about. The picture I get is an Orwellian double speak "peace through war" or something like that.

If you want to clear up the rubbish for free then good on you. Voluntary free and open cooperation is a wonderful thing. If only that was universal.

Remember what happens if you don't pay your council tax. First a letter, then the bailiffs and police. If you continue to resist with force then expect to be met with armed thugs in paramilitary uniform. You can't opt out of payment to the state. Resistance is futile.
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: I know this Council are cr@p but do you know anyone who is happy with their Council? Isn't this an ideal opportunity for people to support David Camerons Big Society? People of the right wing persuasion desire a shrinking state, less interference from Government and Councils yet when given the opportunity, they complain that it's the Councils job. My streets residents pick up rubbish, weed and keep it tidy. Get out there right wingers and start practicing your ideology.[/p][/quote]It is the councils job. We pay them to do it. If they don't wish to do that anymore then that's fine. Stop charging us and let the private sector take over with open competition to provide the services. I don't know what Cameron's big society is all about. The picture I get is an Orwellian double speak "peace through war" or something like that. If you want to clear up the rubbish for free then good on you. Voluntary free and open cooperation is a wonderful thing. If only that was universal. Remember what happens if you don't pay your council tax. First a letter, then the bailiffs and police. If you continue to resist with force then expect to be met with armed thugs in paramilitary uniform. You can't opt out of payment to the state. Resistance is futile. The real liberal
  • Score: 3

10:35am Fri 13 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

bambara wrote:
Red rose lad wrote:
Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
Ah personnal insult, smear and unsubstantiated allegations.
The stock in trade of the right wing.

I have NO links of any kind to any Darlington councilor.
I am NOT a member of any political party.
I am NOT on benefits of any kind.
I do NOT work in the public sector.

Now for some additional points

Darlington council had budget cuts of 19.9% imposed on it from central government from 2010/11 to 2013/14.
It is predicted that Government grant will reduce by a further £24m by 2020 in addition to the £13.9m already lost since 2010.

A net Tory cut of £38 million pounds a year in a budget of approx £100 million. So in 10 years rather than increasing with inflation (At say 2% per year compound) to £120 million the budget that Darlington will have to provide all the services will have been cut to £62 million. Approximately halved in real terms.

The Council’s main sources of income are Council Tax and Business Rates. The ability to increase income to protect services and mitigate the damage done by these Tory cuts is limited by the Government. The Council may only increase tax by 2% each year unless a public referendum is held. The level of business rates is set by the Government, and the council has no control over that.

Now compare that to the equivalent cuts impossed on Tory areas, which amount to approximately 10% of the above. That is correct the cuts imposed on Darlington are 10 times as severe as those imposed on Tory councils.

Assuming the Tories were to again be elected (perish the thought) in 2015 the cumulative effect on Darlington council for 2010 to 2020 would be a cut of central government by 87%.

But hey that is fine because central government can use all that money to fund the overspend on the £20Billion pound high speed rail link vanity project that will cut 20 minutes off the journey from London to Birmingham.
So your beef is with the way the cuts have been apportioned.
Well what is fair ?
The North East has been taking more than its fair share of money from the producers in the South under successive Governments in order to retain/capture votes. I could tell you some stories of where all that money went.

You would be quite content for the money to be flowing into our coffers and not those of the Southern 'Tory Shires' as you call them, but why should they be subsidising the North ?

Its Just more welfare. More grabbing. More 'we deserve' more than they do.

Isn't this just a see saw ? Labour throwing money around like confetti to keep its voting base intact ? Aren't the Tories just reigning it in because we aren't a Tory stronghold ? If you were in the South then perhaps you would see it differently. The shoe would be on the other foot.

Our council should do whatever it takes to maintain services within their budget restrictions. That means finding innovative ways of working. Not spending money on boondoggles and self promotion. If that means cutting wages, working with other authorities, cutting heads then that's what they should do.

They signed up to do that job knowing what it was. They know political parties change, budgets and rules are altered. Instead of being political animals they need to provide the services they agreed to deliver. If you get a quote from a tradesmen then you expect to pay that price for the job. Its up to the tradesman to factor in price changes and disturbances. It isn't the customer fault if they haven't priced it correctly they just have to absorb the losses, by a cheaper car, don't go on holiday, eat bread and dripping. That's the real world.
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.[/p][/quote]Ah personnal insult, smear and unsubstantiated allegations. The stock in trade of the right wing. I have NO links of any kind to any Darlington councilor. I am NOT a member of any political party. I am NOT on benefits of any kind. I do NOT work in the public sector. Now for some additional points Darlington council had budget cuts of 19.9% imposed on it from central government from 2010/11 to 2013/14. It is predicted that Government grant will reduce by a further £24m by 2020 in addition to the £13.9m already lost since 2010. A net Tory cut of £38 million pounds a year in a budget of approx £100 million. So in 10 years rather than increasing with inflation (At say 2% per year compound) to £120 million the budget that Darlington will have to provide all the services will have been cut to £62 million. Approximately halved in real terms. The Council’s main sources of income are Council Tax and Business Rates. The ability to increase income to protect services and mitigate the damage done by these Tory cuts is limited by the Government. The Council may only increase tax by 2% each year unless a public referendum is held. The level of business rates is set by the Government, and the council has no control over that. Now compare that to the equivalent cuts impossed on Tory areas, which amount to approximately 10% of the above. That is correct the cuts imposed on Darlington are 10 times as severe as those imposed on Tory councils. Assuming the Tories were to again be elected (perish the thought) in 2015 the cumulative effect on Darlington council for 2010 to 2020 would be a cut of central government by 87%. But hey that is fine because central government can use all that money to fund the overspend on the £20Billion pound high speed rail link vanity project that will cut 20 minutes off the journey from London to Birmingham.[/p][/quote]So your beef is with the way the cuts have been apportioned. Well what is fair ? The North East has been taking more than its fair share of money from the producers in the South under successive Governments in order to retain/capture votes. I could tell you some stories of where all that money went. You would be quite content for the money to be flowing into our coffers and not those of the Southern 'Tory Shires' as you call them, but why should they be subsidising the North ? Its Just more welfare. More grabbing. More 'we deserve' more than they do. Isn't this just a see saw ? Labour throwing money around like confetti to keep its voting base intact ? Aren't the Tories just reigning it in because we aren't a Tory stronghold ? If you were in the South then perhaps you would see it differently. The shoe would be on the other foot. Our council should do whatever it takes to maintain services within their budget restrictions. That means finding innovative ways of working. Not spending money on boondoggles and self promotion. If that means cutting wages, working with other authorities, cutting heads then that's what they should do. They signed up to do that job knowing what it was. They know political parties change, budgets and rules are altered. Instead of being political animals they need to provide the services they agreed to deliver. If you get a quote from a tradesmen then you expect to pay that price for the job. Its up to the tradesman to factor in price changes and disturbances. It isn't the customer fault if they haven't priced it correctly they just have to absorb the losses, by a cheaper car, don't go on holiday, eat bread and dripping. That's the real world. The real liberal
  • Score: -1

