Anti-cuts protest at Southend Council

5:04pm Friday 2nd March 2012 in Southend

Anti-cuts protest at Southend Council Anti-cuts protest at Southend Council

ANTI-cuts campaigners made their feelings known ahead of last night’s Southend Council budget meeting.

Southend members of trade union Unison and supporters of lobby group Southend Against the Cuts gathered outside Southend Victoria train station and marched to the civic centre in Victoria Avenue.

They protested about Southend Council saving £44.3million over the next four years, leading to 120 job losses and £11.8million of cuts in 2012/13.

Claire Wormald, Unison branch secretary, said a petition was also being handed to the council before the meeting with almost 2,000 signatures opposing the cuts.

She said: “120 jobs are going in areas like social services and people who deal with the most vulnerable, so it will definitely have an impact on the community.”

Comments (46)

5:16pm Fri 2 Mar 12

Alice in Her Own Land :P says...

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 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. Alice in Her Own Land :P

5:19pm Fri 2 Mar 12

The Cater Wood Creeper says...

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

5:20pm Fri 2 Mar 12

Lefty Cyclist Type says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]Alice in Her Own Land :P[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]£15.5 MILLION tarting up the Civic Centre. Lefty Cyclist Type

5:23pm Fri 2 Mar 12

Alice in Her Own Land :P says...

The Cater Wood Creeper wrote:
they seem to have missed out an 'n' in the second word of that headline
Naughty - but VERY funny!!!!
[quote][p][bold]The Cater Wood Creeper[/bold] wrote: they seem to have missed out an 'n' in the second word of that headline[/p][/quote]Naughty - but VERY funny!!!! Alice in Her Own Land :P

5:33pm Fri 2 Mar 12

LibbyJ says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]Lefty Cyclist Type[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alice in Her Own Land :P[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]£15.5 MILLION tarting up the Civic Centre.[/p][/quote]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. LibbyJ

8:49pm Fri 2 Mar 12

southendshrimper says...

Wasn't it lib dem graham longley who decided on the clock? Oh sorry forgot he wont admit to it will he.
Wasn't it lib dem graham longley who decided on the clock? Oh sorry forgot he wont admit to it will he. southendshrimper

9:00pm Fri 2 Mar 12

Lefty Cyclist Type says...

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.
Then don't vote tory. This bunch have even suggested taking meals away from the elderly and vulnerable to pay for their mismanagement of Southend's finances, through increasing the charge for meals on wheels by £42 a month.

That doesn't sound like much to you or me, but to a pensioner or disabled person on a minimal income, who quite likely will have to choose between heating their home or eating, that's a LOT of money.

Such a policy is absolutely vile, and I could never vote for a party that would advocate such an evil way to save money.
[quote][p][bold]LibbyJ[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Lefty Cyclist Type[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alice in Her Own Land :P[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]£15.5 MILLION tarting up the Civic Centre.[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]Then don't vote tory. This bunch have even suggested taking meals away from the elderly and vulnerable to pay for their mismanagement of Southend's finances, through increasing the charge for meals on wheels by £42 a month. That doesn't sound like much to you or me, but to a pensioner or disabled person on a minimal income, who quite likely will have to choose between heating their home or eating, that's a LOT of money. Such a policy is absolutely vile, and I could never vote for a party that would advocate such an evil way to save money. Lefty Cyclist Type

9:09pm Fri 2 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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

9:17pm Fri 2 Mar 12

Lefty Cyclist Type says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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[/p][/quote]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. Lefty Cyclist Type

9:27pm Fri 2 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

who is stealing food? you choose your word clumsily. why shouldn't local authority services/domiciliary care not be means tested?
the problem is those on fixed incomes are being more raped by loose monetary policy than they are for a bit of means testing. many pensioners can well afford and should pay for council services.
who is stealing food? you choose your word clumsily. why shouldn't local authority services/domiciliary care not be means tested? the problem is those on fixed incomes are being more raped by loose monetary policy than they are for a bit of means testing. many pensioners can well afford and should pay for council services. sash bore buoy

9:49pm Fri 2 Mar 12

A Dermot says...

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.
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. A Dermot

11:25pm Fri 2 Mar 12

Brunning999 says...

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.
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. Brunning999

8:58am Sat 3 Mar 12

Ross Kemp says...

What would be interesting is their view on the fact that ALL leaders agreed the budget (even Labour who presented this petition) and didnt oppose it at all.
What would be interesting is their view on the fact that ALL leaders agreed the budget (even Labour who presented this petition) and didnt oppose it at all. Ross Kemp

8:58am Sat 3 Mar 12

Ross Kemp says...

