Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Big savings needed in Haringey. Where should the savings come from?
Now the party's truly over. I've been talking for a while now about the need for local authorities to save something like 20-25% from their budgets. This evening Panorama took up the theme. It's now out there. For Haringey that'll mean savings of something like £80-100m in savings. That's huge! We're facing the biggest cuts since the 1970s. Handled badly, it will be an emergency.
So what do we think? What would we choose? We can sit back and let the Council take decisions or we can share the responsibility and contribute our views. Probably about as exciting as doing your expenses, but something we should probably be doing.
Here's how Haringey's spending is split right now:
So discuss. For more details on Haringey's finances, see this area on their website.
Some rules. Only constructive discussion allowed. If you want to party-politic or bash the Council, please go to another discussion. I'm opening this discussion for constructive discussion only. Break those rules and ya get nuked!
So what do we think? What would we choose? We can sit back and let the Council take decisions or we can share the responsibility and contribute our views. Probably about as exciting as doing your expenses, but something we should probably be doing.
Here's how Haringey's spending is split right now:
So discuss. For more details on Haringey's finances, see this area on their website.
Some rules. Only constructive discussion allowed. If you want to party-politic or bash the Council, please go to another discussion. I'm opening this discussion for constructive discussion only. Break those rules and ya get nuked!
Tags for Forum Posts: cuts, public spending cuts
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
Julie if its any consolation, I fell foul on the other side! (suggests even-handedness)
I think the deregulation of pensions companies under previous Conservative governments was a disaster for private pensions, private pensioners and the whole notion of private pension policies. I am thinking mainly of the endowment mortgage scam of the 1980s and 90s, now thankfully abated. What the government failed to take into account was the short-termism and sheer greed of the pensions and insurance industry, who saw mortgages as a great way of bundling pensions and life assurance products.
There was much misselling as we now know, with teachers being a significant group who were misled about private pensions of poor value. The endowment mortgages were hugely 'popular' at one time because the life insurance salesmen were earning big commissions, sometimes more than 100% of the first year's premium! What a massive handicap for a long-term savings product!
Like banks, insurance companies are so greedy and short-termist that they need to be regulated to protect them from themselves.
At one time I considered taking out a small private pension with the safest most reputable company I could find. They made great play of not paying their reps commission. I was glad I avoided becoming a victim of Equitable Life.
-
Permalink Reply by HoL Site Admin on
-
Have done a little editing of this discussion since it had strayed into unacceptable comments made by one member towards another.
Clive, this is the ONLY discussion we've asked that people lay off council-bashing as we've made clear to you several times. We've explained to you why previously. We've said to you before if you want to criticise the Council constrictively on other posts you're more than welcome. We certainly do.
As for personal sleights being acceptable, you know they're not, in this discussion or any other. The reality is community sites that we don't have 24 hour monitoring. So perhaps cut us a little slack and, as always, we'll be on it as soon as we can.
-
Permalink Reply by matt on
-
Latest on 'transparency' with council spending: Councils 'urged' to publish all spending over £500.
Councils in England and Wales are being urged to publish details of spending above £500 as part of a government "revolution" in transparency.
They will not be forced by law to open their books.
The government denies this is a climbdown from the coalition agreement which said councils would be "required" to do so.
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Yes, this is a real let-down, Matt. A mishmash of mixed messages with Eric Pickles "urging" Councils to open their books and promising "measures" against councils which don't. But then stopping short of legislation to enforce this.
I hope that David Cameron will pick up the phone and say:'Eric it's ridiculous. It's public money, spent by their local authority, local schools, quangos etc. Residents should all be able to find out what's going on. So be a good chap, and rip off that cloak of secrecy and extend transparency as far and as wide as possible.'
-
Permalink Reply by Hugh on
-
Seems like, for better or for worse there'll be more discussions aimed at the same territory this was one aimed at. Under the headline "Osborne asks the public to say which services should be axed", this morning's Times reports:
George Osborne will call on the public today to identify services that should be cut as he begins a 'once-in-a-generation' drive to rein in government expenditure.....People will be urged to attend meetings and respond with ideas online as the coalition tries to bind the public into decisions that David Cameron acknowledged yesterday could be felt for decades.
