Yip! The Tories at the Town Hall have once more been coming up with some super ideas in order to deal with their impending financial deficit, caused either by their own vanity projects or cuts made by their Tory colleagues in central government.
This time they’re proposing that if your bin gets stolen, then to get a replacement you’ll need to pay them £25 for a new bins and £15 for a new food caddy and set of liners.
At this point ………
A) You might be wondering where your Council Tax actually goes and what it gets spent on?
B) You might also remember that these are the same Tories who came up with the idea of charging you to have your brown bin collected a.k.a the Brown Bin Tax.
The bods at the Town Hall are justifying this proposal by talking about “….the number of lost or stolen bins in the city.”
They claim, last year the council spent £144k replacing these.
They also claim that they predict that this cost will rise to £170k in 2018/19.
But give no reason as to why? Perhaps they know of some of some expert bin thieves moving up from London in the near future?
As always, I’d love to know what you think? Please post a comment below!
Do YOU use Twitter, have a look at the further proposals in the budget consultation by VISITING HERE!
However, I was intrigued why the Tories at the Town Hall, with their history and apparent policy of short-term capital gain, had decided not to sell the land, after they themselves previously claimed the land was valued at £750,000?
Tory Councillor Irene Walsh advised that she was not aware of the particular reason behind the 12 year lease period, but would provide a further response to me following clarification. This of course never transpired.
Since the meeting, I’ve discovered that one of the main reasons for not selling the land, according to the City Council was “due to the significant social return of £490,000 that the Green Backyard have been able to demonstrate from their activities with the local community during 2015/2016“, strange that Cllr Walsh did not know this, as it clearly states this in the decision notice signed by her ….. and why was such information ignored or not looked into in previous years?
And why 12 years, and not a 13 or 10 year lease??
I’d love to know your thoughts! Please feel free to post them below!
“Whether it is technically and financially feasible to reassign the proportion of the overall budget allocated to demolish the footbridges to instead make significant repairs to the bridge at Junction 18 (Rhubarb Bridge)”
You may remember, the Tories at the Town Hall received something of a backlash, after they announced plans to spend up to £30,000,000 on removing the bridge, and even signed an agreement with Skanska, before seeing what local residents thought?
Some interesting points from the latest report (page 377) include:
Approximately 60,000 vehicles use the junction daily, 1,260 pedestrians and 540 cyclists.
The Council still claim that not “carrying out an improvement scheme would lead to a significant increase in congestion at this junction associated with the growth of the city and increasing revenue repair costs for the existing network of bridges given their physical condition.”
Membership of the group will consist of one elected Member from each of the political groups to ensure cross party representation.
It’s expected the group will hold around three meetings. With the first one to be held before the end of the year.
My big worry, is that given the huge amount of money involved, there’ll certainly be one or two peeps who want to get their hands on it! And will be devilishly determined to go ahead with the original concept.
Therefore, I personally do hope is that this working group also includes one or two local residents, like those who led on the petition, a rep form the local cycling forum and Sustrans the cycling charity. This has yet to be confirmed.
What do YOU think the Council should do? Please let me know below!