Comments on: The Cuts Debate: Cllr Graham Longley’s View

By: Vicky

Vicky — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 22:38:44 +0000

well I’m sure that’ potential’ business is important but if it is a higher priority than ‘real’ childrens’ services we’re in a sorry state. joe public still pays .

By: James

James — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 12:37:44 +0000

The cost of £74000 is reletively small. The roadsigns are not for joe publics benefit as such, but to show business and potential investment in the area following better road links.
The cost ‘should’ be minute compared to the potential extra business and efficiency of existing business due to the improved road network.

By: Vicky

Vicky — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 19:59:34 +0000

If Cllr Longley believes there is still room for manoeuvre, how about making a £10,000 saving on axing the extra executive councillor that the conservatives wanted? That would be a good start. All the money wasted in this town over the last decade and beyond has been with a Conservative council ,for example as a tax payer I don’t appreciate £74,000 being spent on signs to tell me that works to upgrade the area/roads are being undertaken. I have perfectly good eyes -that money could have been spent in a much more worthwhile way like on youth activities.

By: Annie J

Annie J — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 17:57:12 +0000

Might I re-iterate David Cameron’s views on NON-JOBS as a starting point for cuts???? (something I am not often prone to doing) “Area Locality co-ordinator”. That’s a job title apparently and there are 3 posts called this. Work out what it is and your prize is the sum of the extra allowances the Tory group have voted for.
I hope Cllr Longley has persueded the cuts to be made in the field of SURVEYS and CONSULTANTS. Where exactly has he purloined this money from??? (incidently, Shiny new Youth Centres do not function terribly well if un-staffed-bit of a no-brainer that one!!!)