Marple Community Forum & Noticeboard

Local Community => Local Issues => Topic started by: Dave on May 04, 2012, 02:21:58 PM

Title: Local election results
Post by: Dave on May 04, 2012, 02:21:58 PM
I see that both the incumbent LibDem candidates were returned with healthy majorities yesterday:

Marple North: M Candler 1700, A Finnie 1098.  Majority 602
Marple South: S Alexander 1906, C Rydings 906. Majority 1,000

Does anyone know how these majorities compare with last year? 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on May 04, 2012, 02:55:40 PM
The Marple South majority last year was 455, Marple North 381.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: alan@romiley on May 04, 2012, 04:36:03 PM
By my reckoning, both councillors have been returned "by the skin  of their teeth" if you compare the total votes cast for ALL the candidates and to %turnout at the polls.

My Rydings in my opinion could have done much better and probably would have ousted Mrs Alexander, with the "assistance" of the other candidates, had he made a concerted effort in Marple, perhaps he did not get the support he deserved from the Marple Conservatives. I do hope that he will bounce back next.

Dave Goddard, well what can one say? I hope he remembers that the Job centre might be closed next week!

And Mrs Derbyshire whew! what a close call for her, the deputy leader and just returned with a majority of 24

However that is democracy and I know many of you will be happy and no doubt many of the electorate will now feel that they really should have bothered and voted.

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=55&RPID=620081

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=56&RPID=620311
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 04, 2012, 04:43:50 PM
By my reckoning, both councillors have been returned "by the skin  of their teeth" if you compare the total votes cast for ALL the candidates and to %turnout at the polls.

My Rydings in my opinion could have done much better and probably would have ousted Mrs Alexander, with the "assistance" of the other candidates, had he made a concerted effort in Marple, perhaps he did not get the support he deserved from the Marple Conservatives. I do hope that he will bounce back next.

Dave Goddard, well what can one say? I hope he remembers that the Job centre might be closed next week!

And Mrs Derbyshire whew! what a close call for her, the deputy leader and just returned with a majority of 24

However that is democracy and I know many of you will be happy and no doubt many of the electorate will now feel that they really should have bothered and voted.

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=55&RPID=620081

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=56&RPID=620311


Fortunately, Stockport will not fall into Labour hands.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on May 04, 2012, 05:17:21 PM
By my reckoning, both councillors have been returned "by the skin  of their teeth" if you compare the total votes cast for ALL the candidates and to %turnout at the polls.

Hardly - according to Victor's figures from last year, they have both increased the Libdem majority handsomely! 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 04, 2012, 09:19:57 PM
By my reckoning, both councillors have been returned "by the skin  of their teeth" if you compare the total votes cast for ALL the candidates and to %turnout at the polls.

My Rydings in my opinion could have done much better and probably would have ousted Mrs Alexander, with the "assistance" of the other candidates, had he made a concerted effort in Marple, perhaps he did not get the support he deserved from the Marple Conservatives. I do hope that he will bounce back next.

Dave Goddard, well what can one say? I hope he remembers that the Job centre might be closed next week!

And Mrs Derbyshire whew! what a close call for her, the deputy leader and just returned with a majority of 24

However that is democracy and I know many of you will be happy and no doubt many of the electorate will now feel that they really should have bothered and voted.

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=55&RPID=620081

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=56&RPID=620311

I don't think that Mr Rydings could have ousted Mrs Alexander if he'd had Winston Churchill canvassing for him, Picasso putting up his posters and Shakespeare writing his leaflets. By the way there are no elections next year it is fallow year. Next elections 2014. Mr Rydings is indeed young enough to bounce back many times. However he will need to run a much better campaign than he did if he is to make a dent in the Libdem organisation in South Marple. Many of their 200+ activists/ members are getting on a bit now and perhaps his best hope is to wait until 2018 by which time many of them may have died , the town hall will have been Labour for 2/3 years and we will have been almost 3 yrs into the worst national (labour) government the country has ever seen. Even then I suspect Marple would still be LibDem.     
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 04, 2012, 09:25:45 PM
By my reckoning, both councillors have been returned "by the skin  of their teeth" if you compare the total votes cast for ALL the candidates and to %turnout at the polls.

My Rydings in my opinion could have done much better and probably would have ousted Mrs Alexander, with the "assistance" of the other candidates, had he made a concerted effort in Marple, perhaps he did not get the support he deserved from the Marple Conservatives. I do hope that he will bounce back next.

Dave Goddard, well what can one say? I hope he remembers that the Job centre might be closed next week!

And Mrs Derbyshire whew! what a close call for her, the deputy leader and just returned with a majority of 24

However that is democracy and I know many of you will be happy and no doubt many of the electorate will now feel that they really should have bothered and voted.

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=55&RPID=620081

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=56&RPID=620311


Fortunately, Stockport will not fall into Labour hands.



I am afraid it will. Possibly after 2014 elections  Labour will have gained enough seats, probably 5 from the LibDems and at least 2/3 from the Conservatives to give them at least majority party status.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 04, 2012, 09:56:51 PM
By my reckoning, both councillors have been returned "by the skin  of their teeth" if you compare the total votes cast for ALL the candidates and to %turnout at the polls.

Your "reckoning" is a little difficult agree with Alan.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 05, 2012, 08:37:42 AM
By my reckoning, both councillors have been returned "by the skin  of their teeth" if you compare the total votes cast for ALL the candidates and to %turnout at the polls.

My Rydings in my opinion could have done much better and probably would have ousted Mrs Alexander, with the "assistance" of the other candidates, had he made a concerted effort in Marple, perhaps he did not get the support he deserved from the Marple Conservatives. I do hope that he will bounce back next.

Dave Goddard, well what can one say? I hope he remembers that the Job centre might be closed next week!

And Mrs Derbyshire whew! what a close call for her, the deputy leader and just returned with a majority of 24

However that is democracy and I know many of you will be happy and no doubt many of the electorate will now feel that they really should have bothered and voted.

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?ID=55&RPID=620081

http://democracy.stockport.gov.uk/mgElectionAreaResults.aspx?XXR=0&ID=56&RPID=620311


Fortunately, Stockport will not fall into Labour hands.



I am afraid it will. Possibly after 2014 elections  Labour will have gained enough seats, probably 5 from the LibDems and at least 2/3 from the Conservatives to give them at least majority party status.


I don't see why, the national scene will have improved a little by then and nationally the likes if Ed Balls will be oiled as the lying toad he is. Where Labour has control of budgets we'll see council tax out of control and non collection problems leading to Liverpool & Sheffield style financial meltdowns in those towns and cities. Both lib Dems & Tories will fight back.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on May 05, 2012, 10:38:51 AM
the national scene will have improved a little by then

I wish I could be so optimistic, Duke. All the signs are that things are getting worse not better.  See, for example, http://www.ukrecession.com/2012/04/ (http://www.ukrecession.com/2012/04/), which is normally an objective and reliable source.  

When this government came to power two years ago, they inherited a very serious economic position, although a fairly weak recovery was at that time under way.  Since then everything Osborne has done has made it worse.  The recovery of early 2010 was well and truly snuffed out, and as a result the government has had to borrow billions more than it planned just to keep the show on the road.  Far from seeing any improvement by 2014, the target date for balancing the books has now slipped back from 2015 to 2017, two years after the next election.  And the really scary thing is, Osborne is lashed to the helm of this sinking ship - he can't change direction and stimulate growth, as the Americans have done so effectively, because that would spook the bond markets.  

I'm no admirer of Mr Balls either, but surely he couldn't make a bigger mess of it than this.   ::)
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 05, 2012, 12:03:09 PM
It doesn't really matter whether in reality things are better or worse. Even if they are better which is highly unlikely under the current Cameron/Clegg bumble, the media will portray it as worse.

Anyway, back to Stockport and the 2014, local elections... Labour will win, Offerton,Manor, Hazel Grove and Cheadle and Gatley from the  Libdems thus making them the majority party then the following year they will win Heatons north and the "people matters seat" thus making the Town Hall... Labour...game,set and match.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 05, 2012, 04:11:06 PM
the national scene will have improved a little by then

I wish I could be so optimistic, Duke. All the signs are that things are getting worse not better.  See, for example, http://www.ukrecession.com/2012/04/ (http://www.ukrecession.com/2012/04/), which is normally an objective and reliable source.  

When this government came to power two years ago, they inherited a very serious economic position, although a fairly weak recovery was at that time under way.  Since then everything Osborne has done has made it worse.  The recovery of early 2010 was well and truly snuffed out, and as a result the government has had to borrow billions more than it planned just to keep the show on the road.  Far from seeing any improvement by 2014, the target date for balancing the books has now slipped back from 2015 to 2017, two years after the next election.  And the really scary thing is, Osborne is lashed to the helm of this sinking ship - he can't change direction and stimulate growth, as the Americans have done so effectively, because that would spook the bond markets.  

I'm no admirer of Mr Balls either, but surely he couldn't make a bigger mess of it than this.   ::)


The recovery you mention has been non-existent, over time, we'll see a graph with a massive drop and then in reality, flat-lining for 5 years and slow recovery. We will not get to the growth and consumption of the naughties for many decades to come, as we know with hindsight, that was a phoney boom and always doomed to fail, the fact it went so long without catastrophe just meant that the catastrophe would be harder felt in the end.  Even A' level economics tells you that there is something wrong when growth was expanding in the 00's but trade deficits were worsening that the growth must only be based on an increase in Money supply or cheap imports, with no attempt at making the county's output more efficient (in fact quite the opposite) then failure was the only logical conclusion.

Osbourne hasn't put a foot wrong from an economic POV. Even the own goals politically have been correct. The realigning of the tax thresholds for everyone was spot on but spun as an attack on the retired, politically he should have made it far clearer but it was the right thing to do. The 50% rate cut was politically daft but we should remember that income tax isn't supposed to be a penalty for doing well, it's supposed to fund state activity and the aim is to get the optimum amount for the treasury.

The alternative put forward by Balls is a disaster. His solution of keeping the spending high in prder to keep people in public service jobs will do absolutely nothing to help the economy long-term. It's akin to the flash Harry who had a great job, flash house & motor who finds himself out of work; unprepared to lose-face, he borrows to keep his lifestyle to appear cool infront of his peers but ends up absolutely powerless to stop the bankruptcy which follows.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 05, 2012, 04:17:06 PM
It doesn't really matter whether in reality things are better or worse. Even if they are better which is highly unlikely under the current Cameron/Clegg bumble, the media will portray it as worse.

Anyway, back to Stockport and the 2014, local elections... Labour will win, Offerton,Manor, Hazel Grove and Cheadle and Gatley from the  Libdems thus making them the majority party then the following year they will win Heatons north and the "people matters seat" thus making the Town Hall... Labour...game,set and match.

There is a certain truth in that. Northern people have a tendency to feel hard done to and turn towards Labour and Labour like to keep their people at the bottom and without ambition in order to keep them grovelling. I think in fairness, Stockport folk are a little more ambitions than Mancs, Scousers and dare I say it (as it's where my roots are) Geordies and I don't think there will be the race to the bottom of the barrel here.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 05, 2012, 05:34:50 PM
It doesn't really matter whether in reality things are better or worse. Even if they are better which is highly unlikely under the current Cameron/Clegg bumble, the media will portray it as worse.

