Voting on Issues.

Let me see you vote for your MP or your Councillor. He or she could be New Labour – Conservative-Liberal– BNP– Independent what ever. So there is a vote how should he or she cast that vote.

1. Party Lines? You are whipped into a view even though you disagree? most major parties work this way. Even in council the cabinet speaks and the rest just nod.
2. You argue just for the sake of it, even though you no there is no chance of you view being listened to or taken into account.
3. You just like the sound of your own voice so you speak any way.

Or you sit back listen to the alternatives, and vote to secure the best deal for your City or ward?

It always amazes me when i get some cretin saying if you are in the opposition you oppose, what if the point being put forward is sound and workable. What happens if it’s the best deal on the table?

I for one have never been afraid to voice my views, unlike some people i have witnessed who never utter a word just follow like sheep. But if i feel it’s the right decision for the people i represent i will take it.

Unlike one group of individuals that seem hell bent on having a moan but forget to offer any real answers to the problems. Like they say it’s easy in opposition but running the shop is a totally new ball game.

 

 

From Salford youth Council. My only comment the Star in my view acts as a policeman for Local Government and is sadly missed for it’s content.

Our committee was presented with an emergency motion this evening:

“SUPPORT THE SALFORD STAR”

Membership calls on the Youth Council Committee to:

1. Condemn the decision by the Budget Sub-Group of the East Salford Community Committee to turn down the funding application made by the Salford Star.

2. Boycott the city council’s “Life IN Salford” publication and no longer provide content to them via the youth service run youth local forums on the following grounds:

a. Unfairly biased in favour of the city council’s executive department and does not provide any form of representative outlet for local people to express their views on the services provided to them.

b. Produced at an obscenely high cost – which is passed on to the public at the expense of other public services which are currently being cut by the city council – including Children’s Services.

3. Petition local councillors in our respective wards to overturn the decision by the East Salford Community Committee.

4. Agree to support the continued work of the Salford Star by whatever means necessary.

This motion was PASSED unanimously.

In response Rachel Cavendish (Co-Chair of the Salford Youth Council committee) commented:

“The denial of such a minuscule sum of critical funding designated for independent community projects like the star has clearly been influenced by those who wish to censor freedom of speech. There are elected and unelected officials who represent the people of Salford who simply to do not wish the public to hear the truth about how the their local authority is failing them. It is crucial young people stand up to this type of censorship and are made aware of the actions of the city council. This is a disgrace.”

Cllr Warmisham shame on You. I think you owe me a new pair of pants.

 Take a look on Cllr Warmishams Blog to understand the Picture,

Well first the Tories fight for the Pink vote and now?

The Grey vote is it me, or when you read the Tory blogs do they seem like their getting desperate. Just because your hair is grey you still have a brain and vote for who you think will serve you the best.i get the feeling that some politicians think that after you reach 65 you can’t think for your self.

Found this on Mudhooks blog

mudhook

EAT THE APPLE, LOOK THROUGH THE TELESCOPE IN CORNWALL AND ELSEWHERE

LIBDEM MUDDLE

Liberal Democrats are now in a mire of muddle about fairness.

* They have announced they would abolish Labour’s winter fuel payment for people aged 60-64 who presently get it; people of 65 and over would still get it. Half the money saved would go, regardless of means, to the severely disabled and the terminally ill of any age as winter fuel payment of £200. Extending the payment to these people is good but many of those who presently get the payment and from whom the Libdems will take it are people who are poor. We should not be asking the vulnerable poor in their early sixties to pay for other vulnerable people. There are about 32 000 people aged 60-64 in Cornwall who would lose this winter fuel payment and the Libdems are silent about the poor and vulnerable in Cornwall who would lose by their policy. This loss probably won’t appear on Libdem election leaflets though I expect the extension will. Oh, and in 1999 the Libdems described winter fuel payments as “a gimmick of a policy” (Hansard 18 January 1999 column 648). I assume they’ve changed their minds about that.

* Upping the tax threshold to £10 000, at cost of about £17 billion, is presented as a Libdem fairness policy. Unfortunately this analysis shows that only about £1 billion of this would go to lift those at the bottom out of tax and £16 billion would go to cutting the tax of those on middle and high incomes and the policy would increase inequality. Of course, people too poor to pay tax would not gain anything at all. The Libdems say that all their policies have to be seen as a whole to measure the effect on rich and poor but I haven’t found any Libdem analysis of that whole comparable to the above analysis of the £10 000 threshold policy. In itself the increase in the threshold would give people on middle incomes much more than those on low incomes; the report devastatingly quotes Michael Howard rejecting such a policy for that very reason.

* The Libdems say they would add to Labour’s weighting for disadvantaged pupils with an additional pupil premium. This would cost about £2.5 billion. It sounds very progressive but look at this paper, A disadvantaged pupil premium, by the Institute for fiscal studies (IFS). The IFS paper indicates that there is a weak link between perpupil spending and attainment and that perhaps eight times more than the Libdem proposals is needed to make a difference.

* The other day Dan Rogerson, Libdem MP for North Cornwall, said that “scandalously” pupils in inner London get more perhead spent on them than pupils in Cornwall. It’s a familiar Libdem complaint, victim Cornwall; the figures are here. Yes, the inner London figures are higher.

Now consider this. Free school meals are an approximate proxy for deprivation. Look at the proportions of pupils known to be eligible for free school meals in Cornwall and inner London, to use Rogerson’s geographic terms though I think the variation in individual schools make the terms of limited relevance here. The proportions of primary and secondary pupils in Cornwall who are known to be eligible for free school meals are 11 percent and 9 percent. For inner London the figures are 34 and 35 percent. There are some schools in inner London where more than half the pupils are known to be eligible for free school meals; no school in Cornwall approaches anywhere near that proportion though a few have disturbingly high proportions. The tables are here (local authorities) and here (individual schools). Look too at the index of multiple deprivation (you can find it through the post Cornwall data on this site).

The Cornwall Libdem approach is outdated and unacceptable. We have to look at reducing disadvantage as a whole. We can identify deprivation very finely and we should focus on the individuals and families in need wherever they are. In education, as an important part of that, while every school needs a substantial base of funds to operate, we should be pressing for the focus to recognise individual pupils and schools where the disadvantage and need are most keenly felt – and remember the IFS paper which indicates a vast input of funds is required, a difficulty as we struggle with a monstrous deficit. We should also be looking for a significant and also difficult boost to Labour’s Sure Start which helps before children get to school.

* The county council Libdems agreed the contract for the waste incinerator and now the party, well, what does it think should happen? This is the party that ran Cornwall county council as the council gathered troubling report after troubling report. The Libdems promised us millions of pounds of nett savings from their imposed unitary council. There are none apparently. I don’t suppose that’ll appear on their election leaflets either.

Let’s end with a quiz.

The Liberal Democrats: do you
1 Laugh