What would be interesting is their view on the fact that ALL leaders agreed the budget (even Labour who presented this petition) and didnt oppose it at all.
What would be interesting is their view on the fact that ALL leaders agreed the budget (even Labour who presented this petition) and didnt oppose it at all. Ross Kemp

9:10am Sat 3 Mar 12

aduksquack says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so. aduksquack

10:09am Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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.
it does have to be said that it was a pretty pish poor turnout. less than a sixth of the projected jobs to be lost if you count the kids...
[quote][p][bold]aduksquack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.[/p][/quote]it does have to be said that it was a pretty pish poor turnout. less than a sixth of the projected jobs to be lost if you count the kids... sash bore buoy

11:22am Sat 3 Mar 12

Brunning999 says...

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 !!!!
[quote][p][bold]aduksquack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.[/p][/quote]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 !!!! Brunning999

11:24am Sat 3 Mar 12

Nebs says...

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

11:26am Sat 3 Mar 12

EssexBoy1968 says...

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.
Strange that the protestors at this or any other time, & Ms Wormald at any time have never criticised the renovation works. Maybe that is because the works are required by law to ensure compliance with Health & Safety legislation etc.
If they wish to save money, they can stop using consultants, & maybe ask the population what we would like, cancel the funds for the new library that will not benefit local residents & carry out a review of all council salaries above £50000pa.
I'm sure that other savings can be made by reviewing supply contracts etc. Also, why don't the council ask us what we think can be cut?
[quote][p][bold]Lefty Cyclist Type[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Alice in Her Own Land :P[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]£15.5 MILLION tarting up the Civic Centre.[/p][/quote]Strange that the protestors at this or any other time, & Ms Wormald at any time have never criticised the renovation works. Maybe that is because the works are required by law to ensure compliance with Health & Safety legislation etc. If they wish to save money, they can stop using consultants, & maybe ask the population what we would like, cancel the funds for the new library that will not benefit local residents & carry out a review of all council salaries above £50000pa. I'm sure that other savings can be made by reviewing supply contracts etc. Also, why don't the council ask us what we think can be cut? EssexBoy1968

11:36am Sat 3 Mar 12

EssexBoy1968 says...

Nebs wrote:
What is the To Let sign on the station roof advertising, is there a spare unit inside the station?
Yes, where the ticket office to be before they replaced it with a kiosk at the barriers. It has been empty for some time & I believe the signage has been there for most of that period. However, I'm sure a local trainspotter will be able to you exact details....
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: What is the To Let sign on the station roof advertising, is there a spare unit inside the station?[/p][/quote]Yes, where the ticket office to be before they replaced it with a kiosk at the barriers. It has been empty for some time & I believe the signage has been there for most of that period. However, I'm sure a local trainspotter will be able to you exact details.... EssexBoy1968

11:48am Sat 3 Mar 12

aduksquack says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]aduksquack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.[/p][/quote]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 !!!![/p][/quote]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. aduksquack

11:56am Sat 3 Mar 12

Keptquiettillnow says...

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?
[quote][p][bold]A Dermot[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]Is there a link for that info, or is just hearsay? Keptquiettillnow

3:40pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

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?
yep.. pure hearsay. its just a massive corporate tart up of the civic centre to enable a warm fuzzy feeling to flood through our councillors and council officers.

regarding the seemingly low turn out for the protest. There are more protesters then SBC Tory cabinet councillors.
[quote][p][bold]Keptquiettillnow[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]A Dermot[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]Is there a link for that info, or is just hearsay?[/p][/quote]yep.. pure hearsay. its just a massive corporate tart up of the civic centre to enable a warm fuzzy feeling to flood through our councillors and council officers. regarding the seemingly low turn out for the protest. There are more protesters then SBC Tory cabinet councillors. jayman

4:25pm Sat 3 Mar 12

katch22 says...

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.
Repulsive and clearly evil!
[quote][p][bold]Lefty Cyclist Type[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]Repulsive and clearly evil! katch22

4:32pm Sat 3 Mar 12

katch22 says...