Anyway, back to Stockport and the 2014, local elections... Labour will win, Offerton,Manor, Hazel Grove and Cheadle and Gatley from the  Libdems thus making them the majority party then the following year they will win Heatons north and the "people matters seat" thus making the Town Hall... Labour...game,set and match.

There is a certain truth in that. Northern people have a tendency to feel hard done to and turn towards Labour and Labour like to keep their people at the bottom and without ambition in order to keep them grovelling. I think in fairness, Stockport folk are a little more ambitions than Mancs, Scousers and dare I say it (as it's where my roots are) Geordies and I don't think there will be the race to the bottom of the barrel here.

It is worth reminding ourselves that there are currently 21 political seats in Stockport that are Labour, a steady growth since 2010 and comprising one third of the total seats.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on May 05, 2012, 05:37:11 PM
Osbourne hasn't put a foot wrong from an economic POV.

Emergency Budget, June 2012 - Osborne's bold promises (and the reality):

1.   Growth at 2.8% by 2012.  The reality: -0.2%
2.   Deficit eliminated by 2014.   The reality: postponed until 2017 (maybe......)
3.   CPI in 2012: 2%.  The reality: 3.5%
4.   Unemployment in 2012: 7%.  The reality: 8.5%

And so on, and so on.  If that's getting it right, I hate to think what getting it wrong might look like       :o   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Steptoe and Son on May 05, 2012, 05:50:27 PM
Osbourne hasn't put a foot wrong from an economic POV.

Emergency Budget, June 2012 - Osborne's bold promises (and the reality):

1.   Growth at 2.8% by 2012.  The reality: -0.2%
2.   Deficit eliminated by 2014.   The reality: postponed until 2017 (maybe......)
3.   CPI in 2012: 2%.  The reality: 3.5%
4.   Unemployment in 2012: 7%.  The reality: 8.5%

And so on, and so on.  If that's getting it right, I hate to think what getting it wrong might look like       :o   


Cue Duke Fame to point out that somehow, Mr Osborne et al are in now way responsible for the above and that really, he's a good sort.   ;D
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 06, 2012, 09:46:58 AM
Osbourne hasn't put a foot wrong from an economic POV.

Emergency Budget, June 2012 - Osborne's bold promises (and the reality):

1.   Growth at 2.8% by 2012.  The reality: -0.2%
2.   Deficit eliminated by 2014.   The reality: postponed until 2017 (maybe......)
3.   CPI in 2012: 2%.  The reality: 3.5%
4.   Unemployment in 2012: 7%.  The reality: 8.5%

And so on, and so on.  If that's getting it right, I hate to think what getting it wrong might look like       :o   

And returning to the real world, there have been a few external shocks within those figures.

When the budgets were put together, we would have assumed growth within Europe of around 2-3% but the problems within Europe are far greater than anticipated.

The position left by Labour was horrendous, we all remember the little note left by the incompetents saying they'd spent all the money, you will recall Mervyn King saying that whoever was in power would have to make some very unpopular decisions and that's proving true.

Most intelligent people can understand that the solution to this mess is clamp down on unproductive spending, transfer the money we have to infrastructure spending. To do that. government must pare back on public services, encourage business to expand and over time it has to encourage development of more sectors in the economy because the emphasis on services makes us very vulnerable. This is not a quick fix, for the sake of the future, we can't have a quick fix.

Once people realise that the government is on the right lines, they will come round. There will always be those who think the world owes them a living and they will vote Labour but frankly, the country doesn't need them - the problem is those types will never have the get up and go to leave the country so we're stuck with them.

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Steptoe and Son on May 06, 2012, 09:54:58 AM
And there we are, it would be amusing if it hadn't have been so predictable  ;)
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 06, 2012, 10:21:22 AM
And there we are, it would be amusing if it hadn't have been so predictable  ;)


Case rested:
Most intelligent people can understand
   :D
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Steptoe and Son on May 06, 2012, 02:40:10 PM
You've rested your case in true tory style there Duke...you've blamed Europe, blamed the feckless hordes, and chucked an insult in.  Mind you, given the headless-chicken impression the current tories are doing, blaming Europe, attacking the feckless hordes and insulting people pretty much sums up  tory policies completely.  ;D
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 06, 2012, 04:17:33 PM
You've rested your case in true tory style there Duke...you've blamed Europe, blamed the feckless hordes, and chucked an insult in.  Mind you, given the headless-chicken impression the current tories are doing, blaming Europe, attacking the feckless hordes and insulting people pretty much sums up  tory policies completely.  ;D

I didn't know I was a Tory.

It's not a case of blaming Europe but if our main Market is skint and our home Market is struggling, then there is not going to be a fast fix. I don't think ballsup's 5 point plan is anything but a waste of money. Reducing Vat on DIY stuff will help B&Qs profits but that's about all. Retaining all the public sector workers will just drive up costs and borrowing. The last vat decreasedid nowt to stimulate the economy. The only point of merit is to spend on infrastructure projects but he knows full well that the current lot are doing that already. Ballsup is a lying bog eyed r's who was full square behind getting into the mess we are in and I don't trust him at all.


The point is, it's
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: doc on May 06, 2012, 07:23:40 PM
[


Fortunately, Stockport will not fall into Labour hands.

Fortunately Dave Goddard's seat did.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on May 07, 2012, 10:33:40 AM
I didn't know I was a Tory.

....reminds me of the famous 'duck test':  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duck_test

'If it looks like a duck, swims like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably is a duck.'    :D
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Deniseam on May 07, 2012, 11:38:26 AM
Well put Dave
The Coalition's economic policies have been disastrous so far.  Balls has been proved correct in his analyisis that overdone austerity will reduce growth. The markets at the time of the General Election signalled that they were content with Labour's deficit reduction programme for a new Parliament. Osborne has indeed gone too fast because his policies are idealogically-driven.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Belly on May 07, 2012, 01:21:02 PM
Well put Dave
The Coalition's economic policies have been disastrous so far.  Balls has been proved correct in his analyisis that overdone austerity will reduce growth. The markets at the time of the General Election signalled that they were content with Labour's deficit reduction programme for a new Parliament. Osborne has indeed gone too fast because his policies are idealogically-driven.


I'm no fan of the conservatives but I just don't agree with the analysis above. The current Balls plan appears to be nothing more than to shovel more (borrowed) cash into the econmonic fire at a time when things are very dicey indeed due to Europe and then to cross his fingers and hope that the extra spending delivers the magic growth that is sadly lacking throughout the rest of the Euro zone. If that plan should fail (see the last 2-3 yrs of Gordon Browns government) then we would be in a catastrophic mess. Its like a betting man who has just lost his shirt after a bad gamble, borrowing more cash to bet on a 'dead cert', because its bound to come up trumps this time.

I don't like austerity as much as the next person, but I recognise that you need to cut your cloth accrdingly if you want to pay back what you owe. Much of the bleating about 'cutting too deep' has all the ring of one of those petulant children on the BBC's 'Bank of Mum and Dad' after being brought to task for their debts. We can and will get through this, we just need to knuckle down and make it happen. Hard work and enterprise is only place where 'growth' will come from, not from yet more government spending.

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 07, 2012, 05:15:08 PM
We can and will get through this, we just need to knuckle down and make it happen. Hard work and enterprise is only place where 'growth' will come from, not from yet more government spending.

Almost spot on, some government spending can stimulate the economy but it has to be good public spending. Money is very scarce so it needs to be used wisely. In a water shortage, water is scarce so rather than allow it to be wasted, it's restricted to providing life by drinking and future food in crops. The same applies to public spending, money is scarce, it needs to provide life and future prosperity - not wasted on something with will be fun for a year but ultimately of no use whatsoever. So, it's good that we're spending on infrastructure, roads, rail etc and diverting money from 'nice to have' public services.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 07, 2012, 06:09:51 PM
"Knuckle down" ..."Work hard",  save your money,  spend it wisely.

Balls is this and Osborne is that and you're a dirty rascal!

All sounds like the Junior 3 economics class to me.

What was that parable about water being short? 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 07, 2012, 07:01:07 PM
"Knuckle down" ..."Work hard",  save your money,  spend it wisely.

Balls is this and Osborne is that and you're a dirty rascal!

All sounds like the Junior 3 economics class to me.

What was that parable about water being short? 

When you have scarce resources, it must be used in the most effective way. You went to a posh school, Economics at 8 years old!
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Miss Marple on May 07, 2012, 09:19:40 PM
Well we have all now seen the election statements so let's see if our re elected members are as good at  'walking the walk as they are at talking the talk.   MIA decided not to stand a candidate this time ( against my better judgement ) but here's hoping they will stand by their election statements and work more closely with the community on issues that concern each and everyone of us  :-\
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Bowden Guy on May 07, 2012, 09:39:26 PM
So, what you're saying is that you personally believed that MIA should have put forward a candidate but you were outvoted or there was no support for your position?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 07, 2012, 10:16:22 PM
I think mrs M that you have to be realistic with your expectations, the councillors must react to a broad view and can't simply jump when MIA say jump, MIA doesn't get a vote & the electorate are more important.

It may be just a false impression but I get the impression MIA or it's spokepeople want to keep the issue in the conciousness when really there isn't much to protest against.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 08, 2012, 08:51:44 AM
Well we have all now seen the election statements so let's see if our re elected members are as good at  'walking the walk as they are at talking the talk.   MIA decided not to stand a candidate this time ( against my better judgement ) but here's hoping they will stand by their election statements and work more closely with the community on issues that concern each and everyone of us  :-\

I think that MIA would have struggled to find a credible candidate who would have gained votes in any significant number. In addition to this they would have been unable to launch any kind of campaign that would have challenged the LibDems. We only have to look at the paucity of their poster campaign to see this. Nevertheless, it is to MIA's credit that they know what they can do and what they can't do.

The startling realisation for me in this election was how poor a show the Conservatives put up. I really thought that they were going to have a real fight this time with young Rydings (where is he by the way- what has he got to say for himself )  but they just laid down and died. They also lost Gatley to the LibDems, had a massive majority overturned in Romiley by the LibDems, lost Heaton Moor to Labour and all in all had a bad night. I think that there are some leadership issues with the Conservatives in Stockport.

I think that our Councillors have done o.k. on the supermarket issue, although I would in the first instance, liked to have seen them working with the College to try and find a way out of CAMSFC's financial woes before they started building/fighting supermarkets though it is probably too late for that now.       
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: tigerman on May 08, 2012, 10:09:44 AM
More schoolboy stuff. It sounds counter-intuitive, but as Keynes showed in the 1930s, austerity doesn't pull countries out of debt it just makes things worse. ie increasing borrowing through the cost of unemployment and loss of tax revenue. The US has achieved growth recently by not following Europe's austerity drive. Yes, debt will have to be reduced over the long term. Hollande in France is proposing debt reduction over a slightly (ie one year) longer period. Call it austerity-lite if you wish but the British Labour party's view is taking hold in Europe.Interesting times.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 08, 2012, 01:37:31 PM
More schoolboy stuff. It sounds counter-intuitive, but as Keynes showed in the 1930s, austerity doesn't pull countries out of debt it just makes things worse. ie increasing borrowing through the cost of unemployment and loss of tax revenue. The US has achieved growth recently by not following Europe's austerity drive. Yes, debt will have to be reduced over the long term. Hollande in France is proposing debt reduction over a slightly (ie one year) longer period. Call it austerity-lite if you wish but the British Labour party's view is taking hold in Europe.Interesting times.