11:36am Fri 13 Jun 14

David Lacey says...

I don't know who you are or where you've come from "Real Liberal" but you've brought a much needed dose of common sense onto a column heavily dominated by left wing whingers. The facts are as you've stated. The North East has wallowed in public money for years - money generated in the wealth creating private sector led south. Cuts are irrelevant. What you have available to spend is what matters. And the truth is this region is still a fat cat in terms of central grant and council tax collected. Just look at the huge reserves they've accumulated and refuse to dip into.
.
One day the penny might drop. But don't bet on it.
I don't know who you are or where you've come from "Real Liberal" but you've brought a much needed dose of common sense onto a column heavily dominated by left wing whingers. The facts are as you've stated. The North East has wallowed in public money for years - money generated in the wealth creating private sector led south. Cuts are irrelevant. What you have available to spend is what matters. And the truth is this region is still a fat cat in terms of central grant and council tax collected. Just look at the huge reserves they've accumulated and refuse to dip into. . One day the penny might drop. But don't bet on it. David Lacey
  • Score: -2

1:50pm Fri 13 Jun 14

bambara says...

Thank you for that David & TRL.

You have just both confirmed that the assertion of David Cameron that "We are all in it together" was just another pack of right wing propaganda.

The central funding portion of the council budget existed to support those areas which have a greater number of Pensioners, Disabled, Children and those on low income. (I use the past tense as a cut of 87% means it effectively no longer exists)
It was there to help provide the services that the council are required to provide for everyone including those with greater need.

As you have pointed out, the Tory policy is that councils that have a higher proportion of those in greater need should as a result now receive a lower level of funding than those with fewer people in need.
From this we can see that Tory policy is that services should only be provided to and for the rich.
Right wing policy is that the old, sick, poor and children, should bear the highest burden of the cuts required to pay for the expense of bailing out the banks.

I think we are clear on that, protect the incomes and standard of living of the 1% at the expense of the weakest in society.

Another sociopathic policy brought to you by the nasty party.
Thank you for that David & TRL. You have just both confirmed that the assertion of David Cameron that "We are all in it together" was just another pack of right wing propaganda. The central funding portion of the council budget existed to support those areas which have a greater number of Pensioners, Disabled, Children and those on low income. (I use the past tense as a cut of 87% means it effectively no longer exists) It was there to help provide the services that the council are required to provide for everyone including those with greater need. As you have pointed out, the Tory policy is that councils that have a higher proportion of those in greater need should as a result now receive a lower level of funding than those with fewer people in need. From this we can see that Tory policy is that services should only be provided to and for the rich. Right wing policy is that the old, sick, poor and children, should bear the highest burden of the cuts required to pay for the expense of bailing out the banks. I think we are clear on that, protect the incomes and standard of living of the 1% at the expense of the weakest in society. Another sociopathic policy brought to you by the nasty party. bambara
  • Score: -1

1:53pm Fri 13 Jun 14

DarloXman says...

Jonn wrote:
I know this Council are cr@p but do you know anyone who is happy with their Council? Isn't this an ideal opportunity for people to support David Camerons Big Society?
People of the right wing persuasion desire a shrinking state, less interference from Government and Councils yet when given the opportunity, they complain that it's the Councils job.
My streets residents pick up rubbish, weed and keep it tidy.
Get out there right wingers and start practicing your ideology.
I'm not of the Left or Right persuasion so a critic of them both.

I am someone who never knowingly drops litter, frequently picks up litter on my estate, regularly cuts the grass next to my property despite this being on the councils maintenance schedule and I have also recently filled in a pot hole on the street in front of my house with a bag of tarmac I bought myself!

Like "the real Liberal' says - I've already paid for this service - that is what upsets me - that I am paying for something that I am not getting! What would I do with any other regular contract I had if I was not getting the service - I would stop paying! If Virginmedia stopped transmitting then I would cancel my direct debit! As also pointed out I don't have any option with council tax - I just have to continue to pay the Sheriff of Nottingham or his henchmen will come round and knock my front door down!.

I suggest this is a deliberate political act of the Labour Council to try and blame the Coalition for their cut in funding - they are deliberately trying to upset as many of the residents as possible - and I suspect they will succeed! I just hope most see through this pathetic scam and vote appropriately at the next opportunity! How I hope for a Robin Hood to stand - he would have my vote tomorrow!
[quote][p][bold]Jonn[/bold] wrote: I know this Council are cr@p but do you know anyone who is happy with their Council? Isn't this an ideal opportunity for people to support David Camerons Big Society? People of the right wing persuasion desire a shrinking state, less interference from Government and Councils yet when given the opportunity, they complain that it's the Councils job. My streets residents pick up rubbish, weed and keep it tidy. Get out there right wingers and start practicing your ideology.[/p][/quote]I'm not of the Left or Right persuasion so a critic of them both. I am someone who never knowingly drops litter, frequently picks up litter on my estate, regularly cuts the grass next to my property despite this being on the councils maintenance schedule and I have also recently filled in a pot hole on the street in front of my house with a bag of tarmac I bought myself! Like "the real Liberal' says - I've already paid for this service - that is what upsets me - that I am paying for something that I am not getting! What would I do with any other regular contract I had if I was not getting the service - I would stop paying! If Virginmedia stopped transmitting then I would cancel my direct debit! As also pointed out I don't have any option with council tax - I just have to continue to pay the Sheriff of Nottingham or his henchmen will come round and knock my front door down!. I suggest this is a deliberate political act of the Labour Council to try and blame the Coalition for their cut in funding - they are deliberately trying to upset as many of the residents as possible - and I suspect they will succeed! I just hope most see through this pathetic scam and vote appropriately at the next opportunity! How I hope for a Robin Hood to stand - he would have my vote tomorrow! DarloXman
  • Score: 0

2:05pm Fri 13 Jun 14

David Lacey says...

Bambi - I honestly think that you have lost your last penker. None of your assertions are backed up by verifiable figures. They are simply Labour propaganda. But here's one for you to mull over. Should Labour win next May (and the system gives them a flying start) do you believe that a single "cut" will be reversed? Try turning on that dormant part of your brain (the bit where sensible thoughts are kept) and be truthful.
Bambi - I honestly think that you have lost your last penker. None of your assertions are backed up by verifiable figures. They are simply Labour propaganda. But here's one for you to mull over. Should Labour win next May (and the system gives them a flying start) do you believe that a single "cut" will be reversed? Try turning on that dormant part of your brain (the bit where sensible thoughts are kept) and be truthful. David Lacey
  • Score: -1

2:14pm Fri 13 Jun 14

bambara says...

Note the South East receives (per head of population) an investment in transport infrastructure of 20 times the amount that the North East gets.
The South East receives per head of population
A similar huge disparity exists in arts funding between the North East and the South East (more like 15:1 than 20:1 in the case of Arts and culture)

If the NE were to receive a similar investment in infrastructure (per head of population) to the investment in the SE, approx £5 billion pounds more would be invested in the NE.

Who is funding who again?
Note the South East receives (per head of population) an investment in transport infrastructure of 20 times the amount that the North East gets. The South East receives per head of population A similar huge disparity exists in arts funding between the North East and the South East (more like 15:1 than 20:1 in the case of Arts and culture) If the NE were to receive a similar investment in infrastructure (per head of population) to the investment in the SE, approx £5 billion pounds more would be invested in the NE. Who is funding who again? bambara
  • Score: 1

2:30pm Fri 13 Jun 14

bambara says...

David Lacey wrote:
Bambi - I honestly think that you have lost your last penker. None of your assertions are backed up by verifiable figures. They are simply Labour propaganda. But here's one for you to mull over. Should Labour win next May (and the system gives them a flying start) do you believe that a single "cut" will be reversed? Try turning on that dormant part of your brain (the bit where sensible thoughts are kept) and be truthful.
David you should know by now that every time I quote a figure it is backed by reports by the ONS, or from other sources.
I gave a link earlier which gives details of the Darlington council budget.
The population demographics I refer to are available from the ONS.

Will Labour reverse the cuts? Will they reverse the unequal changes to the funding formula?
I rather think that the funding formula which has seen the most deprived areas hit with cuts 10 times as severe as the most affluent areas will have to be re-assessed.
Even the governor of the bank of England has highlighted the widening equality gap as being a problem that has to be addressed.
The £1.162 Trillion hole in the public finances created by needing to bail out the banks very largely benefited the South of England. The South is where those banks and the bankers are based. The south needs to at least share in the pain of the cuts that have been imposed to stop that hole getting any bigger.
[quote][p][bold]David Lacey[/bold] wrote: Bambi - I honestly think that you have lost your last penker. None of your assertions are backed up by verifiable figures. They are simply Labour propaganda. But here's one for you to mull over. Should Labour win next May (and the system gives them a flying start) do you believe that a single "cut" will be reversed? Try turning on that dormant part of your brain (the bit where sensible thoughts are kept) and be truthful.[/p][/quote]David you should know by now that every time I quote a figure it is backed by reports by the ONS, or from other sources. I gave a link earlier which gives details of the Darlington council budget. The population demographics I refer to are available from the ONS. Will Labour reverse the cuts? Will they reverse the unequal changes to the funding formula? I rather think that the funding formula which has seen the most deprived areas hit with cuts 10 times as severe as the most affluent areas will have to be re-assessed. Even the governor of the bank of England has highlighted the widening equality gap as being a problem that has to be addressed. The £1.162 Trillion hole in the public finances created by needing to bail out the banks very largely benefited the South of England. The South is where those banks and the bankers are based. The south needs to at least share in the pain of the cuts that have been imposed to stop that hole getting any bigger. bambara
  • Score: 4

3:58pm Fri 13 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

bambara wrote:
Thank you for that David & TRL.

You have just both confirmed that the assertion of David Cameron that "We are all in it together" was just another pack of right wing propaganda.

The central funding portion of the council budget existed to support those areas which have a greater number of Pensioners, Disabled, Children and those on low income. (I use the past tense as a cut of 87% means it effectively no longer exists)
It was there to help provide the services that the council are required to provide for everyone including those with greater need.

As you have pointed out, the Tory policy is that councils that have a higher proportion of those in greater need should as a result now receive a lower level of funding than those with fewer people in need.
From this we can see that Tory policy is that services should only be provided to and for the rich.
Right wing policy is that the old, sick, poor and children, should bear the highest burden of the cuts required to pay for the expense of bailing out the banks.

I think we are clear on that, protect the incomes and standard of living of the 1% at the expense of the weakest in society.

Another sociopathic policy brought to you by the nasty party.
I don't know who 'the right wing" is. I don't listen to the rubbish that comes out of the gobs of politicians. I already know who they are in it for......themselves.
To me they all look exactly the same.

The problem with welfare is its a self perpetuating policy. It constantly erodes people's ability to support themselves by destroying low paid jobs and raising prices through inflation which makes low paid jobs ever less attractive. More Government destroys wealth its as simple as that. The more welfare is paid the more dependent people become and the worse the life decisions are that they make. That applies to bankers bailouts just as it does to everyone else.

I'm not in the habit of scapegoating those who through no fault of there own cannot work, or even those that have been conned by the state into ever increasing dependency. However wanting more of the same medicine is insane.

We paid for the bailouts.....but who was it that gave the banks a bailout. It was Labour. Who was it who presided over the repeal of banking regulations pushing private borrowing to record levels whilst creating the housing bubble ? It was Labour. Who sold all the Gold off cheap....it was Labour. Who presided over QE .....Labour.

I'm not going to give Cameron any points either. He and his government have failed to tackle the deficit or the spending beyond some mild cuts. They have done nothing about the artificially low interest rates which have driven prices up and created more asset bubbles than its possible to count.

Labour promised nothing different. Indeed they promised tougher cuts than the ones the coalition have actually delivered.

The Conservatives are as left as labour are right. Blair and Brown were as much in bed with bankers and crony capitalists as Cameron is. That's why Miliband never asks the hard questions.

I think you will find the very rich generally provide their own services and pay the greatest proportion of the tax income to the revenue.
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: Thank you for that David & TRL. You have just both confirmed that the assertion of David Cameron that "We are all in it together" was just another pack of right wing propaganda. The central funding portion of the council budget existed to support those areas which have a greater number of Pensioners, Disabled, Children and those on low income. (I use the past tense as a cut of 87% means it effectively no longer exists) It was there to help provide the services that the council are required to provide for everyone including those with greater need. As you have pointed out, the Tory policy is that councils that have a higher proportion of those in greater need should as a result now receive a lower level of funding than those with fewer people in need. From this we can see that Tory policy is that services should only be provided to and for the rich. Right wing policy is that the old, sick, poor and children, should bear the highest burden of the cuts required to pay for the expense of bailing out the banks. I think we are clear on that, protect the incomes and standard of living of the 1% at the expense of the weakest in society. Another sociopathic policy brought to you by the nasty party.[/p][/quote]I don't know who 'the right wing" is. I don't listen to the rubbish that comes out of the gobs of politicians. I already know who they are in it for......themselves. To me they all look exactly the same. The problem with welfare is its a self perpetuating policy. It constantly erodes people's ability to support themselves by destroying low paid jobs and raising prices through inflation which makes low paid jobs ever less attractive. More Government destroys wealth its as simple as that. The more welfare is paid the more dependent people become and the worse the life decisions are that they make. That applies to bankers bailouts just as it does to everyone else. I'm not in the habit of scapegoating those who through no fault of there own cannot work, or even those that have been conned by the state into ever increasing dependency. However wanting more of the same medicine is insane. We paid for the bailouts.....but who was it that gave the banks a bailout. It was Labour. Who was it who presided over the repeal of banking regulations pushing private borrowing to record levels whilst creating the housing bubble ? It was Labour. Who sold all the Gold off cheap....it was Labour. Who presided over QE .....Labour. I'm not going to give Cameron any points either. He and his government have failed to tackle the deficit or the spending beyond some mild cuts. They have done nothing about the artificially low interest rates which have driven prices up and created more asset bubbles than its possible to count. Labour promised nothing different. Indeed they promised tougher cuts than the ones the coalition have actually delivered. The Conservatives are as left as labour are right. Blair and Brown were as much in bed with bankers and crony capitalists as Cameron is. That's why Miliband never asks the hard questions. I think you will find the very rich generally provide their own services and pay the greatest proportion of the tax income to the revenue. The real liberal
  • Score: 2

6:24pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Red rose lad says...

bambara wrote:
Red rose lad wrote:
Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.
Ah personnal insult, smear and unsubstantiated allegations.
The stock in trade of the right wing.

I have NO links of any kind to any Darlington councilor.
I am NOT a member of any political party.
I am NOT on benefits of any kind.
I do NOT work in the public sector.

Now for some additional points

Darlington council had budget cuts of 19.9% imposed on it from central government from 2010/11 to 2013/14.
It is predicted that Government grant will reduce by a further £24m by 2020 in addition to the £13.9m already lost since 2010.

A net Tory cut of £38 million pounds a year in a budget of approx £100 million. So in 10 years rather than increasing with inflation (At say 2% per year compound) to £120 million the budget that Darlington will have to provide all the services will have been cut to £62 million. Approximately halved in real terms.

The Council’s main sources of income are Council Tax and Business Rates. The ability to increase income to protect services and mitigate the damage done by these Tory cuts is limited by the Government. The Council may only increase tax by 2% each year unless a public referendum is held. The level of business rates is set by the Government, and the council has no control over that.

Now compare that to the equivalent cuts impossed on Tory areas, which amount to approximately 10% of the above. That is correct the cuts imposed on Darlington are 10 times as severe as those imposed on Tory councils.

Assuming the Tories were to again be elected (perish the thought) in 2015 the cumulative effect on Darlington council for 2010 to 2020 would be a cut of central government by 87%.

But hey that is fine because central government can use all that money to fund the overspend on the £20Billion pound high speed rail link vanity project that will cut 20 minutes off the journey from London to Birmingham.
Please accept my apologies Bambi. I didn't think that a little verbal jousting would leave you mortally wounded. It's difficult when communicating in writing to sense when someone in Uber Sensitive. I'll bear it in mind in future. There was no smear or insult intended. Not sure what you meant by the unsubstantiated allegation bit. I was flippantly trying to point out that it seems that you'd defend this council even if they tipped your rubbish over your car every week. Perceived insults and wiki-fuelled percentage quotes apart (deflection me thinks) I take it then that you agree with their allocation of the funding they receive? Are car parks, roundabouts, throughbouts etc what this town needs most, when as you so lengthily point out, council funding is dwindling?
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Red rose lad[/bold] wrote: Are you Bill and Ada's love child Bambi? Citizens may have sympathy for the budget cut stuff if the top heavy overpaid council execs weren't blowing what money they do get on madcap schemes. They can't be trusted with more money. It's way past time for a change. If there was only enough money for 30 people in the council, you'd still have the same number of directors. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.[/p][/quote]Ah personnal insult, smear and unsubstantiated allegations. The stock in trade of the right wing. I have NO links of any kind to any Darlington councilor. I am NOT a member of any political party. I am NOT on benefits of any kind. I do NOT work in the public sector. Now for some additional points Darlington council had budget cuts of 19.9% imposed on it from central government from 2010/11 to 2013/14. It is predicted that Government grant will reduce by a further £24m by 2020 in addition to the £13.9m already lost since 2010. A net Tory cut of £38 million pounds a year in a budget of approx £100 million. So in 10 years rather than increasing with inflation (At say 2% per year compound) to £120 million the budget that Darlington will have to provide all the services will have been cut to £62 million. Approximately halved in real terms. The Council’s main sources of income are Council Tax and Business Rates. The ability to increase income to protect services and mitigate the damage done by these Tory cuts is limited by the Government. The Council may only increase tax by 2% each year unless a public referendum is held. The level of business rates is set by the Government, and the council has no control over that. Now compare that to the equivalent cuts impossed on Tory areas, which amount to approximately 10% of the above. That is correct the cuts imposed on Darlington are 10 times as severe as those imposed on Tory councils. Assuming the Tories were to again be elected (perish the thought) in 2015 the cumulative effect on Darlington council for 2010 to 2020 would be a cut of central government by 87%. But hey that is fine because central government can use all that money to fund the overspend on the £20Billion pound high speed rail link vanity project that will cut 20 minutes off the journey from London to Birmingham.[/p][/quote]Please accept my apologies Bambi. I didn't think that a little verbal jousting would leave you mortally wounded. It's difficult when communicating in writing to sense when someone in Uber Sensitive. I'll bear it in mind in future. There was no smear or insult intended. Not sure what you meant by the unsubstantiated allegation bit. I was flippantly trying to point out that it seems that you'd defend this council even if they tipped your rubbish over your car every week. Perceived insults and wiki-fuelled percentage quotes apart (deflection me thinks) I take it then that you agree with their allocation of the funding they receive? Are car parks, roundabouts, throughbouts etc what this town needs most, when as you so lengthily point out, council funding is dwindling? Red rose lad
  • Score: -2

8:14pm Fri 13 Jun 14

K. Richardson says...

I can't understand why you guys give any credence to bambi's posts. It's just indoctrinated spin and 'statistics' every time. A more cynical man would think he/she/it is a public sector lackey or, worse, a MP.
I can't understand why you guys give any credence to bambi's posts. It's just indoctrinated spin and 'statistics' every time. A more cynical man would think he/she/it is a public sector lackey or, worse, a MP. K. Richardson
  • Score: 0

9:13pm Fri 13 Jun 14

Red rose lad says...

You have to admire the sheer bloody-mindedness in ignoring the record and actions of this Council and keep on trotting-out the same old dogma and statistics. I'm tempted to bring up that old quote about Lies, damned lies and statistics but the pedants would be Googling all night to challenge it's validity or origin. If you keep following blindly without questioning or challenging failings or wrondoing, then you deserve all you get. The cuts always happen at the coalface and not the level of the self-serving fat cats at the top. Every other service is Durham and Darlington - NHS, Police, Fire. When it comes to sharing services, these clowns pretend to investigate whether they could share services with Hartlepool, knowing full well that they aren't going to do it. Sorry, they do share some printing service with Stockton I seem to remember. Really though , whose interests are they serving?
You have to admire the sheer bloody-mindedness in ignoring the record and actions of this Council and keep on trotting-out the same old dogma and statistics. I'm tempted to bring up that old quote about Lies, damned lies and statistics but the pedants would be Googling all night to challenge it's validity or origin. If you keep following blindly without questioning or challenging failings or wrondoing, then you deserve all you get. The cuts always happen at the coalface and not the level of the self-serving fat cats at the top. Every other service is Durham and Darlington - NHS, Police, Fire. When it comes to sharing services, these clowns pretend to investigate whether they could share services with Hartlepool, knowing full well that they aren't going to do it. Sorry, they do share some printing service with Stockton I seem to remember. Really though , whose interests are they serving? Red rose lad
  • Score: -1

2:07pm Sat 14 Jun 14

LUSTARD says...

