Anti-cuts protest at Southend Council (From Echo)

Alice in Her Own Land :P wrote:
The council could save so much money if they stopped shelling out on cr@p like:
The roofless closed cafe at Warrior Square - what a disgrace that is.
The millenium clock - clapped out and now being paid for it's storage fee.
Palm trees - totally unsuitable for the climate in this country.
Endless consultations for things that don't materialise.
A pointless new library when a suitable, recently converted to being self-service.
I'm sure other commentators on this site can add to the list of monumental wastes of money by the council.

The Cater Wood Creeper wrote:
they seem to have missed out an 'n' in the second word of that headline

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Alice in Her Own Land :P wrote:
The council could save so much money if they stopped shelling out on cr@p like:
The roofless closed cafe at Warrior Square - what a disgrace that is.
The millenium clock - clapped out and now being paid for it's storage fee.
Palm trees - totally unsuitable for the climate in this country.
Endless consultations for things that don't materialise.
A pointless new library when a suitable, recently converted to being self-service.
I'm sure other commentators on this site can add to the list of monumental wastes of money by the council.

£15.5 MILLION tarting up the Civic Centre.

LibbyJ wrote:

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Alice in Her Own Land :P wrote:
The council could save so much money if they stopped shelling out on cr@p like:
The roofless closed cafe at Warrior Square - what a disgrace that is.
The millenium clock - clapped out and now being paid for it's storage fee.
Palm trees - totally unsuitable for the climate in this country.
Endless consultations for things that don't materialise.
A pointless new library when a suitable, recently converted to being self-service.
I'm sure other commentators on this site can add to the list of monumental wastes of money by the council.

£15.5 MILLION tarting up the Civic Centre.

HERE! HERE! BUT:

SBC are able to be so cynical in their choice of vanity spending and cuts that affect the most vulnerable because they know that the vast majority of voters either don't know or care.

I am a lifelong tory voter, but I cannot abide this greedy, short sighted, destructive, self serving, bunch.

sash bore buoy wrote:
what is more vile...execution of students in tianamen square or trying to balance the books? i'll go with balancing the books myself

Brunning999 wrote:
That is about 20 people who made the story, is it possible perhaps to have a photo of the 180,000 people from Southend that was not there, now that is a better story the fact that 180,000 couldn't give a toss.

aduksquack wrote:

Brunning999 wrote:
That is about 20 people who made the story, is it possible perhaps to have a photo of the 180,000 people from Southend that was not there, now that is a better story the fact that 180,000 couldn't give a toss.

This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.

aduksquack wrote:

Brunning999 wrote:
That is about 20 people who made the story, is it possible perhaps to have a photo of the 180,000 people from Southend that was not there, now that is a better story the fact that 180,000 couldn't give a toss.

This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

Alice in Her Own Land :P wrote: The council could save so much money if they stopped shelling out on cr@p like: The roofless closed cafe at Warrior Square - what a disgrace that is. The millenium clock - clapped out and now being paid for it's storage fee. Palm trees - totally unsuitable for the climate in this country. Endless consultations for things that don't materialise. A pointless new library when a suitable, recently converted to being self-service. I'm sure other commentators on this site can add to the list of monumental wastes of money by the council.

£15.5 MILLION tarting up the Civic Centre.

Nebs wrote:
What is the To Let sign on the station roof advertising, is there a spare unit inside the station?

Brunning999 wrote:

aduksquack wrote:

Brunning999 wrote:
That is about 20 people who made the story, is it possible perhaps to have a photo of the 180,000 people from Southend that was not there, now that is a better story the fact that 180,000 couldn't give a toss.

This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.

What are you on about you dopey duck it is a protest end of basically by people that are teaching their young children
' IF YOU DON'T GET WHAT YOU WANT TAKE TO THE STREETS'

And don't give a shyt who must pay for it all !!!!

A Dermot wrote:
The back of the civic offices is actually subsiding, there are offices near the birth marriages deaths section were huge crack spread across the walls and the floor sags. It started after a water pipe burst and washed away the foundations in one corner. Best pull the whole building down before it toples over.

Keptquiettillnow wrote:

A Dermot wrote:
The back of the civic offices is actually subsiding, there are offices near the birth marriages deaths section were huge crack spread across the walls and the floor sags. It started after a water pipe burst and washed away the foundations in one corner. Best pull the whole building down before it toples over.

Is there a link for that info, or is just hearsay?

Lefty Cyclist Type wrote:

sash bore buoy wrote:
what is more vile...execution of students in tianamen square or trying to balance the books? i'll go with balancing the books myself

What is more vile, painting a council building at the expense of feeding the elderly and vulnerable, or not stealing the food from their plates in the first place?

Anyone who advocates stealing food from the vulnerable to pay for the mistakes of this Conservative council is repulsive.

Brunning999 wrote:
That is about 20 people who made the story, is it possible perhaps to have a photo of the 180,000 people from Southend that was not there, now that is a better story the fact that 180,000 couldn't give a toss.

aduksquack wrote:

Brunning999 wrote:

aduksquack wrote:

Brunning999 wrote:
That is about 20 people who made the story, is it possible perhaps to have a photo of the 180,000 people from Southend that was not there, now that is a better story the fact that 180,000 couldn't give a toss.

This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.