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.
Same could be said about posters on here, only a handful of people posting compared to the majority, so going by that, things reported or discussed on here the majority "couldn't give a toss" about. Which, again going by your post, would mean none of what you post in regards to "about 20 people" is relevant either! We, the articles, the comment to those articles, all irrelevant when living up to the rule of your post!
[quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]Same could be said about posters on here, only a handful of people posting compared to the majority, so going by that, things reported or discussed on here the majority "couldn't give a toss" about. Which, again going by your post, would mean none of what you post in regards to "about 20 people" is relevant either! We, the articles, the comment to those articles, all irrelevant when living up to the rule of your post! katch22

5:45pm Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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.
yes they probably waited till most of the "throng" had left before taking the photo.
[quote][p][bold]aduksquack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]aduksquack[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Brunning999[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]This was a protest, not a strike. As such those who were able to attend outside their working hours did so.[/p][/quote]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 !!!![/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]yes they probably waited till most of the "throng" had left before taking the photo. sash bore buoy

6:33pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

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..
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.. jayman

7:23pm Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] 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..[/p][/quote]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

7:39pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

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.
what are you talking about? i have provided a link to the council website article so that others can see for themselves!

its the fact in itself..

honestly some people.. tsk.
[quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] 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..[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]what are you talking about? i have provided a link to the council website article so that others can see for themselves! its the fact in itself.. honestly some people.. tsk. jayman

8:16pm Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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

9:02pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

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.
all i claim is this

a 449.000 cut in Southend councils corporate budget means that the council might no be able to print a few glossy brochures or at a push might have to reduce the work provided to a nameless consultant..

2 million from the education budget means a hell of a lot less books/equipment/teac
hers/facilities for our young..

work the percentage all you like. I know the worth and the cost of a well staffed and well equipped school..

90% of the 10% asked agree, that only 5% know what's going on!
[quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] wrote: these numbers are meaningless unless they are compared against existing budgets as you well know. your worthless propagandering is er...worthless.[/p][/quote]all i claim is this a 449.000 cut in Southend councils corporate budget means that the council might no be able to print a few glossy brochures or at a push might have to reduce the work provided to a nameless consultant.. 2 million from the education budget means a hell of a lot less books/equipment/teac hers/facilities for our young.. work the percentage all you like. I know the worth and the cost of a well staffed and well equipped school.. 90% of the 10% asked agree, that only 5% know what's going on! jayman

9:27pm Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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.
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

9:34pm Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

that was bollllloxxxx
that was bollllloxxxx sash bore buoy

9:42pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

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.
look at the link provided previously.. did the council provide a full breakdown of the cuts with percentages.. No.
[quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]look at the link provided previously.. did the council provide a full breakdown of the cuts with percentages.. No. jayman

9:45pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

if you missed it. here it is again

http://www.southend.
gov.uk/news/article/
664/council_sets_201
213_budget
if you missed it. here it is again http://www.southend. gov.uk/news/article/ 664/council_sets_201 213_budget jayman

9:47pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

or alternatively

http://www.southend.
gov.uk/

click on the budget news link at the bottom of the page
or alternatively http://www.southend. gov.uk/ click on the budget news link at the bottom of the page jayman

9:52pm Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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...
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

10:12pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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...[/p][/quote]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

10:16pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

'renascence' should have been 'Renaissance'.. typo
'renascence' should have been 'Renaissance'.. typo jayman

10:22pm Sat 3 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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.
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. sash bore buoy

10:43pm Sat 3 Mar 12

jayman says...

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..
[quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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.. jayman

12:59am Sun 4 Mar 12

Nebs says...

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.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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...[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]http://www.budgetsim ulator.com/southend . Try this, and send your opinion to the council. Nebs

9:14am Sun 4 Mar 12

sash bore buoy says...

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..
well i agree. there is too little detail and no rationale. that needs proper explanation.
[quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]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..[/p][/quote]well i agree. there is too little detail and no rationale. that needs proper explanation. sash bore buoy

9:22am Sun 4 Mar 12

Nebs says...

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.
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

9:30am Sun 4 Mar 12

Nebs says...

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.
Forget that!! They have different descriptions.
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] 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.[/p][/quote]Forget that!! They have different descriptions. Nebs

9:34pm Mon 5 Mar 12

jayman says...

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.
i have done it already. the whole exercise is a farce a it doesn't allow for the user to alter specific departments within the council. the on-line tool has been created so that the user reduces the budget of departments that have been clumped together. if there was a consultant slide bar or a tendering contracts to (in the contacts book under 'wedge') companies then i could save the public purse a fortune.. oh and stop spending money on pet projects that are not related to front line services!!
[quote][p][bold]Nebs[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]jayman[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]sash bore buoy[/bold] 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...[/p][/quote]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.[/p][/quote]http://www.budgetsim ulator.com/southend . Try this, and send your opinion to the council.[/p][/quote]i have done it already. the whole exercise is a farce a it doesn't allow for the user to alter specific departments within the council. the on-line tool has been created so that the user reduces the budget of departments that have been clumped together. if there was a consultant slide bar or a tendering contracts to (in the contacts book under 'wedge') companies then i could save the public purse a fortune.. oh and stop spending money on pet projects that are not related to front line services!! jayman

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree