Living off the fat of the land. - Page 5

garinda · 28-01-2009, 00:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by andrewb

Very clear. Thank-you for condemning them. I agree it's wrong for them to do so, its very cheap to vote against expenses, shout and scream about it, then take it up.

Good.

You're learning to see a little through your blinkers.

I might even try a sadle on you tomorrow.

Good boy.

Have a sugar lump.

jaysay · 28-01-2009, 10:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Good.

You're learning to see a little through your blinkers.

I might even try a sadle on you tomorrow.

Good boy.

Have a sugar lump.

Be careful Rindi, he might just give you a rough ride, make sure you have plenty of sugar lumps just in case

Neil · 28-01-2009, 10:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

I might even try a sadle on you tomorrow.

Are you going to stick an orange in his mouth at the same time and take him for a ride?

jaysay · 28-01-2009, 11:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

Are you going to stick an orange in his mouth at the same time and take him for a ride?

Shoooooooosh Neil people will think Rindi's a Tory MP

garinda · 28-01-2009, 11:20

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

Are you going to stick an orange in his mouth at the same time and take him for a ride?

Goodness no.

You can't ride a Shetland.

My plan is to have him jumping through hoops, then I can sell him to Chipperfield's.

jaysay · 28-01-2009, 11:29

Quote:

Originally Posted by garinda

Goodness no.

You can't ride a Shetland.

My plan is to have him jumping through hoops, then I can sell him to Chipperfield's.

That's being smallist Rindi, and you'll hurt Andrews feelings he's very sensitive you know

lancsdave · 28-01-2009, 19:07

Chicken feed, wait while they get to county council level

ALMOST £2,700 of taxpayers’ money was used to send a senior councillor to an international conference in New York, it has been revealed.
County Hall bosses flew Matthew Tomlinson, the cabinet member in charge of transport, out to the US for the four-day event, saying it would benefit Lancashire.
But an opposition councillor has criticised the decision, insisting that the trip could have been undertaken at a lower cost to council taxpayers.
County Coun Tomlinson, the man in charge of Lancashire’s roads, flew out to the Intelligent Transport Systems World Congress in New York in November at a cost of £2,674.56.
Geoff Driver, leader of County Hall’s opposition Conservative group, said: “The question is: did we need to go to New York? If the answer is yes then we needed to go in the cheapest possible way and £2,700 does not seem to be that way.

Neil · 28-01-2009, 19:49

Quote:

Originally Posted by lancsdave

“The question is: did we need to go to New York? If the answer is yes then we needed to go in the cheapest possible way and £2,700 does not seem to be that way.

I don't agree with going in the cheapest possible way. This man was representing our County. I would not expect him to be flying with chickens on his knee and staying in a B&B while he was there.

garinda · 29-01-2009, 01:09

Quote:

Originally Posted by Neil

I don't agree with going in the cheapest possible way. This man was representing our County. I would not expect him to be flying with chickens on his knee and staying in a B&B while he was there.

I bet he'd have found a better deal for a flight that cost £2,674.56, without having a crate of chickens on his lap, or being strapped to a wing of the plane for the journey, if he'd been paying for the trip out of his own pocket.

jaysay · 29-01-2009, 10:21

Its not that long since that a Labour County Councillor was on seminar somewhere in the lake district, it so happened that there was an important meeting back in good old Hyndburn so the said councillor booked a taxi there and back to attend the meeting then return to the away day junket in sunny Cumbria

jaysay · 30-01-2009, 11:39

Maybe, just maybe, if the Observer had published the whole facts about councillors expenses for staying away from home on council business, the big furore could have been avoided. I think, not for the first time the Observer have been guilty of using journalist licence or in other words why let the truth get in the way of a good story. The facts of the issue are as follows.
The allowances claimed by councillors are set by an Independent Revue Body, the allowances for overnight accommodation were set at £110 for accommodation and £10 for meal allowance around 5 or 6 years ago, on revue it was recommended the the maximum allowances be increased to £145 and £25 respectively. These amounts are not what councillors are paid but what is the upper limit that can be claimed. Councillors who stay away on council business have to furnish all receipts for meals and accomadation in order to claim back out of pocket expenses, a fact that was not mentioned in the Observer article last Friday. Over the last 12 months Councillor Britcliffe has stayed away on council business just one night, that was when he visited Downing Street representing Hyndburn. On this occasion his accommodation was pre-booked on line prior to going, the cost of which was £79 for overnight accommodation Bed and Breakfast in central London and he claimed £12-30p for an evening meal. I hardly think that by any stretch of the imagination can be classed as Living of the fat of the land

Benipete · 30-01-2009, 11:50

Quote;On this occasion his accommodation was pre-booked on line prior to going, the cost of which was £79 for overnight accommodation Bed and Breakfast in central London and he claimed £12-30p for an evening meal. I hardly think that by any stretch of the imagination can be classed as Living of the fat of the land;

Why didn't you say before you spoke?

jaysay · 30-01-2009, 12:55

Quote:

Originally Posted by Benipete

Quote;On this occasion his accommodation was pre-booked on line prior to going, the cost of which was £79 for overnight accommodation Bed and Breakfast in central London and he claimed £12-30p for an evening meal. I hardly think that by any stretch of the imagination can be classed as Living of the fat of the land;

Why didn't you say before you spoke?

garinda · 30-01-2009, 13:12

The Observer did their duty in giving the facts, as far as I see it.

The original story did mention that the increases had been recommended by an independent review body.

Just as they also mentioned that some councillors voted for to award the increases, and some didn't.

I wonder why Peter Britcliffe voted for increases of such a great percentage hike, when he's proved that he could both accommodate and feed himself in our most expensive city, for much less than the voted for increases?

Would our councillors not have been wiser to vote for a lesser increase than the independent review suggested, thus showing the rest of the residents of Hyndburn that they understand the need for restraint in this financial crisis?

The lack of understanding of people's feeling on this matter, when many people are struggling, and many fear unemployment, nevermind if they are in work having to settle for pay freezes or cuts, makes those councillors who voted for the increases look like they have very little understanding of the real world.

garinda · 30-01-2009, 13:22

Quote:

Originally Posted by jaysay

Maybe, just maybe, if the Observer had published the whole facts about councillors expenses for staying away from home on council business, the big furore could have been avoided. I think, not for the first time the Observer have been guilty of using journalist licence or in other words why let the truth get in the way of a good story. The facts of the issue are as follows.
The allowances claimed by councillors are set by an Independent Revue Body, the allowances for overnight accommodation were set at £110 for accommodation and £10 for meal allowance around 5 or 6 years ago, on revue it was recommended the the maximum allowances be increased to £145 and £25 respectively. These amounts are not what councillors are paid but what is the upper limit that can be claimed. Councillors who stay away on council business have to furnish all receipts for meals and accomadation in order to claim back out of pocket expenses, a fact that was not mentioned in the Observer article last Friday. Over the last 12 months Councillor Britcliffe has stayed away on council business just one night, that was when he visited Downing Street representing Hyndburn. On this occasion his accommodation was pre-booked on line prior to going, the cost of which was £79 for overnight accommodation Bed and Breakfast in central London and he claimed £12-30p for an evening meal. I hardly think that by any stretch of the imagination can be classed as Living of the fat of the land

Blimey, you have access to much more detailed information about Cllr. Britcliffe's comings and goings than the journalists at the Observer.

Was the 30p a tip?

I hope it's not too much of a burden having friends in such high places, and being used as a mouthpiece.

We'll have to start calling you Emu, Nookie Bear, or would you prefer Lord Charles?

Did the £12.30 include a nice 'gottle of gear' for Cllr. Britcliffe?