Interesting times indeed but as I've mentioned on here before Keynes was only joking about employing people to hide £ notes down the mines. What his real point is that spending on infrastructure etc will provide employment and growth now whilst providing a comparative advantage for our economy in the future. That's what the governemtn is doing right now and it's what the US is doing, the reduction on spending on public services is just reducing our spending to be closer to US (disregaring health) levels.


The British Labour government is not taking hold accross Europe, the British Labour government's 5 point plan is unique to the UK and IMHO a waste of effort.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: tigerman on May 08, 2012, 08:19:44 PM
Of course, "the British Labour government isnt taking hold across Europe."  What I mean is that austerity is being rejected by the people of Europe when they get the chance to speak. Its called democracy I'm afraid. The emphasis is now turning towards growth which is the only way back from the brink. This Coalition has stopped the economy in its tracks. (When Labour was ousted we actually had growth back in the economy). Why you hate Balls so much Duke I dont know. At least he understands economics unlike Osborne  and his mates.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: amazon on May 08, 2012, 09:20:56 PM
Of course, "the British Labour government isnt taking hold across Europe."  What I mean is that austerity is being rejected by the people of Europe when they get the chance to speak. Its called democracy I'm afraid. The emphasis is now turning towards growth which is the only way back from the brink. This Coalition has stopped the economy in its tracks. (When Labour was ousted we actually had growth back in the economy). Why you hate Balls so much Duke I dont know. At least he understands economics unlike Osborne  and his mates.
.


Good posting tony .
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 08, 2012, 10:38:53 PM
Of course, "the British Labour government isnt taking hold across Europe."  What I mean is that austerity is being rejected by the people of Europe when they get the chance to speak. Its called democracy I'm afraid. The emphasis is now turning towards growth which is the only way back from the brink. This Coalition has stopped the economy in its tracks. (When Labour was ousted we actually had growth back in the economy). Why you hate Balls so much Duke I dont know. At least he understands economics unlike Osborne  and his mates.

It is a good post Tony. Austerity is the method of the unimaginative, it breeds unemployment which has a cost plus a loss to the exchequer plus a very significant anti-social implication for the whole nation the cost of which cannot be caculated in terms of money. The type of cost that slices through generation after generation and punishes society with a vengeance. We've all had enough now of the two posh boys telling us that we are in for "tough times" and offering nothing else but more tough times. If you offered that future to your wife, she'd leave you. We get poorer whilst CEO's pick up massive bonuses for failure, the banks refuse to invest in business and Posh2 just stand by and dish out the platitudes.

I heard today that Posh2 say no u turn on "austerity" well I say we will survive your austerity but no u turn on voting the Tories out of office and no u turn on wiping the LibDems off the political map at the next election. 

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 08, 2012, 10:44:07 PM
Of course, "the British Labour government isnt taking hold across Europe."  What I mean is that austerity is being rejected by the people of Europe when they get the chance to speak. Its called democracy I'm afraid. The emphasis is now turning towards growth which is the only way back from the brink. This Coalition has stopped the economy in its tracks. (When Labour was ousted we actually had growth back in the economy). Why you hate Balls so much Duke I dont know. At least he understands economics unlike Osborne  and his mates.


The reason why I distrust Ed Balls is simple, he was up to his ears in the blame for the mess we’re in, he & Milliband were Brown’s boys from way before 1997 and they both have their the dirtiest of hands when it comes to taking the blame for the economic disaster.  Furthermore, I think he either simply does not understand economics or he’s a liar. Take his response to the increase of VAT from 17.5% to 20% - he said it would cost the average man in the street £500 per year! Any O’level maths student can work out that that seems very wrong. He backtracked a little but that’s not a chap who understands simple sums nevermind high level economics.

The democracy you talk of across Europe is in reality a backlash in Greece which is hamstrung by the Euro and France who in Sarkozy had a rather unpleasant human being who was disliked on a personal level over that of politics (nevertheless, the French have never needed much of an excuse to vote in a socialist). There isn’t the same appetite for socialism in the UK be that the BNP, Greens, Respect or Labour.
It’s not as easy as “growth not austerity” , even Hollande is agreeing with cutting spending, he just talks of spending for growth as if it’s a magic wand. The sort of public spending that is good and effective is infrastructure, not making up public services to spend money on. Government doesn’t create real jobs, it creates the economy for business to expand and create jobs. It can try but to do so, it has to take money out of the private sector and it’s not very efficient at doing that and tends not to create a positive outcome. You can’t put off a hangover by simply remaining drunk.

 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 08, 2012, 10:50:00 PM
Of course, "the British Labour government isnt taking hold across Europe."  What I mean is that austerity is being rejected by the people of Europe when they get the chance to speak. Its called democracy I'm afraid. The emphasis is now turning towards growth which is the only way back from the brink. This Coalition has stopped the economy in its tracks. (When Labour was ousted we actually had growth back in the economy). Why you hate Balls so much Duke I dont know. At least he understands economics unlike Osborne  and his mates.

It is a good post Tony. Austerity is the method of the unimaginative, it breeds unemployment which has a cost plus a loss to the exchequer plus a very significant anti-social implication for the whole nation the cost of which cannot be caculated in terms of money. The type of cost that slices through generation after generation and punishes society with a vengeance. We've all had enough now of the two posh boys telling us that we are in for "tough times" and offering nothing else but more tough times. If you offered that future to your wife, she'd leave you. We get poorer whilst CEO's pick up massive bonuses for failure, the banks refuse to invest in business and Posh2 just stand by and dish out the platitudes.

I heard today that Posh2 say no u turn on "austerity" well I say we will survive your austerity but no u turn on voting the Tories out of office and no u turn on wiping the LibDems off the political map at the next election. 

In 'we' I think you mean 'you', Si. Cutting the spending on unnecessary public services means that we can borrow money at a reasonable rate to spend funds in areas that produces growth and income. That means spending on the A1(m), airports, HS2, light rail, access for disabled persons at local airports but not on nuclear free secretariats.   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Carl Rydings on May 08, 2012, 11:14:05 PM
Hi Everyone,

I would first like to thank everyone who voted for me and those who worked on the election campaign,
the Lib Dems put up the biggest fight I have ever seen in Marple, I believe I was a threat to them and
that's why they did so. The Lib Dems had unmatchable resources in Marple, which is something we need
to work on for the next election (in 2014).

I would like to echo the comments made by the Conservative Group leader Syd Lloyd who said a 34pc
turnout played its part as voters mirrored the national mood. He said: “It’s been a disappointing night
for the Conservatives on Stockport council. We have lost an exceptionally good councillor in Mick Jones
and clearly we are disappointed not to have defended Heaton North. National issues clearly impacted on
the vote. There has been an extremely low turnout across the borough and this has hit the Conservative
vote. I’m deeply disappointed and we will be regrouping in the coming days.”

I would also like to offer (and did at the count) my sincerest congratulations to Councillor Alexander.

As Syd Lloyd said we will regroup and live to fight another day.

Regards,
Carl Rydings
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 09, 2012, 08:18:50 AM
Duke,

When I say 'we' and you say 'I' we both mean the electorate.

Before you point it out to me I know that..."a week is a long time in politics"... But it obvious to me, that David Cameron doesn't really want to win the next election, he has found government much tougher than he anticipated, he certainly doesn't need the money and he daren't resign as that would destroy all his future plans. So he has just decided to progressively commit political suicide and then he will blame the electorate (saying that they have no stomach for the fight)whilst he gallops off as Lord Cthe rest of his party will blame the LibDems. It won't matter about the LibDems as there won't be enough of them left to blame anyone.



   

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Henry_ on May 09, 2012, 10:02:05 AM
I'm with Duke on pretty much all of this. A sustained economic recovery needs real economic growth which will take time and more pain. A phantom recovery of the type engineered in the final days of the last government, and based on funny money, just builds up worse problems for the future and frankly lumbers future generations with an iniquitous level of debt.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: acoustician on May 09, 2012, 10:55:29 AM
duke,you may not have noticed but there was a (wesgtern) world wide crisis, not just a UK based one. The tories werent pressing for more regulations. theyre in the bankers back pocket, with over 50% of their donations coming from the financial sector.

even camoron and clegg have given up blaming labour for eveything at this point.

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 09, 2012, 12:48:38 PM
Duke,

When I say 'we' and you say 'I' we both mean the electorate.

Before you point it out to me I know that..."a week is a long time in politics"... But it obvious to me, that David Cameron doesn't really want to win the next election, he has found government much tougher than he anticipated, he certainly doesn't need the money and he daren't resign as that would destroy all his future plans. So he has just decided to progressively commit political suicide and then he will blame the electorate (saying that they have no stomach for the fight)whilst he gallops off as Lord Cthe rest of his party will blame the LibDems. It won't matter about the LibDems as there won't be enough of them left to blame anyone.

I don't mean this to sound rude but simply I don't think you are right.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 09, 2012, 12:58:24 PM
duke,you may not have noticed but there was a (wesgtern) world wide crisis, not just a UK based one. The tories werent pressing for more regulations. theyre in the bankers back pocket, with over 50% of their donations coming from the financial sector.

even camoron and clegg have given up blaming labour for eveything at this point.

This is true, the banking crisis would have happened under a government of any colour. The area in which I believe Brown was wrong was in his post 2000 years where he literally spent his way out of a boom and left the country unable to deal with the post recession period in any meaningful way. Scratching at the surface by giving people money to buy new foreign cars was an example where the old govt tried fluffy ideas without thinking things through nor having the means to do anything meaningful.


The only way to create meaningful growth is to allow businesses to expand. THat means making borrowing easier, reduce / remove business rates, remove HSE / employmelws or at least relax laws for SME's. Spending can kick start things but it has to be meaningful, simply creating a loud of lacal authority officers in strange roles will not do a thing.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 09, 2012, 05:41:18 PM
Hi Everyone,

I would first like to thank everyone who voted for me and those who worked on the election campaign,
the Lib Dems put up the biggest fight I have ever seen in Marple, I believe I was a threat to them and
that's why they did so. The Lib Dems had unmatchable resources in Marple, which is something we need
to work on for the next election (in 2014).

I would like to echo the comments made by the Conservative Group leader Syd Lloyd who said a 34pc
turnout played its part as voters mirrored the national mood. He said: “It’s been a disappointing night
for the Conservatives on Stockport council. We have lost an exceptionally good councillor in Mick Jones
and clearly we are disappointed not to have defended Heaton North. National issues clearly impacted on
the vote. There has been an extremely low turnout across the borough and this has hit the Conservative
vote. I’m deeply disappointed and we will be regrouping in the coming days.”

I would also like to offer (and did at the count) my sincerest congratulations to Councillor Alexander.

As Syd Lloyd said we will regroup and live to fight another day.

Regards,
Carl Rydings


Hello Carl,

Welcome back, I for one am pleased that you can be gracious in defeat. You are of course quite right, you will..."live to fight another day". Of course you were a threat to the LibDems you are the opposition and you represent the only other party that could ever win a seat in Marple in the forseeable.

I wouldn't listen too much to Syd Lloyd, he's only just returned to Council (2011)after losing his own seat, (2010) he had four years as the incumbent to consolidate his position with the electorate and he lost the seat. You have only had four weeks as the challenger, so I don't think that he is any position to advise you. His assertions about low turnout and National Politics are wide off the mark. The low turnout applied to every candidate not just you, and as for National Politics the LibDems nationally are the most unpopular party in the country, yet Mrs Alexander was able to double her majority plus more. Brand new Candidates both LibDem and Labour were able to defeat established Conservative Councillors in Gatley and the Heatons. 

The fact of the matter is in these constituencies the Conservatives have no political organisation, in addition to this, instead of being selective you just stand for every seat going and in the process dilute the strengths that you have for the seats that you are strong in. There is no doubt in my mind that if you had not stood in Marple at all but moved your Marple resource to Romiley and Gatley then you probably would have won both seats. Again this is down to Syd Lloyd and the Conservative leadership. It is true to say that your party has had a disastrous year on his watch.

It is also worthy of remembrance for the next time,  that in Marple you are up against one of the strongest,local political organisations in the country. In fact it is said in LibDem circles nationally that if Marple falls so does the party. Of course you have already discovered this to your chagrin. In example of this did you know that in Sth Marple they had tellers at every single polling station right throughout the day, can yo imagine that? The lesson to be learnt is don't go again until you are ready. Don't just stand in hope because there happens to be an election that year...prepare.  Don't march until you've got the equipment and the men ! 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 09, 2012, 07:15:43 PM
Si, Don't take this the wrong way but I'm doubting the sincerity of your advice to Carl. Do I take it that you have a rather strong party alligience which is not that to support Carl's party or the eventual winner?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 10, 2012, 07:53:23 AM
Si, Don't take this the wrong way but I'm doubting the sincerity of your advice to Carl. Do I take it that you have a rather strong party alligience which is not that to support Carl's party or the eventual winner?

Duke,

I am not quite sure that I completely understand all of your posting.

Everybody, that voted in the election has an allegience to the party that they voted for, and I voted, I expect that you did also. How does that  either contradict or support sincerity ?

My advice to Carl is genuine and real and  is much more sincere than his own party leaders comments which are just empty excuses. Challenging the LibDems in Marple is a real David and Goliath situation. Having fought this election Carl will recognise all that I have said to be true.

Please permit me a question to you.

If Carl had just been a paper candidate in Marple Sth but in reality had taken his team over to Romiley to  help fight the election there, then what do you think the eventual outcomes would have been in Marple Sth and Romiley?

Another thing, I don't understand what you mean (it's probably me) by the phrase ..."which is not that to support Carl's party or the eventual winner"...please explain. 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 10, 2012, 10:10:20 AM
I don't have an allegience to a particular party, I have my own views and try and see which candidate comes closest to my priorities. I'm certainly anti-Labour at the moment because of the hypocrisy and the failures on a national level as well as the questionable misuse of funds we see on a local level elsewhere in hte North west.

My question was propted because you seem to be very aware of the personalities in the local political scene. It's the sort of awareness a Labour party activist may have and your interest in Carl's party may well be driven by the national Labour party's spin machine to see the destruction of the Lib dem vote rather than a genuine hope for Carl to do well in local politics.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 10, 2012, 12:55:37 PM
I don't have an allegience to a particular party, I have my own views and try and see which candidate comes closest to my priorities. I'm certainly anti-Labour at the moment because of the hypocrisy and the failures on a national level as well as the questionable misuse of funds we see on a local level elsewhere in hte North west.

My question was propted because you seem to be very aware of the personalities in the local political scene. It's the sort of awareness a Labour party activist may have and your interest in Carl's party may well be driven by the national Labour party's spin machine to see the destruction of the Lib dem vote rather than a genuine hope for Carl to do well in local politics.


Duke,

Your first paragraph is entirely your prerogative as a free man in a democratic society.

The second, again I do not fully understand, neither do I follow your logic. I am aware of the local political scene but that doesn't mean that I am an "activist", and if I was why does it have to be Labour - why not any of the other parties including the LibDems ? Don't you think that you might just be seeing Reds under the bed?       
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on May 29, 2012, 01:43:09 PM
I can't really see how you expect the Lib Dems to loss Offerton in 2014. The Councillor up for election is John Smith a Tory. I would expect a Lib Dem gain in 2014.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 29, 2012, 06:11:41 PM
I can't really see how you expect the Lib Dems to loss Offerton in 2014. The Councillor up for election is John Smith a Tory. I would expect a Lib Dem gain in 2014.

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 30, 2012, 10:28:51 AM
Hello Wheels,

What I meant to say is this.

I agree that party turncoat Councillor, John Smith will not win the election in 2014. He probably won't even stand. He's getting on a bit now and he certainly doesn't ned the money. 

Nevertheless the LibDems won't win it. They couldn't get Dave Goddard re-elected this year and they threw everything that they could think of into the campaign. No, if nothing changes Labour will win it. In fact, after the 2014 Election, Stockport Town Hall will either be Labour or LAB/LIB coalition.

Come in Duke, over and out.   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on May 30, 2012, 10:50:10 AM
Its extremly unlikely Labour would win it in my view even less so manor as you suggest. But even if Labour did win Offerton it would make not the slightest difference to the countrol of the authority as as it would merely move seats between oppostion groups.

Much more likely give current trends is that Labour will lose Daveport and Cale Green and the Lib Dems regain Offerton taking them to 30.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on May 30, 2012, 11:36:26 AM
Its extremly unlikely Labour would win it in my view even less so manor as you suggest. But even if Labour did win Offerton it would make not the slightest difference to the countrol of the authority as as it would merely move seats between oppostion groups.

Much more likely give current trends is that Labour will lose Daveport and Cale Green and the Lib Dems regain Offerton taking them to 30.

What current trends are these that you speak of ? You must be reading a different set of election figures to me. In example, where is your evidence for the LibDems regaining Offerton having lost it by a handful of votes (45 I THINK) when the incumbent was actually the leader of the Council ?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on May 30, 2012, 12:09:49 PM
Well in the terms of Cale Green the Labour majority fell from approaching 1000 to 200 and was the biggest swing againt Labour in the whole North West and with the weak candidate they have defending next time I would expect a Lib Dem gain gain from Labour.  In terms of Offerton all we can be certain of is that this will be a Tory loss and most likely to the Lib Dems and even if it did go to Labour its affect the Lib Dem total seats would ne nil so should not be factored in.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on May 30, 2012, 12:11:40 PM
Its extremly unlikely Labour would win it in my view even less so manor as you suggest. But even if Labour did win Offerton it would make not the slightest difference to the countrol of the authority as as it would merely move seats between oppostion groups.

Much more likely give current trends is that Labour will lose Daveport and Cale Green and the Lib Dems regain Offerton taking them to 30.

What current trends are these that you speak of ? You must be reading a different set of election figures to me. In example, where is your evidence for the LibDems regaining Offerton having lost it by a handful of votes (45 I THINK) when the incumbent was actually the leader of the Council ?

Because they just have to persuade 23 people to change their minds. Labour did one of their mass hatchet jobs on Offerton to win it. If there is a risk of Labour contol at Stockport town hall, I think enough people will be excecised enough to avoid the sheer horror that an incompetent bunch of self serving fools Labour are.


Lib dems just need to fight a dirtier fight next time and they can kep the plague out.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on May 30, 2012, 01:04:59 PM
I agree and Labour on polling night must have been even more dissapointed not to get Sue Derbyshire in Manor dispite getting Dave Goddard by as you say a throughly nasty campaign.

Cllr Derbsyhire has tremoundous abilty and Labour were even more keen to remove her as I suspect her intellect frightens them.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Bowden Guy on May 30, 2012, 05:12:49 PM

Well, Simone......

"He's getting on a bit now" = nice bit of ageism

"he certainly doesn't ned the money" = green-eyed monster
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on June 01, 2012, 05:56:57 AM
Its extremly unlikely Labour would win it in my view even less so manor as you suggest. But even if Labour did win Offerton it would make not the slightest difference to the countrol of the authority as as it would merely move seats between oppostion groups.

Much more likely give current trends is that Labour will lose Daveport and Cale Green and the Lib Dems regain Offerton taking them to 30.

What will actually happen is that Labour will win Manor and also Offerton and the Conservatives having learned the lesson of putting resources into both Marple seats will field paper candidates here and focus on Romiley and Gatley. These four seats will be taken from the LibDems, only marginally (except Offerton where LibDems will be battered) but nevertheless taken. LibDems will then have 25 seats and Labour will have 23 seats. Labour's renegade Green Party Councillor will come back into the fold making 24. Then there will be one defection from LibDem to Labour which will happen in 2013.....BINGO 

The fly in the ointment could be Hazel Grove....not too sure about that one, there are a lot of fluctuating factors there.   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 01, 2012, 09:59:49 AM
How litle you understand. The offerton seat up in 2014 is held by  John Smith for the Tories so could never ever be a loss for the Lib Dems. And if Labour could not take Manor this year with all the nastyness they through at Sue Derbyshire and the mass resources they pumped in there I would not hold your breath. Lol Lib Dems will lose Offerton in 2014 a seat they dont even hold. Oh dear what sharpe analysis.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on June 01, 2012, 10:42:46 AM
How litle you understand. The offerton seat up in 2014 is held by  John Smith for the Tories so could never ever be a loss for the Lib Dems. And if Labour could not take Manor this year with all the nastyness they through at Sue Derbyshire and the mass resources they pumped in there I would not hold your breath. Lol Lib Dems will lose Offerton in 2014 a seat they dont even hold. Oh dear what sharpe analysis.

Apologies for my lack of understanding.

I'm fully aware that John Smith is a Conservative at least he is now. He won't even stand. So that bit is irrelevant. You are not reading this thread properly, Wheels. Pedantry aside the LibDems will not regain it.

What was the "nastiness" the Labour Party threw at Sue Derbyshire ? I don't recall hearing about any, please tell, help inform my opinion. The thing is they won't be up against SD will they, they'll be up against young Danny, won't they! To look at your argument from another angle if all the LibDems could do was hang on by their fingernails to a seat that the Deputy Leader of the Council (now the Leader)had held for 8 years, a seat that they chucked everything at,  then what happens when the Deputy Leader doesn't stand? and they don't chuck everything at it... EXACTLY!...i'll leave you to work it out. The fact is the numbers are working against the  LibDems. Not just in Stockport but across the region/country. The talk in Manchester and Oldham is that they reckon after 2015 election there won't be a single one left on either Council.     
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on June 01, 2012, 11:08:44 AM
Quote
The talk in Manchester and Oldham is that they reckon after 2015 election there won't be a single one left on either Council.

But this isn't Manchester or Oldham and that's probably the reason why we all live here. I am getting a little tired of the political point scoring that seems to be going on on this thread. We should all be much more interested in going to the next Marple Area Committee meeting on 6th June when the Chadwick Street car park development will be discussed and where we can all see Democracy in Action.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 01, 2012, 11:31:08 AM
I don't actually agree. I think a discussion of the wider political make up of the council is much more important than going to an area committee meeting.The make up of the council has much more impact on Marple than turning up at one area committee meeting.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 01, 2012, 11:39:32 AM
The point i make Simon is that you continually contend that whatever happens in Offerton will be a loss for the Lib Dems it wont. Therefore you cannot build it into any calcualtion. At the best for Lab they will gain the seat from the Tories and that will not increase in any way the opposition numbers.
I suspect and you might disagree that we will see a Lib Dem gain there together with a LD gain in Cale Green increasing theirnumbers by 2.

Labour have never controlled Stockport and cannot do it on their current ward base.


Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on June 01, 2012, 12:34:56 PM
Quote
I don't actually agree. I think a discussion of the wider political make up of the council is much more important than going to an area committee meeting.The make up of the council has much more impact on Marple than turning up at one area committee meeting.
The next time that there is Council elections is in May 2014, by that time the Chadwick Street car park development will at least have been started and may have been completed + the proposed development on Hibbert lane at least been decided. The make up of the SMBC council has very little impact on Marple in general because even after 2014 no one party will have overall control. Over the last 25 years the Council has either been Tory, Lid Dem or NOC. Labour have no change of gaining overall control of SMBC!
The Chadwick St. car park will have a dramatic impact on Marple.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Harry on June 01, 2012, 12:46:04 PM
The Chadwick St. car park will have a dramatic impact on Marple.

In what way?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on June 01, 2012, 01:00:49 PM
Quote
In what way?
Depends on the size of the development, what it consists of, changes to the road configuration. Just look at what has happened in Poynton?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 01, 2012, 03:30:44 PM
Until you see any firm proposals and dont see how you can say it will have a dramatic impact on Marple. But even if it does we all have our own interests and priorities and for me I think it is more import for the future of Marple that control remains with the Lib Dems than that I spend my time watching area committee meetingI say that without being a member of any party just a concerned and aware Marple resident. Particularly as at the moments I have no clear views re the development in Marple.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on June 01, 2012, 03:52:26 PM
Quote
Until you see any firm proposals and dont see how you can say it will have a dramatic impact on Marple.
That's why you need to be at the next Area Committee Meeting, because it is there that the preferred proposal will be discussed and made public!
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 01, 2012, 07:19:32 PM
But why you were told last November what the perfered option for the site was all you can be told now is that there is a prefered biddered. You can have your input when there is an actually planning application. I have better things to do next Wednesday. Let the process take its course.

A development is a good idea just lets get the actual planning application detail right.

Until then don't get all excited.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Heritage on June 01, 2012, 09:26:09 PM
I agree...just follow a due process and allow for a structured approach to this and other issues. Otherwise [and the Tesco/ASDA thread seems to have thankfully withered on this basis] all that becomes 'debated' is speculative hot air and rhetoric.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on June 03, 2012, 08:50:37 AM
The point i make Simon is that you continually contend that whatever happens in Offerton will be a loss for the Lib Dems it wont. Therefore you cannot build it into any calcualtion. At the best for Lab they will gain the seat from the Tories and that will not increase in any way the opposition numbers.
I suspect and you might disagree that we will see a Lib Dem gain there together with a LD gain in Cale Green increasing theirnumbers by 2.

Labour have never controlled Stockport and cannot do it on their current ward base.




The only points I make Wheels about JS's Offerton seat is that Labour will win it thus giving them one more seat and that gradually the numbers are stacking up in favour of Labour. Any way Victor is probably right ..."nuff said on the subject".


Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on June 03, 2012, 09:10:48 AM
I see no point in attending Area Committee, you won't learn much. Perhaps the name of the preferred developer and you can get that from other sources the day after.  The 6 Councillors obviously, already have their plan very much mapped out and nothing anybody says at the AC will change that.

In point of fact all credit to them. They didn't just stand by and protest as Asda marched into town as many other Councillors would have done. They thought about and they came up with a plan an innovative one in fact. Who would have thought to build a supermarket on Chadwick Street?

Neither do they consult...they often appear to, it is very cleverly done but what they do in reality is "inform" after the event. They probably have to do it this way or nothing would be implemented. 

It also looks as if it is going to happen. The only fly in the ointment I can see is if it's actually Asda that buy Chadwick Street. Now that would be interesting.

Like most on here I will wait until I see some plan/structure before hareing off to area committee and giving forth about something that I have no detail on. 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Miss Marple on June 03, 2012, 09:48:27 AM
I see every point of attending Area Committee meetings.   We must remember that two recently re elected councillors got their seats back due to their claim of opposing a supermarket on Hibbert Lane, remember the pictures, posters ? I remember them well, so I will be watching along with a lot of the community to see if our councillors do what they were elected to do, that is to speak on behalf  the community, not to speak for with out consultation.
For years our councillors have had a free hand, but not anymore   MARPLE has woken up and now demands representatives who are  transparent and we will settle for nothing less.   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 03, 2012, 12:17:04 PM
I think you totally misunderstand the item on the adgenda if you think that Wednesday is in any way a significant part of the process. You will learn nothing there that would not in other ways be freely available. There is no value in whipping people into a fever pitch at the wrong time. Follow the process and make yourcomments at the right time.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on June 03, 2012, 02:44:54 PM
I see every point of attending Area Committee meetings.   We must remember that two recently re elected councillors got their seats back due to their claim of opposing a supermarket on Hibbert Lane, remember the pictures, posters ? I remember them well, so I will be watching along with a lot of the community to see if our councillors do what they were elected to do, that is to speak on behalf  the community, not to speak for with out consultation.
For years our councillors have had a free hand, but not anymore   MARPLE has woken up and now demands representatives who are  transparent and we will settle for nothing less.   

I don't think that they think they were re-elected purely on the basis of the supermarket issue. There is not much to learn at Wednesday's meeting about Chadwick Street and even less about Hibbert Lane. Councillors are not going to have any regard for your bluster they'll just make platitudes and move on. It's your choice of course to attend but don't be disappointed when you know little more at the end of the meeting than you did at the beginning. Also, let us not forget that there are no elections now until May 2014, by which time the supermarket issue will be probably be all over.   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 04, 2012, 08:31:11 PM
I see every point of attending Area Committee meetings.   We must remember that two recently re elected councillors got their seats back due to their claim of opposing a supermarket on Hibbert Lane, remember the pictures, posters ? I remember them well, so I will be watching along with a lot of the community to see if our councillors do what they were elected to do, that is to speak on behalf  the community, not to speak for with out consultation.
For years our councillors have had a free hand, but not anymore   MARPLE has woken up and now demands representatives who are  transparent and we will settle for nothing less.   

I don't think the supermarket is much of an issue as pretty much all candidates agreed. It's not am issue until Asda make a move, until then, the council should get on with reducing our council tax
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 04, 2012, 09:27:40 PM
I don't want the council tax reduced it hasnt gone up for the last two years.  Iwant to see services increased and if that means paying more thats fine by me. I am band F and pay about £225 a month which seems good value to me.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on June 05, 2012, 06:35:04 AM
I can't see any reduction in Council tax happening now or in the future. I don't believe that anybody realistically (apart from you Duke) expects it. The politicians know that, so they won't do it. Also, no election for 2 yrs, so any pain inflicted now has longer to be forgotten about so I see an increase coming.

What services would you like to see that we don't have now?

I'd like to see some innovation from our politicians. I've given up on that nationally with this lot of amateur book-keepers that are in power but maybe we could see some locally.

On a specific point our roads and pavements are getting worse year on year they appear to be just left to total neglect. Surely something needs to be done about them.

I walked down Station Rd to the Street Party the other day it was raining heavily and the surface water was just cascading down the road. Virtually every single gulley appeared to be blocked. The answer to everything can't continually be ..."we've got no money".       
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 05, 2012, 10:20:32 AM
I don't want the council tax reduced it hasnt gone up for the last two years.  Iwant to see services increased and if that means paying more thats fine by me. I am band F and pay about £225 a month which seems good value to me.

Hmmm, that is possibly because you have a relatively high wage so that £225 is a small % of your income, council tax suits two groups, the vey well paid and those who don't bother to work for a living. Council taxes and business taxes have increased above inflation for 20 years. I pay £190 per week which is around 30% of my salary, if everyone paid 30% of their salary for a load of incompetent made up jobs and answering freedom of information requests, the electorate would demand more accountability and more efficiency.

I can't see any reduction in Council tax happening now or in the future. I don't believe that anybody realistically (apart from you Duke) expects it. The politicians know that, so they won't do it. Also, no election for 2 yrs, so any pain inflicted now has longer to be forgotten about so I see an increase coming.

What services would you like to see that we don't have now?

I'd like to see some innovation from our politicians. I've given up on that nationally with this lot of amateur book-keepers that are in power but maybe we could see some locally.

On a specific point our roads and pavements are getting worse year on year they appear to be just left to total neglect. Surely something needs to be done about them.

I walked down Station Rd to the Street Party the other day it was raining heavily and the surface water was just cascading down the road. Virtually every single gulley appeared to be blocked. The answer to everything can't continually be ..."we've got no money".       

What innovation do you want? That they deliver effective efficient services? Our local council isn't great but the worry is (as you pointed out) the alternative is likely to be Labour. Labour always create expensive & wasteful councils, let's fight to keep Manchester style Labour with their wasteful ways and egotistical town clerks out of Stockport.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 05, 2012, 10:31:43 AM
I pay £190 per week which is around 30% of my salary
Blimey Duke, how big a mansion do you live in?   We're in a detached house and we pay £50 per week - I think you're being taken for a ride!

As for this:
What services would you like to see that we don't have now?
Road and pavement repairs, improving poor-quality school buildings, improving care for the elderly and disabled, re-opening public toilets, improving public transport.  That will do for starters.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 05, 2012, 10:37:53 AM
Stockport Council has put a extra £1m for the last two yearsover and above what government said they should spend into road repairs.
We havea brand new school going up at Rose Hill. Transport as your aware is not a local authority responsibilty. There are now places for the public to use toilets than ten years ago.

So not much innovation coming from you there.

Be careful Innovation doesnt = my hobby horse.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 05, 2012, 10:42:51 AM
I pay £190 per week which is around 30% of my salary
Blimey Duke, how big a mansion do you live in?   We're in a detached house and we pay £50 per week - I think you're being taken for a ride!


Whoops, £190 per month - still 30% of salary and I really object to it being wasted.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 05, 2012, 10:44:09 AM
Stockport Council has put a extra £1m for the last two yearsover and above what government said they should spend into road repairs.
We havea brand new school going up at Rose Hill. Transport as your aware is not a local authority responsibilty. There are now places for the public to use toilets than ten years ago.