What are you on about you dopey duck it is a protest end of basically by people that are teaching their young children
' IF YOU DON'T GET WHAT YOU WANT TAKE TO THE STREETS'

And don't give a shyt who must pay for it all !!!!

The fact that it was a protest explains why there were so few people there. Although the story doesn't actually mention numbers so I presume you just 'looked at der pikchur' and didn't actually read anything.

But then we have come to expect nothing less from you. You paint a self-portrait of a bitter, twisted, nasty, selfish little person who would happily trample the elderly and disabled just so you are ok.

jayman wrote:
here is a summery of the council cuts

Adult & Community Services - £2.825m
Children & Learning - £2.005m
Enterprise, Tourism & the Environment - £1.640m
Support Services - £0.930m and
Corporate - £0.449m

i think it shows that the council care less about children and the community over all departments..

read the whole harrowing tale at
http://www.southend.

gov.uk/news/article/

664/council_sets_201

213_budget..

sash bore buoy wrote:

jayman wrote:
here is a summery of the council cuts

Adult & Community Services - £2.825m
Children & Learning - £2.005m
Enterprise, Tourism & the Environment - £1.640m
Support Services - £0.930m and
Corporate - £0.449m

i think it shows that the council care less about children and the community over all departments..

read the whole harrowing tale at
http://www.southend.


gov.uk/news/article/


664/council_sets_201


213_budget..

really? just how does it do that? so much emotive language with zero substance. get a grip..take yourself off suicide watch. what are the existing budgets and what are the percentages that have been cut? don't let the real facts get in the way tho jayman.

sash bore buoy wrote:
these numbers are meaningless unless they are compared against existing budgets as you well know. your worthless propagandering is er...worthless.

sash bore buoy wrote:
what ****. i'll give you a clue..the corporate budget is a fraction of the education budget as you well know. so i'll ask you again what percentage of the budget for each department do the cuts represent? i'm not expecting you to come back with the answer just more shameless electioneering.

sash bore buoy wrote:
so how on earth are you qualified to say which budgets have been cut the most? did you know that 1% of 1mio = 10,000 but 1% of 1bio = 10mio but %s are irrelevant in your world. so much bluster and so little substance. i thought you were better than this jayman...

sash bore buoy wrote:
no %s are essential when resources are finite. there is only relative. there is no absolute. the pie is only so big. it is how you cut your pie that counts. you are unable to tell me how big the pie is or how it is divided up.

jayman wrote:

sash bore buoy wrote:
so how on earth are you qualified to say which budgets have been cut the most? did you know that 1% of 1mio = 10,000 but 1% of 1bio = 10mio but %s are irrelevant in your world. so much bluster and so little substance. i thought you were better than this jayman...

percentages are only useful on a spread sheet or if you are completing a tax return. percentages in real terms are useless when there affect has not been quantified. example. to cut the councils corporate budget dramatically near 'completely' may be a good move as it would remove the councils ability and scope for squandering massive amounts of money on consultants, hospitality, upper echelon council perks ect ect. however, cutting the educational budget will, without fail take away the few chances our poorest children have to succeed. this comes at a time when we need a highly educated workforce to compete in a cut throat global market. but then again the Tories don't have a good track record for providing good educational chances for all.. do they. I suppose there is going to be a renascence of the grammar school soon.

jayman wrote:

sash bore buoy wrote:
no %s are essential when resources are finite. there is only relative. there is no absolute. the pie is only so big. it is how you cut your pie that counts. you are unable to tell me how big the pie is or how it is divided up.

i think you will find that is the councils responsibility! as the council have not provided the breakdown or the rational for the cuts and until the council publish comprehensive, easy to find and access documentation without party political comments running through it like a Tory voter friendly narrative then we are both in the same boat..

until then sash..

Nebs wrote:
If the figures on the website
http://www.budgetsim


ulator.com/southend are correct, and the figures in Jaymans 6.33pmsaturday post are correct, and I have no reason to doubt either, then a bit of maths comes out with the following budget (in millions) and the level of cut as a percentage:
Adult Social Care 60.2, 4.7%
Sport Leisure Culture 10.5, 19.1%
Children and young people 35.6, 5.0%
Environment and street scene 26.5, 3.5%
Community development 8.3, 5.4%
I stand to be corrected if anyone else works it out different.

Nebs wrote:

jayman wrote:

sash bore buoy wrote:
so how on earth are you qualified to say which budgets have been cut the most? did you know that 1% of 1mio = 10,000 but 1% of 1bio = 10mio but %s are irrelevant in your world. so much bluster and so little substance. i thought you were better than this jayman...

percentages are only useful on a spread sheet or if you are completing a tax return. percentages in real terms are useless when there affect has not been quantified. example. to cut the councils corporate budget dramatically near 'completely' may be a good move as it would remove the councils ability and scope for squandering massive amounts of money on consultants, hospitality, upper echelon council perks ect ect. however, cutting the educational budget will, without fail take away the few chances our poorest children have to succeed. this comes at a time when we need a highly educated workforce to compete in a cut throat global market. but then again the Tories don't have a good track record for providing good educational chances for all.. do they. I suppose there is going to be a renascence of the grammar school soon.

http://www.budgetsim

ulator.com/southend
.
Try this, and send your opinion to the council.