The real liberal wrote:
bambara wrote:
Thank you for that David & TRL.

You have just both confirmed that the assertion of David Cameron that "We are all in it together" was just another pack of right wing propaganda.

The central funding portion of the council budget existed to support those areas which have a greater number of Pensioners, Disabled, Children and those on low income. (I use the past tense as a cut of 87% means it effectively no longer exists)
It was there to help provide the services that the council are required to provide for everyone including those with greater need.

As you have pointed out, the Tory policy is that councils that have a higher proportion of those in greater need should as a result now receive a lower level of funding than those with fewer people in need.
From this we can see that Tory policy is that services should only be provided to and for the rich.
Right wing policy is that the old, sick, poor and children, should bear the highest burden of the cuts required to pay for the expense of bailing out the banks.

I think we are clear on that, protect the incomes and standard of living of the 1% at the expense of the weakest in society.

Another sociopathic policy brought to you by the nasty party.
I don't know who 'the right wing" is. I don't listen to the rubbish that comes out of the gobs of politicians. I already know who they are in it for......themselves.
To me they all look exactly the same.

The problem with welfare is its a self perpetuating policy. It constantly erodes people's ability to support themselves by destroying low paid jobs and raising prices through inflation which makes low paid jobs ever less attractive. More Government destroys wealth its as simple as that. The more welfare is paid the more dependent people become and the worse the life decisions are that they make. That applies to bankers bailouts just as it does to everyone else.

I'm not in the habit of scapegoating those who through no fault of there own cannot work, or even those that have been conned by the state into ever increasing dependency. However wanting more of the same medicine is insane.

We paid for the bailouts.....but who was it that gave the banks a bailout. It was Labour. Who was it who presided over the repeal of banking regulations pushing private borrowing to record levels whilst creating the housing bubble ? It was Labour. Who sold all the Gold off cheap....it was Labour. Who presided over QE .....Labour.

I'm not going to give Cameron any points either. He and his government have failed to tackle the deficit or the spending beyond some mild cuts. They have done nothing about the artificially low interest rates which have driven prices up and created more asset bubbles than its possible to count.

Labour promised nothing different. Indeed they promised tougher cuts than the ones the coalition have actually delivered.

The Conservatives are as left as labour are right. Blair and Brown were as much in bed with bankers and crony capitalists as Cameron is. That's why Miliband never asks the hard questions.

I think you will find the very rich generally provide their own services and pay the greatest proportion of the tax income to the revenue.
here here
[quote][p][bold]The real liberal[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: Thank you for that David & TRL. You have just both confirmed that the assertion of David Cameron that "We are all in it together" was just another pack of right wing propaganda. The central funding portion of the council budget existed to support those areas which have a greater number of Pensioners, Disabled, Children and those on low income. (I use the past tense as a cut of 87% means it effectively no longer exists) It was there to help provide the services that the council are required to provide for everyone including those with greater need. As you have pointed out, the Tory policy is that councils that have a higher proportion of those in greater need should as a result now receive a lower level of funding than those with fewer people in need. From this we can see that Tory policy is that services should only be provided to and for the rich. Right wing policy is that the old, sick, poor and children, should bear the highest burden of the cuts required to pay for the expense of bailing out the banks. I think we are clear on that, protect the incomes and standard of living of the 1% at the expense of the weakest in society. Another sociopathic policy brought to you by the nasty party.[/p][/quote]I don't know who 'the right wing" is. I don't listen to the rubbish that comes out of the gobs of politicians. I already know who they are in it for......themselves. To me they all look exactly the same. The problem with welfare is its a self perpetuating policy. It constantly erodes people's ability to support themselves by destroying low paid jobs and raising prices through inflation which makes low paid jobs ever less attractive. More Government destroys wealth its as simple as that. The more welfare is paid the more dependent people become and the worse the life decisions are that they make. That applies to bankers bailouts just as it does to everyone else. I'm not in the habit of scapegoating those who through no fault of there own cannot work, or even those that have been conned by the state into ever increasing dependency. However wanting more of the same medicine is insane. We paid for the bailouts.....but who was it that gave the banks a bailout. It was Labour. Who was it who presided over the repeal of banking regulations pushing private borrowing to record levels whilst creating the housing bubble ? It was Labour. Who sold all the Gold off cheap....it was Labour. Who presided over QE .....Labour. I'm not going to give Cameron any points either. He and his government have failed to tackle the deficit or the spending beyond some mild cuts. They have done nothing about the artificially low interest rates which have driven prices up and created more asset bubbles than its possible to count. Labour promised nothing different. Indeed they promised tougher cuts than the ones the coalition have actually delivered. The Conservatives are as left as labour are right. Blair and Brown were as much in bed with bankers and crony capitalists as Cameron is. That's why Miliband never asks the hard questions. I think you will find the very rich generally provide their own services and pay the greatest proportion of the tax income to the revenue.[/p][/quote]here here LUSTARD
  • Score: -2

3:40pm Sat 14 Jun 14

bambara says...