So not much innovation coming from you there.

Be careful Innovation doesnt = my hobby horse.

Did we really need that school or road improvements?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 05, 2012, 10:56:08 AM
Transport as your aware is not a local authority responsibilty.
But we pay for it via council tax. 

There are now places for the public to use toilets than ten years ago.
Yes, that's what one of our councillors told me.  As I pointed out at the time, he obviously hasn't been with his kids at Mellor Rec when one of them wants to go to the loo, and the sign on the door of the toilets tells you to take them to the Devonshire - which is closed all afternoon.   ::)
 
So not much innovation coming from you there.
Did I claim to be innovative?  I just expect decent services. 

Be careful Innovation doesnt = my hobby horse.
Meaning?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: simonesaffron on June 05, 2012, 01:02:20 PM
"Innovation"...a new method or idea of doing something...

Despite putting an extra £1M more than recommended the roads and pavements are worse than ever and deteriorating.

The new school at Rosehill is a legacy from a Labour government initiative.

I don't actually understand the Cantonaesque "hobby horse" allusion, please explain.

None of our Councillors have got any kids. 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 05, 2012, 02:43:27 PM
Transport as your aware is not a local authority responsibilty.
But we pay for it via council tax. 


No we don't the transport levy is collected with the coucil tax for ease but it is not part of the council tax or levied by the local authority
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 05, 2012, 02:53:16 PM
I don't want the council tax reduced it hasnt gone up for the last two years.  Iwant to see services increased and if that means paying more thats fine by me. I am band F and pay about £225 a month which seems good value to me.

Hmmm, that is possibly because you have a relatively high wage so that £225 is a small % of your income, council tax suits two groups, the vey well paid and those who don't bother to work for a living. Council taxes and business taxes have increased above inflation for 20 years. I pay £190 per week which is around 30% of my salary, if everyone paid 30% of their salary for a load of incompetent made up jobs and answering freedom of information requests, the electorate would demand more accountability and more efficiency.

 

I dont have a particularly high income but since you ask its certainly less than £25k  Ijust feel what I/we pay is good value for money and I would be happy to pay more for enhanced services. I am not one as I work inthe private sector but there are clearly a lot of good hard working council officers do their best intheir chosen profession in very difficuly times financially for local authorities.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 05, 2012, 09:07:09 PM
I don't want the council tax reduced it hasnt gone up for the last two years.  Iwant to see services increased and if that means paying more thats fine by me. I am band F and pay about £225 a month which seems good value to me.

Hmmm, that is possibly because you have a relatively high wage so that £225 is a small % of your income, council tax suits two groups, the vey well paid and those who don't bother to work for a living. Council taxes and business taxes have increased above inflation for 20 years. I pay £190 per week which is around 30% of my salary, if everyone paid 30% of their salary for a load of incompetent made up jobs and answering freedom of information requests, the electorate would demand more accountability and more efficiency.

 

I dont have a particularly high income but since you ask its certainly less than £25k  Ijust feel what I/we pay is good value for money and I would be happy to pay more for enhanced services. I am not one as I work inthe private sector but there are clearly a lot of good hard working council officers do their best intheir chosen profession in very difficuly times financially for local authorities.

That's OK but there is a perfectly good market to exchange further cash for additional services if yo so wish. I'd rather pay a little less and have a few less recycling officers and projects to encourage employers to break discrimination laws when recruiting.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 05, 2012, 10:54:42 PM
I'd rather pay a little less and have a few less....projects to encourage employers to break discrimination laws when recruiting.
That's interesting.  So give us an example of a council project to encourage employers to break discrimination laws. 
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 05, 2012, 11:24:52 PM
Glad you asked that I am looking forward to the reply :o
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 06, 2012, 07:17:22 AM
I'd rather pay a little less and have a few less....projects to encourage employers to break discrimination laws when recruiting.
That's interesting.  So give us an example of a council project to encourage employers to break discrimination laws. 

I received as invitation to a presentation to encourage employers to offer Apprenticeships to ethnic minorities. I have no time for positive discrimination, there is nothing that can be positive about discrimination and it's rightly illegal to discriminate on the basis of race etc.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 06, 2012, 09:20:00 AM
I'd rather pay a little less and have a few less....projects to encourage employers to break discrimination laws when recruiting.
That's interesting.  So give us an example of a council project to encourage employers to break discrimination laws. 

I received as invitation to a presentation to encourage employers to offer Apprenticeships to ethnic minorities. I have no time for positive discrimination, there is nothing that can be positive about discrimination and it's rightly illegal to discriminate on the basis of race etc.
And thats it thats at the heart of your campaign to reduce council expenditure????? Quite apart from the fact that your just wrong about positive discrimination. Can't wait to hear what other shocks you have in store.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 06, 2012, 10:17:08 AM
I received as invitation to a presentation to encourage employers to offer Apprenticeships to ethnic minorities. I have no time for positive discrimination, there is nothing that can be positive about discrimination and it's rightly illegal to discriminate on the basis of race etc.

That is not positive discrimination, it is known as positive action.  I believe Duke runs a business, so he must be very well aware of the difference. 

We all realise that you are passionately anti-local authority, Duke, but you undermine your own case when you base it on completely unjustified allegations.  ::)
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 06, 2012, 10:22:23 AM
I'd rather pay a little less and have a few less....projects to encourage employers to break discrimination laws when recruiting.
That's interesting.  So give us an example of a council project to encourage employers to break discrimination laws. 

I received as invitation to a presentation to encourage employers to offer Apprenticeships to ethnic minorities. I have no time for positive discrimination, there is nothing that can be positive about discrimination and it's rightly illegal to discriminate on the basis of race etc.
And thats it thats at the heart of your campaign to reduce council expenditure????? Quite apart from the fact that your just wrong about positive discrimination. Can't wait to hear what other shocks you have in store.


No, that is not all but it's a recent waste of time & money I noticed.

Why do you think I'm wrong BTW?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 06, 2012, 10:29:38 AM
I received as invitation to a presentation to encourage employers to offer Apprenticeships to ethnic minorities. I have no time for positive discrimination, there is nothing that can be positive about discrimination and it's rightly illegal to discriminate on the basis of race etc.

That is not positive discrimination, it is known as positive action.  I believe Duke runs a business, so he must be very well aware of the difference. 

We all realise that you are passionately anti-local authority, Duke, but you undermine your own case when you base it on completely unjustified allegations.  ::)

I don't run my OWN business Dave, I run the financial side of things for the shareholders.

If the aim is that employers CONSIDER all applicants for a role, I'd say that's fine, the aim on the email was that firms employ more people from an ethnic minority background. I've not been to the presentation yet but it struck me as wrong.

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 06, 2012, 01:11:50 PM
And thats it thats at the heart of your campaign to reduce council expenditure????? Quite apart from the fact that your just wrong about positive discrimination. Can't wait to hear what other shocks you have in store.

I don't really have a campaign, Wheels, I simply don't agree with the way some council does it's spending. Stockport is not as bad as some, Richard Leese & his Manchester council is one (around here) that annoys me the most. I don't believe the council tax payer in Manchester should be funding the likes of a Nuclear Free Local Secretariat & Policy and Research Officer whilst the council is claiming to be hard done to. If I have time, I may consider putting myself up for election with a view of teaming up with the excellent Heald Green Independent Ratepayers - the problem being is I would rather target a Labour seat as they are the least competent at seeking economy & efficiency.

I don't like council tax as a way of funding local authorites. I think it has none of the advantages of the short-lived poll tax but retains all the drawbacks in that it's not connected to the ability to pay. I think all flat rate taxes are unfair which are neither connected to income or consumption. i.e. council tax, business rates, TV licence etc unfairly hit the poorest in society & unfair. I'd suggest the tax be a local income tax , corporation tax and well, the BBC should be privatised.


Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on June 06, 2012, 06:18:17 PM
Quote
the BBC should be privatised
I have some sympathy with your views Duke but not the last one. The USA is a good example of why the BBC should NOT be privatised.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 06, 2012, 06:22:26 PM
And thats it thats at the heart of your campaign to reduce council expenditure????? Quite apart from the fact that your just wrong about positive discrimination. Can't wait to hear what other shocks you have in store.

I don't really have a campaign, Wheels, I simply don't agree with the way some council does it's spending. Stockport is not as bad as some, Richard Leese & his Manchester council is one (around here) that annoys me the most. I don't believe the council tax payer in Manchester should be funding the likes of a Nuclear Free Local Secretariat & Policy and Research Officer whilst the council is claiming to be hard done to. If I have time, I may consider putting myself up for election with a view of teaming up with the excellent Heald Green Independent Ratepayers - the problem being is I would rather target a Labour seat as they are the least competent at seeking economy & efficiency.

I don't like council tax as a way of funding local authorites. I think it has none of the advantages of the short-lived poll tax but retains all the drawbacks in that it's not connected to the ability to pay. I think all flat rate taxes are unfair which are neither connected to income or consumption. i.e. council tax, business rates, TV licence etc unfairly hit the poorest in society & unfair. I'd suggest the tax be a local income tax , corporation tax and well, the BBC should be privatised.

Well I think I would disagree there on moreor less every point you make. I thinkit is very much the roleof a local authority to champion those issues which without there support would not find an outlet. Even those which whom I disagree. SO if a few pounds of my council tax is going each year to support unfashonable causes well done Local AUthority I say. HG Ratepayers or at lease there Leader Peter Burns  are good people but make no mistake they have an organisation several thousands strong and operate effectivley as the leading political party of the area. Independents might sound attractive buy they often no philosphy or underlying principles. All there interested in is not paying their fair share and NIMBYism and usually disappear very quickly.

I would love to see a local income taxand indeed site value rating but do remember that we locally contribute very little to our councils budget over 70% of it coming directly from Westminster.

As for the BBC the frezzing of the TV licence is a disgrace the board of govenors were shocking the way they rolled over. We pay a tiny amount for an outstanding service (Royal simmpering apart) It could be doubled and still be good value.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: sleepless on June 06, 2012, 07:41:55 PM
 Where do Westminster get the money from?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 06, 2012, 08:00:03 PM
Where do Westminster get the money from?


Well from general taxation and borrowing. wahts your point?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 06, 2012, 11:01:14 PM
I don't believe the council tax payer in Manchester should be funding the likes of a Nuclear Free Local Secretariat & Policy and Research Officer whilst the council is claiming to be hard done to.

We have heard this tired old accusation so many times from Duke, and maybe it's time we had a few hard facts. There is an organisation called Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA).  This is their website: http://nfznsc.gn.apc.org/

As it happens, they rent a room in Manchester Town Hall.  Manchester City Council therefore makes a few quid in rent from this organisation. Sometimes jobs come up in NFLA. These jobs may appear at first glance to be city council jobs, but it ain't necessarily so! Get over it!  ;)

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 06, 2012, 11:10:17 PM
Why give facts when the myth tells a better story. I suspect your wasting your time with the facts.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 06, 2012, 11:28:26 PM
I don't believe the council tax payer in Manchester should be funding the likes of a Nuclear Free Local Secretariat & Policy and Research Officer whilst the council is claiming to be hard done to.

