Full Council - 1st & 9th March

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by jaysay

It shows a good man who apologies when he is wrong, maybe the use of the word "allegedly", may have avoided that, or the start of any sentence where your not 100% sure of your facts could srart "is it true" nobody can be pulled up for asking a question Ken

Thank you, John. It was a stupid error but worth it to learn a valuable lesson.

Cllr Britcliffe appeared to followed suit by threatening legal action to the opposition last night on various points. I can't say I condone such tactics over something and nothing and it would take something fairly major to incense me in such a way but I suppose that's the difference between us.

For myself, the greatest shock last night was the accusation that by submitting a motion to cancel buffets we were actually trying to increase our own allowances by the back door, a truly amazing piece of spin which I congratulated the Leader on at the time. The defence against cancelling council buffets was that it was far cheaper than claiming meal allowances, to my mind completely missing the whole point of what I was trying to say.

This came shortly before a question regarding the £17,500 mentioned last week in the Conservative budget which turned out to be payments of £500 per councillor to spend on whatever they saw fit in their ward. Despite repeated statements from Conservatives that the previous Labour government spent more than it should we get this behaviour from the local controlling group at a time when we should be making as many painless cuts as possible to save money.

Being an opposition councillor is tantamount to political impotence in many matters and why I very strongly hope that control of the council shifts to Labour in May. The increase in the workload will probably be even more than I imagine but if it means that we get to stop spending money that the borough cannot afford then I welcome the challenge.

I implore the residents to look beyond a flurry of handouts when casting their vote this May.

[lancsdave]

Originally Posted by accyman

why risk damage to your tv when you have a perfectly good HBC callendar to throw darts at?

or have you already worn it out ?

I thought you only got one if you lived in a particular kingdom of the borough ?

[lancsdave]

What happened regarding the allowance rise ?

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by lancsdave

What happened regarding the allowance rise ?

It would seem that it is still going ahead. The Leader of the Council intimated that any councillor could reduce their allowances in private without making it public.

For the record, every member of the Labour group has signed a statement to say that they will not be taking the 3.6% increase next year. I personally will happily do what I feel is right and keep myself publicly accountable, regardless of whether it is regarded as 'gesture politics' or 'tokenism' by the Conservative group, labels which seem to have replaced 'good news' as new buzz words.

The public put me where I am, they deserve to know what is happening with their money.

[garinda]

Was it mentioned that there might be a conflict of interest, with the butties and buffets coming from a firm closely associated with someone who's now a councillor?

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by garinda

Was it mentioned that there might be a conflict of interest, with the butties and buffets coming from a firm closely associated with someone who's now a councillor?

Cllr Hurn and Cllr Pam Barton left the chamber through a personal and prejudicial interest in the matter. The situation with buffets does not sit well with me for various reasons, plus it is what I consider to be a non-essential item of council spending. I'm sure someone will bring up Daltons but printing council literature is a little bit more important than feeding the councillors in my opinion.

It would appear that at least 17 members of the council are averse to either making their own lunch or paying for it themselves based on last night's vote. In order to have lost that motion at least one of the Independent councillors would seem to have voted against it as I don't recall any abstentions.

That surprises me most of all as they accused Labour of not cutting back far enough in our budget.

[claytonender]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

It would seem that it is still going ahead. The Leader of the Council intimated that any councillor could reduce their allowances in private without making it public.

For the record, every member of the Labour group has signed a statement to say that they will not be taking the 3.6% increase next year. I personally will happily do what I feel is right and keep myself publicly accountable, regardless of whether it is regarded as 'gesture politics' or 'tokenism' by the Conservative group, labels which seem to have replaced 'good news' as new buzz words.

The public put me where I am, they deserve to know what is happening with their money.

As well as not taking any increase from 1 April I have reduced my allowances by 7.5% from the 1 March. I know we have been instructed not to make any 'token' gestures and to reduce our allowances in private, but I am not prepared to be dictated too by the leader of another party.

[Neil]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

It would seem that it is still going ahead. The Leader of the Council intimated that any councillor could reduce their allowances in private without making it public.

Originally Posted by claytonender

.... I know we have been instructed not to make any 'token' gestures and to reduce our allowances in private, but I am not prepared to be dictated too by the leader of another party.

You can't do it in private as anyone could FOI it anyway

[gynn]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

This came shortly before a question regarding the £17,500 mentioned last week in the Conservative budget which turned out to be payments of £500 per councillor to spend on whatever they saw fit in their ward.

A sort of Re-Election Fund?

Now that DOES sound dodgy.

And very, very illegal.

There is that word again!

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by gynn

A sort of Re-Election Fund?

Now that DOES sound dodgy.

And very, very illegal.

There is that word again!

So long as its not spent on electioneering and is available to all councillors can't see the problem gynn, bur even so you ain't going to buy to many votes with 500 quid are you

[accysimon]

Originally Posted by jaysay

So long as its not spent on electioneering and is available to all councillors can't see the problem gynn, bur even so you ain't going to buy to many votes with 500 quid are you

Maybe not, but it would cover a large slice, if not all, of the leaflet and poster printing costs.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by accysimon

Maybe not, but it would cover a large slice, if not all, of the leaflet and poster printing costs.

Any money spent has to be accounted for, and I think you'll find it has to be spent on community projects.

[Ken Moss]

Originally Posted by jaysay

Any money spent has to be accounted for, and I think you'll find it has to be spent on community projects

Unfortunately, the Conservative Leader's Budget spreadsheet indicates much spending which has little or no connection to community projects.

£120.91 on newspapers?

£100.00 on a buffet for a group meeting?

£35.00 on pie and peas for a group meeting?

£77.60 on drinks and decorations for the Leader's office?

£59.50 on a camera?

I understand from discussions I have had with senior executives at Scaitcliffe House that the £17,500 discussed is to be counted within next year's Leader's Budgets.

[gynn]

Originally Posted by jaysay

So long as its not spent on electioneering and is available to all councillors can't see the problem gynn, bur even so you ain't going to buy to many votes with 500 quid are you

No you aren't, but its 500 quid more than the other candidates (of all parties) are getting. That creates an uneven playing field in each ward.

Which is illegal.

[jaysay]

Originally Posted by Ken Moss

Unfortunately, the Conservative Leader's Budget spreadsheet indicates much spending which has little or no connection to community projects.

£120.91 on newspapers?

£100.00 on a buffet for a group meeting?

£35.00 on pie and peas for a group meeting?

£77.60 on drinks and decorations for the Leader's office?

£59.50 on a camera?

I understand from discussions I have had with senior executives at Scaitcliffe House that the £17,500 discussed is to be counted within next year's Leader's Budgets.

Quite obviously Being a right thinking person I can't condone that spending Ken, in any way shape or form, my comments were made about the £17,500 which cannot be spent on election leaflets that's all