(Apologies, registration now needed to read Times Online)
-
Permalink Reply by Chris Setz on
-
I'm not appalled, but I agree with you Mark. Surely this thread illustrates the problem - a few HoLlers who care enough posting polarising, unrepresentative and often immoderate views, unable to agree, with a trace of bad feeling and a moderator needed.
Could the council borrow money to protect us from the cuts in front line services? The entire east of the borough voted against cuts now (i.e. voted Labour) in the council elections, with a 60%+ turnout. Interest rates are very low. It would be interesting to think of ways the borough could generate revenue (extra local taxes on Tesco and/or business vehicles) to pay back the debts over the long term. A congestion charge just for lorries that get lost in our 'back roads' for instance, could, over time, pay back a small chunk.
-
-
rather ill fated and ill thought out PFI and PPP policies tried to get around
Yes, strongly agree. PFI was a financial disaster brewing for years even without the banking crisis. We now have upon us a perfect storm. All that's missing is high interest rates – and if the heads-in-sand-ers have their way, we'll have those too!
One of the ironies is that, while under a lengthy period of New Labour Government, finance capitalism was allowed to let rip as never before, there is now a chance that under the Coalition (with Conservatives the senior partner) there just might be some improved regulation of the banks. I certainly hope so.
In the meantime – and this is the bitterest pill to swallow – the banks have to be fattened up again in order that they can be sold off and repay the taxpayer. What policy choices. It's going to take a long time to put right.
-
-
Yes, there is that chance. I suppose the reason that it hasn't been factored in is that there is no certainty about when and if that will happen. In the meantime we are obliged to watch the casino-style trading, the big banker bonuses and not least, the continuing damage to the real economy by restricted lending.
It is a cliche to say that banks over-lend in good times and under-lend in bad times. This behaviour (essentially greed and fear, respectively) needs to be modified and almost certainly without the banks' co-operation.
-
-
>>PFI was a financial disaster
From what I read the government are going to propose a form of PFI/PPP where people will be encouraged to leave the public sector to sell their services back. The government wants them to start their own social enterprises, effectively privatising their jobs.
-
-
>>What is polarising, immoderate or unrepresentative about stating what the national debt is?
Sorry Will, I didn't mean to imply that stating the debt was those things, nor is most of the things that you and others post. Taken overall though, don't you agree?
The way that the website discussion software (ning) lays out the replies to posts is confusing. As ning will start to charge people for the software soon, I hope the HoL Admins are considering changing to more 'standard' software - one that is more popular. It will make threads easier to follow.
-
-
Posts merged in from another thread at request of Mark who started the new thread:
Posted by Mark Whitehead on June 8, 2010 at 11:59am
I think we should be discussing ways to oppose cuts in public services, not discussing how we might help implement them.
As ordinary residents and voters, I suggest, it is not our job to help the government destroy services and throw people out of work.
Reply by John D 56 minutes ago
How do you propose to maintain the present level of services without the money to pay for them ? Hugh's thread is constructive- " given the inevitable what do we do about it ? " Your prespective is negative - "let's ignore the inevitable and do nothing to minimise the effect on those receiving public services "
Reply by Clive Carter 32 minutes ago
Agree John. There is an air of unreality about some comments. It's an unwillingness to face up to the huge financial mess that has led to this disagreeable position from which nobody is deriving satisfaction. Our futures are mortgaged.
If opposing all cuts in Haringey is a good thing, surely higher council spending and lower council taxes would be even better? Let's double council spending and half the rates! Wouldn't that be just wonderful: surely it would please everyone!
-
-
>> unwillingness to face up to the huge financial mess
This is a political point - are cuts needed now or not? The ConDems say they are, Labour says they are not (yet).
As the ConDems are in power, we will get cuts, but it doesn't mean that cuts are the only way forward, or that cuts are essential now. It's a political point of view, that's all - an ideology.
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