We have heard this tired old accusation so many times from Duke, and maybe it's time we had a few hard facts. There is an organisation called Nuclear Free Local Authorities (NFLA).  This is their website: http://nfznsc.gn.apc.org/

As it happens, they rent a room in Manchester Town Hall.  Manchester City Council therefore makes a few quid in rent from this organisation. Sometimes jobs come up in NFLA. These jobs may appear at first glance to be city council jobs, but it ain't necessarily so! Get over it!  ;

And who finances those local authorities? The taxpayer! Why should the taxpayer finance a stupid little pressure group?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 06, 2012, 11:38:45 PM
But it not a little pressure group its a serious research based organisation. You sound as if you know nothing about the organisation other then its name and you think that you disagree with the premise of the organisatoion

I wish Stockport were a member as a CT payer this is exactly what I want my money being spent on.We all have to live as tax payers with expenditure we don't like.

I think we are over policed and would like to see cut to police pay and numbers but I live with my dislike of my money being spent that way as the price I pay for being a member of society

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 10:03:48 AM
Well I think I would disagree there on moreor less every point you make. I thinkit is very much the roleof a local authority to champion those issues which without there support would not find an outlet. Even those which whom I disagree. SO if a few pounds of my council tax is going each year to support unfashonable causes well done Local AUthority I say. HG Ratepayers or at lease there Leader Peter Burns  are good people but make no mistake they have an organisation several thousands strong and operate effectivley as the leading political party of the area. Independents might sound attractive buy they often no philosphy or underlying principles. All there interested in is not paying their fair share and NIMBYism and usually disappear very quickly.

I would love to see a local income taxand indeed site value rating but do remember that we locally contribute very little to our councils budget over 70% of it coming directly from Westminster.

As for the BBC the frezzing of the TV licence is a disgrace the board of govenors were shocking the way they rolled over. We pay a tiny amount for an outstanding service (Royal simmpering apart) It could be doubled and still be good value.

I can’t agree with you there Wheels. The State (be that local or National) should only get involved where the market fails to allocate resources in a manner that is good for society. To that end, yes it should provide education, defence, a legal framework, streetlighting etc but it shouldn’t be running a road haulage company, a travel agent or telly company – a free democratic nation doesn’t really need a state broadcasting propaganda machine, especially when it crowds out private investment.

I’m aware that the majority of funding comes from the treasury but I think this is wrong too. Where is the accountability, why should a taxpayer in a good responsible local authority area pay for some hey nonny nonny project dreamed up by a Labour councillor. I say that all taxation should be raised locally to meet local demands through a local income tax. That way, the next time Dickie Leese’ mob spend £3m on a brochure for an unworkable transport scheme, only those who voted the dafty in should pay for his indulgences, moreover, they will know for next time that the reason why their local Library etc is closing is because the people voted in had made a mistake.

Business rates are wrong too, we pay regardless of making a profit. If the busienss fails, the owner of the premises still has to pa .There is no incentive for the local authority to provide an environment for business to do well as it gets paid in any case. Considering that onlybusiness can provide real sustainable employment, it's crazy that local authorities have no incentive to assist business. A local corporation tax  would ensure that local authorities need business to make as much money as possible to maximise their own tax revenues.

I know a lot of people defend that BBC as good value, of course it is if you are well off, have a number of HD TV’s in your large band F house. Also if you have multi- platform multimedia products, you will find the flat tax as good value. It’s not such good value for the low paid chap who struggles to buy a £30 TV and then finds he has to earn £220 to pay for the right to sit that £30 TV in the corner of his front room – Far better to have adverts where the consumer on the basis of time they spend watching, for those who really don’t want shake & vac but prefer to see the gap filled in with blokes doing wheelies in wheelchairs or feature film length trailers for upcoming episodes of strictly dancing, the voice  etc then digital TV would allow those folks to pay for  subscription. In any case, the TV tax also will become uncollectable, my brother lives in Hong Kong and receives all the BBC content for free. Furthermore, a proper independent BBC would make a fortune competing across the world and create corporation tax revenue rather than being a tax on the most vulnerable.  If the govt acts quickly, the revenues raised in the sale of the BBC could help ease the deficit and help correct the work of the Scottish PM.  
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 07, 2012, 10:25:09 AM
WoW Duke. Those are certainly strange views.

I don't mean to be rude its the the way the sentence is coming out so don't take offence. I have struggled to find other words.

I thought we had all out grown this sort of view and had left them in the 1980s where they did so much damage or to the stange fringe organisation like the Taxpayers Alliance.

More of a response later have to dash work to do.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 07, 2012, 11:01:57 AM
... a free democratic nation doesn’t really need a state broadcasting propaganda machine, especially when it crowds out private investment..... Far better to have adverts where the consumer on the basis of time they spend watching, for those who really don’t want shake & vac but prefer to see the gap filled in with blokes doing wheelies in wheelchairs or feature film length trailers for upcoming episodes of strictly dancing, the voice  etc

Why not just move to America, Duke, and then you can watch trash TV all day to your heart's content? 

Fortunately, most people realise that the Beeb is a precious national asset, and one of the few things left in Great Britain that is still great.  It retains huge public support, and is respected around the world as an honest and reliable source of news.   That's why no government - not even the present lot, even though they don't like it very much - would dare to sell it off or close it down.   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 12:29:19 PM
... a free democratic nation doesn’t really need a state broadcasting propaganda machine, especially when it crowds out private investment..... Far better to have adverts where the consumer on the basis of time they spend watching, for those who really don’t want shake & vac but prefer to see the gap filled in with blokes doing wheelies in wheelchairs or feature film length trailers for upcoming episodes of strictly dancing, the voice  etc

Why not just move to America, Duke, and then you can watch trash TV all day to your heart's content? 

Fortunately, most people realise that the Beeb is a precious national asset, and one of the few things left in Great Britain that is still great.  It retains huge public support, and is respected around the world as an honest and reliable source of news.   That's why no government - not even the present lot, even though they don't like it very much - would dare to sell it off or close it down.   


No governement has had the guts to take on the power of the BBC. The BBC employees will defend their cushy number and rubbish anyone who attempts to upset their pleasent applecart. There isn't the political will as it would be political suicide and the middle classes don't really opbject to paying for hte BBC as it is as the middle classes see it as good value.

The BBC is a very strong brand but it is not being used to make money and an income for the country which is crazy.

As I say, those who are confortably off get good value so they will defend the BBC. It's a fairly selfish view but not an easy one to shift.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 07, 2012, 01:00:33 PM
No governement has had the guts to take on the power of the BBC.....There isn't the political will as it would be political suicide
Agreed. 

.... the middle classes see it as good value.
I'd like to see any evidence suggesting that other classes don't. 

The BBC is a very strong brand but it is not being used to make money and an income for the country which is crazy.
Really?  Then how come BBC Worldwide had earnings of over £1 billion in 2011?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 01:24:23 PM
No governement has had the guts to take on the power of the BBC.....There isn't the political will as it would be political suicide
Agreed.  

.... the middle classes see it as good value.
I'd like to see any evidence suggesting that other classes don't.  

The BBC is a very strong brand but it is not being used to make money and an income for the country which is crazy.
Really?  Then how come BBC Worldwide had earnings of over £1 billion in 2011?

I'm glad you agree that the BBC has too much power. It seems strange tht we're wasting so much money on Leverson when the BBC has far greater influence than Sky.

I've already illustrated as to why it's an unfair tax that hurts the poorest.

Yes, BBC worldwide pulled in revenues but it could do far better. All the other makjor media groups pull in far greater revenues.  THe BBC is very inefficient too (in comparison), it's spends far more money to pull in that revenue.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 01:39:35 PM
Why not just move to America, Duke, and then you can watch trash TV all day to your heart's content? 

I understand your other arguments Dave, they may be a little selfish but ubderstandable. I don't get this one, are you implying that privatiing the BBC will mean a poorer service? This isn't what happened with BT, BA, Roadline, Thomas Cook, British Gas etc. When VW took over Rolls Royce , they didn't trash the brand & make hatchbacks, they built on the brand to be more efficient, create better demand & sell more. Surely, a private, independant enterprising BBC will enhance the brand.

Another little point, the US sells it's media in far greater numbers and creates far more revenue than the BBC. It's not all trash, the BBC buys in some american trash, shows like the voice, apprentice etc are American. American TV comedy dwarfs the BBC and that's where the BBC is fairly strong. Look at sport, the BBC is staid in comparison to others.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on June 07, 2012, 01:54:12 PM
Quote
are you implying that privatising the BBC will mean a poorer service? This isn't what happened with BT, BA, Roadline, Thomas Cook, British Gas
Duke, I think you have just shot yourself in the foot if you think British Gas, BT, Thomas Cook & BA are now more customer focused than when they were nationalised industries. They are now just more profit orientated.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 02:21:23 PM
But it not a little pressure group its a serious research based organisation. You sound as if you know nothing about the organisation other then its name and you think that you disagree with the premise of the organisatoion

I wish Stockport were a member as a CT payer this is exactly what I want my money being spent on.We all have to live as tax payers with expenditure we don't like.

I think we are over policed and would like to see cut to police pay and numbers but I live with my dislike of my money being spent that way as the price I pay for being a member of society


I'm sure you are right, police do seem to be very well paid for what was a job you fell into if you failed your exams & weren't able to meet the grade as a squadie. I'm sure there are efficeincies can be improved but it's a bit of a closed shop when it comes to a BPR exercise.

Now, onto nukes, one of the arguments for state intervention is that it removes duplication and indeed that argument against marketisation is that competition requires surplus supply. So, why  have this Nuke research group being paid for out of our pocket when we have the most advanced atomic weapons reasearch establishment in the world based at Aldermaston?

It's unlikely that a chap wearing itchy clothing in Manchester will know any more than the guys down at Aldermaston.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 02:22:17 PM
Quote
are you implying that privatising the BBC will mean a poorer service? This isn't what happened with BT, BA, Roadline, Thomas Cook, British Gas
Duke, I think you have just shot yourself in the foot if you think British Gas, BT, Thomas Cook & BA are now more customer focused than when they were nationalised industries. They are now just more profit orientated.

Do you remember how long it took to get a new phone?
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 07, 2012, 02:36:41 PM
they built on the brand to be more efficient, create better demand & sell more....Surely, a private, independant enterprising BBC will enhance the brand....the US sells it's media in far greater numbers and creates far more revenue than the BBC.

So there you have it - from someone who evidently knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.    It's all about sales, revenue, profit.  It's a 'brand'.  ::)  And thus the Beeb would be transformed from being probably the world's most respected media organisation to being just another profit centre. 

Before the downfall of James Murdoch, he was busy peddling that sort of nonsense.  In his now notorious speech to the Edinburgh TV Festival three years ago, he was trying to argue that 'The expansion of state-sponsored journalism is a threat to the plurality and independence of news provision' and that 'The scope of the BBC's activities and ambitions is chilling'.  Since then, of course, this guy whose people hacked Milly Dowler's phone, and his deeply disreputable organisation, have shown us who is really 'chilling'.   
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 03:04:30 PM
they built on the brand to be more efficient, create better demand & sell more....Surely, a private, independant enterprising BBC will enhance the brand....the US sells it's media in far greater numbers and creates far more revenue than the BBC.

So there you have it - from someone who evidently knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.    It's all about sales, revenue, profit.  It's a 'brand'.  ::)  And thus the Beeb would be transformed from being probably the world's most respected media organisation to being just another profit centre.  

Before the downfall of James Murdoch, he was busy peddling that sort of nonsense.  In his now notorious speech to the Edinburgh TV Festival three years ago, he was trying to argue that 'The expansion of state-sponsored journalism is a threat to the plurality and independence of news provision' and that 'The scope of the BBC's activities and ambitions is chilling'.  Since then, of course, this guy whose people hacked Milly Dowler's phone, and his deeply disreputable organisation, have shown us who is really 'chilling'.    

the BBC is a media business, that's all. "the price of everything and the value of nothing" argumet is just like your silly Daily Mail comment, it doesn't mean anything except you're unable to put a valid point accross but still sore that you've lost the argument.


The murdoch thing is irrelevent.

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 07, 2012, 04:36:50 PM
you've lost the argument.

 :D
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 08:16:25 PM
you've lost the argument.

 :D

I should have put it another way, you  have learnt something new and now more enlightened.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 07, 2012, 08:25:44 PM
you  have learnt something new and now more enlightened.
Not much, although this bit did puzzle me for a while: 

"the price of everything and the value of nothing" argumet is just like your silly Daily Mail comment,
What 'Daily Mail comment', I thought.  I went back through this thread, but I failed to find any reference to the Daily Mail.  So I took the dog for a walk, and while I was plodding round Brabyns in the rain, I suddenly had a thought - maybe the reference to the Mail was in another thread?

So I did a search, and I found it:   
I'm just hoping that having shown him how to do it, Duke will do some research for himself in future, instead of believing evrything he reads in the Daily Mail.   ;D 
Duke, that's ages ago.  I know it's embarrassing if people think you're a Mail reader, but do try not to be so sensitive - it can't be good for you!   ;)
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Victor M on June 07, 2012, 08:50:50 PM
Duke,
At least when BT was state owned I could at least talk to someone I could understand, not a call centre in India.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: wheels on June 07, 2012, 09:41:05 PM
No he's right Duke you lost the argument. In fact the arguments you make were lost in the mid 80s

But the two things that strick me is if nationalised transport systems dont work how come they are so sucessful elsewhere. Hop  across the channel and have a look.

It must be the case that a strategic industry like the railways which is to my minds every bit as important as the road netword should be inpublic hands.Actually I expect you to argue for road pricing on all roads even to your front door.

Nor can the current private system be seen to be serving Marple particularly well.

I also fail to understand why the market is king until business are strugling at which point you want the CT payer to bail them out and ease their CT burden. Those who live by the market have to die by the market as well.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 10:21:21 PM
Duke,
At least when BT was state owned I could at least talk to someone I could understand, not a call centre in India.

I think that's the way so many businesses have gone, British workforce has priced itself out of the Market with minimum wage & in some cases, a poor work ethic. India, China etc are cheaper, have fewer days off and reliable.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 10:31:47 PM
you  have learnt something new and now more enlightened.
Not much, although this bit did puzzle me for a while: 

"the price of everything and the value of nothing" argumet is just like your silly Daily Mail comment,
What 'Daily Mail comment', I thought.  I went back through this thread, but I failed to find any reference to the Daily Mail.  So I took the dog for a walk, and while I was plodding round Brabyns in the rain, I suddenly had a thought - maybe the reference to the Mail was in another thread?

So I did a search, and I found it:   
I'm just hoping that having shown him how to do it, Duke will do some research for himself in future, instead of believing evrything he reads in the Daily Mail.   ;D 
Duke, that's ages ago.  I know it's embarrassing if people think you're a Mail reader, but do try not to be so sensitive - it can't be good for you!   ;)

You know Dave, if I'd thought it would trouble you for so long, I'd have milked it a little more.

I'm not really a mail reader, much more of a Razzle chap meeself.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 10:46:34 PM
No he's right Duke you lost the argument. In fact the arguments you make were lost in the mid 80s

That's not really addressing any of the points I raised Alloy, it's just name calling. not that I'm particually insulted, the 80's was when the nation dragged itself to it's feet, got rid of the idea that the world owes us a living and got on with it.

But the two things that strick me is if nationalised transport systems dont work how come they are so sucessful elsewhere. Hop  across the channel and have a look.

It must be the case that a strategic industry like the railways which is to my minds every bit as important as the road netword should be inpublic hands.Actually I expect you to argue for road pricing on all roads even to your front door.

Nor can the current private system be seen to be serving Marple particularly well.

I'm not sure that I said the privatisation of rail was a good thing. I do see an argument for public provision of public transport. However, privatisation has improved transport to a degree, there are more trains running than nationalised days, in fact there are more people travelling by rail than at any time during the nationalised British Railways. The quality of train and service on the train itself and at stations has improved. I do think privatisation was half-cocked, the rail companies should have had control of the rails it ran on, that was a mistake. 7 year franchises were too short to encourage investment.  The comparison with France may seem obvious but in fairness they don't ponce about with builting infrastructure, whilst they had finished a line from the channel to Paris, we were still contending with NIMBY's bemoaning about something or nothing. HS2 seems a great idea but the recession will be over by the time the UK have had all the inquiries and worrying about the beautiful countryside of the midlands - yes the ruddy Midlands - no wonder the French laugh at us.


I also fail to understand why the market is king until business are strugling at which point you want the CT payer to bail them out and ease their CT burden. Those who live by the market have to die by the market as well.

I totally agree, I don't want the taxpayer to bail anyone out, not sure when I suggested I did.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 07, 2012, 11:02:46 PM
No he's right Duke you lost the argument. In fact the arguments you make were lost in the mid 80s

To be honest, my arguments date back to 1776, it's fairly established economics
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Dave on June 09, 2012, 03:28:05 PM
However, privatisation has improved transport to a degree,
It has, but at what cost!   See http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/01/04/the-lesson-of-the-railways-private-is-not-always-best/ ...for the figures, which are eye-watering.  Privatising the railways increased the cost of UK railways to the taxpayer from around £1.2 billion in the days of British Rail, to about £4.2 billion in 2009/01!

Duke also writes:
no wonder the French laugh at us.
..but it's not just the French who are laughing.  It's also the Germans and the Dutch.  Because over the 18 years since privatisation, a number of railway companies have quietly crept back in to public ownership.  The biggest freight carrier, English Welsh and Scottish Rail, is now DB Schenker Rail, owned by Deutsche Bahn, which also owns Arriva.   Our own dear Northern Rail is now owned by NS, the Dutch state railway company.  Thus we UK taxpayers, through our high levels of subsidy to our rail system, are in effect also subsidising the lower fares on state-owned railways in mainland Europe.  You couldn't make it up........

But then Duke, your man Adam Smith knew these things, when he argued that it was the role of the government to provide goods "of such a nature that the profit could never repay the expense to any individual" such as roads, bridges, canals, and harbours.  If railways had existed in 1776, no doubt they would also have been in that list.

Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 10, 2012, 10:46:56 AM
However, privatisation has improved transport to a degree,
It has, but at what cost!   See http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/01/04/the-lesson-of-the-railways-private-is-not-always-best/ ...for the figures, which are eye-watering.  Privatising the railways increased the cost of UK railways to the taxpayer from around £1.2 billion in the days of British Rail, to about £4.2 billion in 2009/01!

Duke also writes:
no wonder the French laugh at us.
..but it's not just the French who are laughing.  It's also the Germans and the Dutch.  Because over the 18 years since privatisation, a number of railway companies have quietly crept back in to public ownership.  The biggest freight carrier, English Welsh and Scottish Rail, is now DB Schenker Rail, owned by Deutsche Bahn, which also owns Arriva.   Our own dear Northern Rail is now owned by NS, the Dutch state railway company.  Thus we UK taxpayers, through our high levels of subsidy to our rail system, are in effect also subsidising the lower fares on state-owned railways in mainland Europe.  You couldn't make it up........

But then Duke, your man Adam Smith knew these things, when he argued that it was the role of the government to provide goods "of such a nature that the profit could never repay the expense to any individual" such as roads, bridges, canals, and harbours.  If railways had existed in 1776, no doubt they would also have been in that list.

Dave Dave Dave, you are only reading half of my post and you’re pushing against an open door. I made my view quite clear:
The State (be that local or National) should only get involved where the market fails to allocate resources in a manner that is good for society. To that end, yes it should provide education, defence, a legal framework, streetlighting etc but it shouldn’t be running a road haulage company, a travel agent or telly company – a free democratic nation doesn’t really need a state broadcasting propaganda machine, especially when it crowds out private investment.
And again reiterated my concerns about rail privatisation:
I'm not sure that I said the privatisation of rail was a good thing. I do see an argument for public provision of public transport. .

I am however, open minded about the issue and prepared to admit there have been successes. You friend’s little blog misses a major point. The point of having a rail network is not to minimise subsidy, it is to transport people (& freight) to minimise pollution & congestion costs and do so at as little a cost to the public purse as possible. Now, the value of the subsidy has gone up in absolute terms but the cost per passenger mile is an indicator that combines the aims of a public transport system and it’s cost, this indicator has fallen since privatisation because the TOCS have been successful in getting passenger numbers up.

Your blog quotes Roy McNulty’s paper on improving the value of our railways. The headline point is we are paying 30% more that in Europe. McNulty’s major argument is there is a major cause of inefficiency in the fact the TOCS do not operate the track. This is exactly my critique of privatisation in that the privatisation divorced the TOCS with the rail.  
I do think privatisation was half-cocked, the rail companies should have had control of the rails it ran on, that was a mistake.
 You will note (your blogger failed in this regard) McNulty does not argue for nationalisation but suggests we reunite the operators with the track. McNulty is clear, he blames the Labour government for meddling too much, government doesn’t allow autonomy for the TOCS,  only now will government allow the TOCS to run less carriages off peak which I’d have thought was basic logic.
Another big worry for me is Privatisation has not fully destroyed the power of Fat Bob Crow & his idiotic union. OK, when one set of workers strike, it no longer takes out the whole service but the TOCS have not addressed this and perhaps as a nationalised industry we could have had a strong Thatcher style stand against this fool & his Lemmings.

In any case, the BBC has none of the characteristics that require state ownership & state funding. Your little blog man actually makes the case for privatisation of the BBC in that state broadcasters cost the state more money than private broadcasters.
Title: Re: Local election results
Post by: Duke Fame on June 10, 2012, 11:46:44 PM
state broadcasters cost the state more money than private broadcasters.

So there you have it - from someone who evidently knows the price of everything and the value of nothing.   

You know Dave, rather than make a few reasonable points to counter your blogger mate, I was tempted to just post "So there you have it - from someone who evidently knows the price of everything and the value of nothing" as a reply. Then I realised it would have made me look clueless ;-)