Council again..

[derekgas]

You are right entwisi, the minimum wage works both ways, it stops employers paying less than the minimum, but is also used as a tool to downgrade wages, in the current climate, the minimum wage is a good thing rather than a bad one, if jobs were plentiful, it would be the opposite. Any debate at present by either main party, would be seen as deflection from other issues.

[andrewb]

As predicted Labour tried to pin the Conservatives as being anti minimum wage. Peter Britcliffe confirmed that he was indeed in favour of the minimum wage, as were the local and national Conservatives. The motion was voted against. After all what would be the point in writing to David Cameron, only to tell him they still agreed with the policy. I ask you why are the council not writing on every issue? Every issue can't be used for point scoring.

I'd put money on local Labour still coming out with the 'fact' that Conservatives voted against the motion. This would of course would be completely misleading the pubic by hiding the full story... but there is an another election coming up.

[BERNADETTE]

Originally Posted by andrewb

Indeed, but that isn't what I'm posting about.

Of course it wasn't you were asking if the proposal should be discussed at local level. As we live in an area where a lot of jobs are shall we say "low pay" then I think it should be discussed by our council. The fact that it has been shelved for the moment means nothing if it is going to be a proposal at some later date.

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by BERNADETTE

Of course it wasn't you were asking if the proposal should be discussed at local level. As we live in an area where a lot of jobs are shall we say "low pay" then I think it should be discussed by our council. The fact that it has been shelved for the moment means nothing if it is going to be a proposal at some later date.

It was precisely, because we live in a ''low pay'' that the Labour Group brought this motion to tonight's council meeting. Clare Pritchard and myself had spoken about the Employment Opportunities Bill several times since we both became aware of it, at the begining of May. We had both signed the petition against the bill (which was originally scheduled to have its 2nd reading - on May 15th). The 2nd reading is now scheduled for 12 June.

Andrew maybe you can answer me as to why, you think, if David Cameron does not support the bill, he allowed Christopher Chope to present this bill to parliament in February. Did he just hope that no one would take any notice of it and it would become law?
Maybe it is a case of Tory arrogance not taking into account public opinion.

This is a link to the a Daily Mirror article on the interview
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-sto...5875-21363243/

The Sunday Mirror has run an article on the MPs supporting the Minimum Wage Opt-out Bill employing their wives while supporting a Bill that condemns 'magic circle' jobs.

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-sto...5875-21346677/

Which appears to smack of 'do as I say not do as I do'

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by claytonender

Andrew maybe you can answer me as to why, you think, if David Cameron does not support the bill, he allowed Christopher Chope to present this bill to parliament in February. Did he just hope that no one would take any notice of it and it would become law?
Maybe it is a case of Tory arrogance not taking into account public opinion.

As you well know it's a private members bill, not that of the Conservative party. It's not up to David Cameron whether to 'allow' it. You know that the national Conservatives under David Cameron support the minimum wage, and you know that the local Conservatives in Hyndburn do too. The motion was nothing more than posturing as Mr Britcliffe put it.

It's quite rich that in today's climate the Labour party would accuse anybody of not understanding public opinion!

[Eric]

How much is the minimum wage? In Ontario, it's around $10.00 an hour. And if it is your only income, you probably won't make enough to pay income tax; so, it's as near as damnit tax free. From what I gather from some of the posts on the price of basic stuff, particularly food, a sawbuck goes a bit further over here than it does there. But in terms of the topic, I would agree that local govt. shouldn't be wasting time on stuff like the minimum wage ... but, I don't agree with party politics of any kind at the municipal level.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by andrewb

After all what would be the point in writing to David Cameron, only to tell him they still agreed with the policy.

The point would have stopped the local Labour party being able to say they were against minimum wage. Lets see if they now lie and still say the Hyndburn Tories are against it in there propaganda leaflets

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by andrewb

As you well know it's a private members bill, not that of the Conservative party. It's not up to David Cameron whether to 'allow' it. You know that the national Conservatives under David Cameron support the minimum wage, and you know that the local Conservatives in Hyndburn do too. The motion was nothing more than posturing as Mr Britcliffe put it.

It's quite rich that in today's climate the Labour party would accuse anybody of not understanding public opinion!

Andrew I am quite aware it is a private members bill, but I fail to see why David Cameron has not condemned it, if he does in fact support the minimum wage.

I can assure you that the motion was not posturing and as you were not responsible for writing the motion, you can only hazard your wild (and inaccurate) guesses as to the motives of the Labour Group. The members of the Labour Group feel very passionate about the minimum wage.

Peter Britcliffe has not always supported the minimum wage - I asked a question at a public meeting (in Accrington Town Hall) of all the candidates (seeking election to Parliament for Hyndburn) in the 1997 general. I asked if the candidates supported the introduction of a minimum wage and whether they were prepared to work for £2.50 an hour (which was the wage quoted for a job that had appeared in the Observer the previous weekend). All the candidates - with the exception of Peter Britcliffe- supported the intoductionof a national minimum wage.