Try this for size : Figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies showing the spending of local government:
(http://www.ifs.org.
uk/budgets/gb2012/12
chap6.pdf)

43% - Education
20% - Social Care
12% - Policing
6% - Transport
etc... (Check the PDF, an easy to follow pie chart shows what councils spend money on)

Since 2010 - The Tory central government have cut the total funding available to Darlington council by 25%.

So Darlington now have a total of 75% of the funding they had in 2010, bills have gone up but they have less money.

Just looking at the core elements from the pie chart,
Education 43%,
Social Care 20%
Policing 12%

OK 25% cut, everything else would have to go.

Now by 2020 under current Tory plans the total cut is 50%, you can have Education plus approximately half as many police and nothing else.

So tell me how do you expect the council to make 50% efficiency cuts?
You could cut Bill and Ada's salaries, plus the entire finance and council tax collection service, all of the back office workers, and admin staff and it would reduce costs by a total of 4%, that leaves 21% of cuts to be made just to get to where we are today, and another 25% in the next 5 years.

On the other hand you could compare this to an affluent Tory council where the Total cuts for the 10 year Tory plan will be 5-10% (Total for the entire 10 year term.)

And NOTE these are official figures I am quoting, what figures are the right wing mouthpieces on here quoting? They are not quoting any figures at all. They can't quote any, because ALL the figures show that what I am saying is the truth.

On one side of the argument, the statements are backed by official figures and reports. On the other all that you get are propaganda statements with nothing but hot air to support them.
Try this for size : Figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies showing the spending of local government: (http://www.ifs.org. uk/budgets/gb2012/12 chap6.pdf) 43% - Education 20% - Social Care 12% - Policing 6% - Transport etc... (Check the PDF, an easy to follow pie chart shows what councils spend money on) Since 2010 - The Tory central government have cut the total funding available to Darlington council by 25%. So Darlington now have a total of 75% of the funding they had in 2010, bills have gone up but they have less money. Just looking at the core elements from the pie chart, Education 43%, Social Care 20% Policing 12% OK 25% cut, everything else would have to go. Now by 2020 under current Tory plans the total cut is 50%, you can have Education plus approximately half as many police and nothing else. So tell me how do you expect the council to make 50% efficiency cuts? You could cut Bill and Ada's salaries, plus the entire finance and council tax collection service, all of the back office workers, and admin staff and it would reduce costs by a total of 4%, that leaves 21% of cuts to be made just to get to where we are today, and another 25% in the next 5 years. On the other hand you could compare this to an affluent Tory council where the Total cuts for the 10 year Tory plan will be 5-10% (Total for the entire 10 year term.) And NOTE these are official figures I am quoting, what figures are the right wing mouthpieces on here quoting? They are not quoting any figures at all. They can't quote any, because ALL the figures show that what I am saying is the truth. On one side of the argument, the statements are backed by official figures and reports. On the other all that you get are propaganda statements with nothing but hot air to support them. bambara
  • Score: 1

4:14pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Red rose lad says...

Thanks for the Maths lesson:
75% indoctrination
10% delusion
5% clutching at straws

Do you think they'll publish the outcome of the sharing services investigation? Have they looked to the logical direction and investigated sharing services with Durham? Yes or no will do. No pie charts or percentages required.
Thanks for the Maths lesson: 75% indoctrination 10% delusion 5% clutching at straws Do you think they'll publish the outcome of the sharing services investigation? Have they looked to the logical direction and investigated sharing services with Durham? Yes or no will do. No pie charts or percentages required. Red rose lad
  • Score: -2

4:18pm Sat 14 Jun 14

Red rose lad says...

PS Do you think the pedants will bite on the deliberate Maths error bait? LOL.
PS Do you think the pedants will bite on the deliberate Maths error bait? LOL. Red rose lad
  • Score: -1

5:47pm Sat 14 Jun 14

The real liberal says...

bambara wrote:
Try this for size : Figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies showing the spending of local government:
(http://www.ifs.org.

uk/budgets/gb2012/12

chap6.pdf)

43% - Education
20% - Social Care
12% - Policing
6% - Transport
etc... (Check the PDF, an easy to follow pie chart shows what councils spend money on)

Since 2010 - The Tory central government have cut the total funding available to Darlington council by 25%.

So Darlington now have a total of 75% of the funding they had in 2010, bills have gone up but they have less money.

Just looking at the core elements from the pie chart,
Education 43%,
Social Care 20%
Policing 12%

OK 25% cut, everything else would have to go.

Now by 2020 under current Tory plans the total cut is 50%, you can have Education plus approximately half as many police and nothing else.

So tell me how do you expect the council to make 50% efficiency cuts?
You could cut Bill and Ada's salaries, plus the entire finance and council tax collection service, all of the back office workers, and admin staff and it would reduce costs by a total of 4%, that leaves 21% of cuts to be made just to get to where we are today, and another 25% in the next 5 years.

On the other hand you could compare this to an affluent Tory council where the Total cuts for the 10 year Tory plan will be 5-10% (Total for the entire 10 year term.)

And NOTE these are official figures I am quoting, what figures are the right wing mouthpieces on here quoting? They are not quoting any figures at all. They can't quote any, because ALL the figures show that what I am saying is the truth.

On one side of the argument, the statements are backed by official figures and reports. On the other all that you get are propaganda statements with nothing but hot air to support them.
Debunked

http://webarchive.na
tionalarchives.gov.u
k/20120919132719/htt
p://www.communities.
gov.uk/documents/new
sroom/pdf/1904897.pd
f

Deprived areas received the most and rich Tory heartlands the least. In other words its a 'fair' distribution and not one based on the previous Labour largesse designed to get votes in its areas.