Also, as you were at last night's meeting maybe you would like to tell everyone, how Peter Britcliffe changed the Constitution of Hyndburn Borough Council to appoint a Chairperson to chair meetings of Full Council, instead of the Mayor. This demeans the role of the Mayor and reduces them to a mere figurehead. Maybe you agree, with members of Hyndburn Borough Council only being informed of important changes to the constitution being presented to them as they enter the Council chamber for the meeting. A similar thing also occured at the last Council meeting, when the spending for the Civic Theatre was brought to the meeting as a late item. Cllr Dave Parkin was quite correct last night when he said that we were being subjected to the 'Britcliffe Bulldozer'.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by claytonender

Andrew I am quite aware it is a private members bill, but I fail to see why David Cameron has not condemned it, if he does in fact support the minimum wage.


Also, as you were at last night's meeting maybe you would like to tell everyone, how Peter Britcliffe changed the Constitution of Hyndburn Borough Council to appoint a Chairperson to chair meetings of Full Council, instead of the Mayor. This demeans the role of the Mayor and reduces them to a mere figurehead. Maybe you agree, with members of Hyndburn Borough Council only being informed of important changes to the constitution being presented to them as they enter the Council chamber for the meeting. A similar thing also occured at the last Council meeting, when the spending for the Civic Theatre was brought to the meeting as a late item. Cllr Dave Parkin was quite correct last night when he said that we were being subjected to the 'Britcliffe Bulldozer'.

Did you propose a motion to condemn Gordon Brown doubling the tax for those on the minimum wage? Perhaps you wrote one asking for a general election, I certainly hope you signed the petition that was passed around last night. Labour could quite easily have written a motion supporting the minimum wage and you'd have support from across the room, but instead choose to make it party political involving silly letters to just one party leader whom you already know supports the minimum wage!

There is such hypocrisy in local politics, it turns me off never mind those already less involved in politics. Not too long ago the Labour group proposed increasing the council tax on empty properties, at the last moment with no mention of it in the agenda. As it had large financial implications it couldn't just be voted on the fly, so the Conservatives opposed it.

Let's give people the full picture. Last night there was a vote to give the mayor the OPTION whether to chair council meetings. Any mayor who wishes to can still do so. I spoke to some people in the public gallery and they could not understand why Labour were making such a big fuss and demanding a 20 minute adjournment to discuss something that seemed quite simple to them.

[ClarePritchard]

What a load of complete tosh Andrew, I took an item to full council to remove the unjust exemptions on council tax for empty properties. A report accompanied it which was written and costed by the Finance Director of the council, do you think he produced that in 5 minutes? The idea that it was brought to council at the last minute is Britcliffe spin, it was an ammendment to his motion which was brought, fully costed, with full officer participation.

[ClarePritchard]

The Labour Group didn't ask for the 20 minute adjournment by the way, Nick Collingridge did, and he's independant, 10 minutes was ample time to read it but it should have been circulated in advance of the meeting.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by ClarePritchard

What a load of complete tosh Andrew, I took an item to full council to remove the unjust exemptions on council tax for empty properties. A report accompanied it which was written and costed by the Finance Director of the council, do you think he produced that in 5 minutes? The idea that it was brought to council at the last minute is Britcliffe spin, it was an ammendment to his motion which was brought, fully costed, with full officer participation.

Not a load of tosh. I was at the council meeting where this was proposed. I had the agenda and every piece of agenda document. Nowhere to be seen.

My apologies for saying it was the Labour group who proposed 20 minutes, you still voted for it, which seems strange if you thought 10 minutes was enough!

[claytonender]

Andrew, do you think it is good for local democracy for the opposition councilllors to be given no time to read council papers, which are proposing important changes to the consitution of Hyndburn Council? From your view of the request at last night's meeting, it would appear that you do - so much for freedom of speech and welcome to Peter Britcliffe's totalitarian state.

[andrewb]

Originally Posted by claytonender

Andrew, do you think it is good for local democracy for the opposition councilllors to be given no time to read council papers, which are proposing important changes to the consitution of Hyndburn Council? From your view of the request at last night's meeting, it would appear that you do - so much for freedom of speech and welcome to Peter Britcliffe's totalitarian state.

I do think 10 minutes was enough time for this particular non-controversial issue. The secretary of the Labour group agrees that it was ample time. While the members of the public in the public gallery thought that 10 minutes was excessive.

Claytonender do you think it's good for local democracy for the opposition to propose council papers with huge financial implications, without distributing them first, and then using the vote in leaflets to gain political advantage?

The agenda and minutes are here: Council I point out that the agenda and attached documents have no mention of the huge change in council tax for empty properties, but if you read the minutes the Labour group suddenly propose the amendment in full. I was as surprised as anybody else as to why a huge financial change was not given in advance to be scrutinised.

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by andrewb

Not a load of tosh. I was at the council meeting where this was proposed. I had the agenda and every piece of agenda document. Nowhere to be seen.

My apologies for saying it was the Labour group who proposed 20 minutes, you still voted for it, which seems strange if you thought 10 minutes was enough!

Maybe you should read Clare's post again, she stated that it was an amendement to a motion proposed on the night of the meeting. I circulted all the costings to the councillors present but Peter Britcliffe refused to read the costings. As Clare said, in her post, the proposal had been fully costed out by the Finance Director and I am sure Peter Britcliffe had already been informed of our plans. He could have proposed an adjournment to read our report, but as usual he choose to ridicule his opponents.

The man is a joke, he twists the truth constantly and chooses to ignore the views of the people of Hyndburn, he is demeaning the role of Leader of The Council. Unfortunately the people of Hyndburn have to live with his inflated ego.