So of course those that were previously receiving higher than average funding are seen to have the greatest cuts.

So now that's been said then we can stop the complaining about the nasty Tories and the great North/South divide.

Greater budgets simply translate into greater dependency and an increased profligacy when it comes to spending.
[quote][p][bold]bambara[/bold] wrote: Try this for size : Figures from the Institute for Fiscal Studies showing the spending of local government: (http://www.ifs.org. uk/budgets/gb2012/12 chap6.pdf) 43% - Education 20% - Social Care 12% - Policing 6% - Transport etc... (Check the PDF, an easy to follow pie chart shows what councils spend money on) Since 2010 - The Tory central government have cut the total funding available to Darlington council by 25%. So Darlington now have a total of 75% of the funding they had in 2010, bills have gone up but they have less money. Just looking at the core elements from the pie chart, Education 43%, Social Care 20% Policing 12% OK 25% cut, everything else would have to go. Now by 2020 under current Tory plans the total cut is 50%, you can have Education plus approximately half as many police and nothing else. So tell me how do you expect the council to make 50% efficiency cuts? You could cut Bill and Ada's salaries, plus the entire finance and council tax collection service, all of the back office workers, and admin staff and it would reduce costs by a total of 4%, that leaves 21% of cuts to be made just to get to where we are today, and another 25% in the next 5 years. On the other hand you could compare this to an affluent Tory council where the Total cuts for the 10 year Tory plan will be 5-10% (Total for the entire 10 year term.) And NOTE these are official figures I am quoting, what figures are the right wing mouthpieces on here quoting? They are not quoting any figures at all. They can't quote any, because ALL the figures show that what I am saying is the truth. On one side of the argument, the statements are backed by official figures and reports. On the other all that you get are propaganda statements with nothing but hot air to support them.[/p][/quote]Debunked http://webarchive.na tionalarchives.gov.u k/20120919132719/htt p://www.communities. gov.uk/documents/new sroom/pdf/1904897.pd f Deprived areas received the most and rich Tory heartlands the least. In other words its a 'fair' distribution and not one based on the previous Labour largesse designed to get votes in its areas. So of course those that were previously receiving higher than average funding are seen to have the greatest cuts. So now that's been said then we can stop the complaining about the nasty Tories and the great North/South divide. Greater budgets simply translate into greater dependency and an increased profligacy when it comes to spending. The real liberal
  • Score: -3

10:31pm Sat 14 Jun 14

bambara says...

Firstly your map of raw spending by area is out of date. It is for 2011-12.

Secondly, what the map shows is that spending is higher in cities and deprived areas.
Simple reason for that deprived areas recieved additional funding to cover the additional needs of a larger numbers of elderly, the disabled, and those on low income. Local councils in these areas have a greater number of residents in receipt of rent rebate, council tax support, etc...
As you will see from your own map this is the case for the South West, and notably it can be seen in "gods waiting room" on the south coast.

From your own map the spending per head for County Durham is in the same bracket as for the Rural South West, the Rural North West and The south coast and Isle of Wight.

Since 2011-2012 County Durham recieved cuts to funding totaling approx 25% of the budget.

As county Durham (and Darlington) were in the £920 - £1050 per head category, a cut of 25% (assuming they were at the top end of that category) reduces the funding to approx £750 per head.
That cut reduces this area into the lowest funding category.
Indeed as categories on your map are approx £50 per head wide, and the lowest category is up to £830, it would place County Durham and Darlington in a new category below the lowest currently shown.
(£780-830, new category £730-780)

As already highlighted this is however not the end of the planned Tory cuts, further cuts have already been planned which would reduce the funding to Durham and Darlington to 50% of the original budgeted levels.

Durham and Darlington would fall from circa £1000 per head to £500 per head.

With each category in your map of £50 width, Durham and Darlingon would be in a category £500-£550,with a clear gap of £250-300 per head difference in funding below that for the Tory shires.

Debunked - I think not.
Firstly your map of raw spending by area is out of date. It is for 2011-12. Secondly, what the map shows is that spending is higher in cities and deprived areas. Simple reason for that deprived areas recieved additional funding to cover the additional needs of a larger numbers of elderly, the disabled, and those on low income. Local councils in these areas have a greater number of residents in receipt of rent rebate, council tax support, etc... As you will see from your own map this is the case for the South West, and notably it can be seen in "gods waiting room" on the south coast. From your own map the spending per head for County Durham is in the same bracket as for the Rural South West, the Rural North West and The south coast and Isle of Wight. Since 2011-2012 County Durham recieved cuts to funding totaling approx 25% of the budget. As county Durham (and Darlington) were in the £920 - £1050 per head category, a cut of 25% (assuming they were at the top end of that category) reduces the funding to approx £750 per head. That cut reduces this area into the lowest funding category. Indeed as categories on your map are approx £50 per head wide, and the lowest category is up to £830, it would place County Durham and Darlington in a new category below the lowest currently shown. (£780-830, new category £730-780) As already highlighted this is however not the end of the planned Tory cuts, further cuts have already been planned which would reduce the funding to Durham and Darlington to 50% of the original budgeted levels. Durham and Darlington would fall from circa £1000 per head to £500 per head. With each category in your map of £50 width, Durham and Darlingon would be in a category £500-£550,with a clear gap of £250-300 per head difference in funding below that for the Tory shires. Debunked - I think not. bambara
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree