184 could lose out under York care cuts. - 200 others sent wrong letters (From York Press)

Now this is more important than bins.
And much more worrying. People rely on these services and they can literally be the difference between life and death.

Even AndyD wrote:
Now this is more important than bins.
And much more worrying. People rely on these services and they can literally be the difference between life and death.

agreed

Even AndyD wrote:
Now this is more important than bins. And much more worrying. People rely on these services and they can literally be the difference between life and death.

OK, perhaps it is,except I would ask the question; how much money was wasted in sending out 200 wrong letters? Another example of incompetence and job failure at a cost to the council taxpayer. No matter how they were delivered, there is a cost involved.

Even Andy D says...


"Now this is more important than bins.
And much more worrying. People rely on these services and they can literally be the difference between life and death".

I agree, a sign of the times to come and so much for 'care in the community'.

Digeorge wrote:
Even Andy D says...


"Now this is more important than bins.
And much more worrying. People rely on these services and they can literally be the difference between life and death".

I agree, a sign of the times to come and so much for 'care in the community'.

I agree - I think we live in scary times. Maybe I'm just a worrier, but to me, this is the most unstable era I've lived in. The financial crisis is far from over and far from resolved. I don't go for all the in-fighting and blaming - all political parties rode the debt bubble in many, many nations; now we have to solve it. The vulnerable and the poor are almost always the first to suffer too. I just hope that this government and those to follow have the decency to spread the burden.

It's the vulnerable that are already suffering without yet more cuts, it's ridiculous as if you have a young teenager or adult to care for and Even Andy D I remember you have, you have my every sympathy.

Time that the free bus fares etc for pensioners taken off (time for another day I think!).

We have two children with disabilities, but to be honest, they present with 'different' problems from the norm rather than 'worse' ones - all parenting is tough imho!
Respite is a lifesaving for us, but not in literal terms. The people I feel for are the vulnerable and elderly who live alone and who these cuts might hit - it might only be meals-on-wheels or a carer coming in for five minutes - but having nothing 24/7 sounds downright dangerous to me.
I suppose looking on the bright side, maybe we will go back to being a less insular and more caring society because we have to be. Looking out for neighbours, etc.

I had both ends of the spectrum - older and a child with disabilities.

You have my sympathy there!

Without the support that I used to have from Social Services when I had my elderly relative living with us (which I wouldn't choose again) was hard enough. She used to 'go out' at least twice a week for a break!

Respite care was our life-line from The Glen whom I can't praise more highly.

We used to get help from Social Services more so in Ryedale when we lived over there. It gave us a break.

EvenAndy -

This story bears you out. I think vindicated is the appropriate word.

Bin story: nearly 100 outraged vitriolic comments. Some of which were unnecessarily abusive towards you (again)

Loss of care story: 7.


Bins, we can deal. As a community we can do whatever, whether that's composting, having to risk dangerous garden bonfires or emptying angrily in JA's garden.

Vital care services for real people, people who need help to enjoy the most basic standard of living most of us take for granted easing the strain for hrd-working families - unfortunately we can not deal.

What, no irate people demanding that JA comes round to bedbath their gran, or provide independent day support for their children?

Well as long the bin situation is sorted...


An absolute disgrace.

Digeorge: The Glen are the unsung heroes of York. The care is.....well, unbelievable. I don't know why we don't hear more about them.

Buzz - in fairness, more people comment during the day, I think and this story appeared late. People get riled too - forums are maybe a good release; people can sound off without any real harm. I can't really complain, relatively small things can get my goat too - its just bins aren't one of them!

Must go to the bin thread which is probably a complete waste of time!

I would agree about The Glen, let's hear more of them!!

And SNAPPY.

Now come on Press, you make a song and dance about saving heart surgery in Yorkshire when in fact the real facts are not heard properly throughout the review.

Most of these children who undergo heart surgery ALSO use these facilities later on in life because of their disabilities and they will need this sort of care.

C'mon dude, you are taking even 'anded to the extreme.

You were right.

n a letter to Ms Clark, Mr Towner, of the Older People’s Assembly, wrote: “We have consistently argued, supported by extensive research evidence nationally, that low-level interventions at modest cost haev sustained older people’s independence for longer and reduced demand on expensive secondary care in hospital.
What the hell is is a haev? to sustain older people's independance?
Proof read your work YP

And while they do this, they replace the mayors car at huge expense, provide free WiFi for those who could get it for themselves and millions on the new HQ!

Before people fall for Labour's blame the government nonsense, lets check the facts. Labour INCREASED spending in a number of areas with their budget. This is what cuts to services like this are paying for.

a) £1.5 million a year "Delivery and Innovation Fund" basically a pot of money for Calamity James to run his next election campaign

b) £20 million "Economic Infrastructure Fund" This one is another £1.5 million a year to pay back debts for a slush fund on a scale never before seen in the country! You can see now the vultures circling York knowing full well a fool and his money are easily parted. Welcome to Yorkshire already snaffled up £50,000 for an ad campaign, I even heard a rumour at the last meeting he promised Leeds Bradford a whopping £1 million sweetener

c) More money for unions. Over and above the hundreds of thousands already given to them

d) more money for themsleves. Increasing the number of cabinet members (the highest paid Councillors) by 1 at the same time as reducing the number of assistant directors, directors, senior management.

e) £100,000 a year to reregulate buses that has done nothing in two years

I could go on. But please be in no doubt. This is a career politician paid by his masters down South to inflict cuts in the most painful and widespread fashion possible to help the national party's general election campaign. All of the cuts so far opposed by the public, Beckfield Lane, Green Bin collection, Litter bins, Burnholme school had costed alternatives. They were the choice of this ideological administration and they should never be allowed to forget that. They claim to be the party of the poor but in reality they're a bunch of self important career politician millionaires who are more than welcome to inflict misery on the weakest of our society for their own political benefit.

The council want to "balance their books" by these cuts, but I would like to see just how much it will cost the NHS in extra spending because of this. Many of those that the council are removing from the care list (labelled "moderate") may quickly have to be switched to critical, as they may not be able to look after themselves, may be unable to keep themselves clean, even cook & eat properly. I fear that many will become malnurished, ill & need extended hospital stays - AT what cost to the NHS?
I know the council will see THEIR budget cut, but I will bet the NHS
bill for the area will be increased to more then compensate for this reduction. The council, like MANY "organisations" (including this Tory, sorry CONservative led government) can see no further than the end of their nose, so long as THEIR budget is cut, to hell with the others!

Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try.
As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

Even AndyD wrote:
Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try.
As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

Comments appreciated but I'm sick of these Labour lot constantly bombarding the public with rubbish about £40million in cuts in 3 years. Nothing we can do ya di ya di ya.

Its important the public know the truth that there is a reduction in government funding but it is not of the scale alleged and our glorious Guildhall masters are not simply automatons implementing cuts. I mean if so why are we even paying them.

They are making choices every day. £1.5 million per annum for a Delivery and Innovation fund or £1.5 million for adult social care Beckfield Lane Bin collections etc etc.

Labour have chosen their Delivery and Innovation Fund over adult social care and they should be honest with the public about this not try and blame the government. If you check the twitter feeds of both Calamity James and Councillor Simpson Laing, they are harassing the "Free Press" for not blaming the government in this article.

"@GavAitchison @cllrtraceysl You failed to mention cuts locally are result of national funding cuts. Cutting £40m over 3 years means cuts "

They spread their lies and try and bully anyone that doesnt assist them. Ask them a simple question if they scrapped their Delivery and Innovation Fund could they have avoided these changes to Adult Social Care? Could they have avoided closing Beckfield Lane? Could they have avoided removing the city's bins? Could they have avoided charging for green waste collection? Could they have maintained Ward Committee budgets? Could they have avoided stinging cuts to the voluntary sector?

The honest answer to all the above is yes, but they will just answer you with spin

Even AndyD wrote:
Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section!

On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid!

In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments.

Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote:
Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section!

On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid!

In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments.

Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

So you are not interested that the council CHOOSES to donate £50,000 to Welcome to Yorkshire's marketing budget rather than providing the very services you are saying are essential ?!?!?!

I don't quite understand your argument

AngryandFrustrated
Very well said,any Councillor with half a backbone should be up in arms about this cut and how it will effect the most vulnerable,the heads of these departments and superiors sanctioning this should be ashamed of their actions and hope it comes back to bite them at the next election .

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote:
Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section!

On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid!

In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments.

Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

York CVS in Priory St are a good contact for people genuinely wanting to do some volunteering. Yes its a good thing to do, but like a lot of things in life, you also get rewards.
I worked in Financial Services (yeah I know - boo hiss and all that!) for 20 plus years, but when I needed a career change to meet my family needs - volunteering allowed me into the world of teaching. I now still do some 'free' work, but get paid as well.
I suppose the point I'm making is volunteering is good for the soul etc (and wow, is it!), but it also can open doors. The more people you meet, the more connections you make, the more doors that open imho.
The hard bit is getting people to run and organise these things. The lady who runs SNAPPY is a rare breed imho. Many of us don't mind being foot soldiers, but to organise this stuff is time consuming. Which is why its something I think government (local especially) should be doing and why I think Big Society isn't a bad idea. Its just nobody is doing it - quite the opposite. Voluntary funding is being cut and people who'd work for nothing aren't getting the chance!

m dee wrote:
AngryandFrustrated
Very well said,any Councillor with half a backbone should be up in arms about this cut and how it will effect the most vulnerable,the heads of these departments and superiors sanctioning this should be ashamed of their actions and hope it comes back to bite them at the next election .

Couldn't agree more. Here are the minutes of the council meeting where this budget was passed

http://democracy.yor
k.gov.uk/documents/g
6280/Public%20minute
s%2023rd-Feb-2012%20
18.30%20Council%20Me
eting.pdf?T=11

You will see on two occasions under minute 61 amendments were proposed that would have overturned this brutal cut

"Remove the following proposals from the savings
schedule
o ACES02a – Fair Access to Care Services £80k"

"Remove the following proposals from the savings
schedule
...
o ACES02a– Fair Access to Care Services
£80k"

On both occasions these were voted down by the Labour group on the council.

Most Councillors were in up and arms about this back in February, these motions came from the Lib Dems and the greens and were supported by the Conservatives.

The ones not up in arms, the ones that voted FOR these cuts were the Labour Councillors. Remember their names each and every one

Cllr Alexander
Cllr Barnes
Cllr Boyce
Cllr Burton
Cllr Crisp
Cllr Cunningham-Cross
Cllr Douglas
Cllr Fitzpatrick
Cllr Fraser
Cllr Funnell
Cllr Gunnell
Cllr Hodgson
Cllr Jeffries
Cllr King
Cllr Levene
Cllr Looker
Cllr McIlveen
Cllr Merrett
Cllr Potter
Cllr Riches
Cllr Scott
Cllr Semlyen
Cllr Simpson-Laing
Cllr Watson
Cllr Williams

I see that tory council thinks its all York council fault. lets see here YOUR coalition refused to ring fence money for disability and care, they have made DLA a joke because now people with real problems have keep appealing.Scrapping Remploy Nationally against all advice! That has not been reported I see. So dont just blame local authorities for National decision as Cameron says 'We're all in it together' of course we are , thats the biggest joke ever!!

Torycouncil2015 wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section! On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid! In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments. Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

So you are not interested that the council CHOOSES to donate £50,000 to Welcome to Yorkshire's marketing budget rather than providing the very services you are saying are essential ?!?!?! I don't quite understand your argument

Let me try and simplify matters for you. We all rant about those in charge, be it Labour, LibDums or the Tories. There are a lot of us "middle of the roaders" out there who COULDN'T GIVE A STUFF about the political point scoring that you, and your colleagues openly play out on these comments forums. I actually find it repugnant that you are so openly political and yet you don't have the balls to post under your real name. Instead, you prefer to do it from behind a cloak of anonymity which quite frankly makes you a hypocrite - you spout your party political ballocks , no doubt in an attempt to change peoples polictical opinions, but don't have the courage of your convictions to do so openly.

I cannot comment on the £50k to Welcome to Yorkshire. If it generated more than £50k for the economy of York, then it was money well spent. If it didn't, it was a waste of money. Where are your figures to say that it was a waste of money? Of course, the Tories are well known for not wasting money - shall we start with how much it has cost nationally for your Chancellor to reverse virtually every major budget decision? Let's not forget, Cameron and Osbourne are the ones gripping onto their austerity measures by their finger nails, despite the IMF recently saying they may have to rethink their plans because of the damage it is doing to the economy.

£50k to Yorkshire Forward I do not feel strongly about either way, because there are no figures showing that it was an overall waste of money. The only person who has mentioned it is you, and I couldn't care for the reasons I have just given. £60k on a brand new limo I feel very strongly about, as well as £43million+ on the Palace of York, something that was brought about by the LibDums. And lest we forget, it is your party who is pressing on with the cuts, (yes and that includes cuts to local authority budgets), in the face of an ever deeper financial crisis and depression.

However, this is a story where party political issues should be put to one side. As I said in my posting, it breaks my heart to think that there will be significant section of the population of the city I love, living on their own without seeing a single real-life face from one day to the next. That is a disgrace and instead of party political point scoring, you should all be working together to make sure that that, doesn't happen.

Blunt enough for you? Do you now understand that there are some of us out there who couldn't care about politics and which side of the divide you are from? There are some of us that wish you would just SHUT UP and try working together for a change without being bound by party political differences.

who are ya wrote:
I see that tory council thinks its all York council fault. lets see here YOUR coalition refused to ring fence money for disability and care, they have made DLA a joke because now people with real problems have keep appealing.Scrapping Remploy Nationally against all advice! That has not been reported I see. So dont just blame local authorities for National decision as Cameron says 'We're all in it together' of course we are , thats the biggest joke ever!!

As I understand it the proposal is to close 27 factories. That is less than the 28 the Labour government closed in 2008? And was it not the Labour government that closed Remploy in York?

Torycouncil2015 wrote:

who are ya wrote:
I see that tory council thinks its all York council fault. lets see here YOUR coalition refused to ring fence money for disability and care, they have made DLA a joke because now people with real problems have keep appealing.Scrapping Remploy Nationally against all advice! That has not been reported I see. So dont just blame local authorities for National decision as Cameron says 'We're all in it together' of course we are , thats the biggest joke ever!!

As I understand it the proposal is to close 27 factories. That is less than the 28 the Labour government closed in 2008? And was it not the Labour government that closed Remploy in York?

http://www.remploy.c
o.uk/content/news/cl
osure-of-remploy-yor
k-confirmed.ashx

Even AndyD wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section! On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid! In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments. Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

York CVS in Priory St are a good contact for people genuinely wanting to do some volunteering. Yes its a good thing to do, but like a lot of things in life, you also get rewards. I worked in Financial Services (yeah I know - boo hiss and all that!) for 20 plus years, but when I needed a career change to meet my family needs - volunteering allowed me into the world of teaching. I now still do some 'free' work, but get paid as well. I suppose the point I'm making is volunteering is good for the soul etc (and wow, is it!), but it also can open doors. The more people you meet, the more connections you make, the more doors that open imho. The hard bit is getting people to run and organise these things. The lady who runs SNAPPY is a rare breed imho. Many of us don't mind being foot soldiers, but to organise this stuff is time consuming. Which is why its something I think government (local especially) should be doing and why I think Big Society isn't a bad idea. Its just nobody is doing it - quite the opposite. Voluntary funding is being cut and people who'd work for nothing aren't getting the chance!

Thank you for that. I will make some enquiries and even if it's an afternoon a month, if we could all do that it would make York a better place. That is the definition of the Big Society! :-)

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Torycouncil2015 wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section! On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid! In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments. Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

So you are not interested that the council CHOOSES to donate £50,000 to Welcome to Yorkshire's marketing budget rather than providing the very services you are saying are essential ?!?!?! I don't quite understand your argument

Let me try and simplify matters for you. We all rant about those in charge, be it Labour, LibDums or the Tories. There are a lot of us "middle of the roaders" out there who COULDN'T GIVE A STUFF about the political point scoring that you, and your colleagues openly play out on these comments forums. I actually find it repugnant that you are so openly political and yet you don't have the balls to post under your real name. Instead, you prefer to do it from behind a cloak of anonymity which quite frankly makes you a hypocrite - you spout your party political ballocks , no doubt in an attempt to change peoples polictical opinions, but don't have the courage of your convictions to do so openly.

I cannot comment on the £50k to Welcome to Yorkshire. If it generated more than £50k for the economy of York, then it was money well spent. If it didn't, it was a waste of money. Where are your figures to say that it was a waste of money? Of course, the Tories are well known for not wasting money - shall we start with how much it has cost nationally for your Chancellor to reverse virtually every major budget decision? Let's not forget, Cameron and Osbourne are the ones gripping onto their austerity measures by their finger nails, despite the IMF recently saying they may have to rethink their plans because of the damage it is doing to the economy.

£50k to Yorkshire Forward I do not feel strongly about either way, because there are no figures showing that it was an overall waste of money. The only person who has mentioned it is you, and I couldn't care for the reasons I have just given. £60k on a brand new limo I feel very strongly about, as well as £43million+ on the Palace of York, something that was brought about by the LibDums. And lest we forget, it is your party who is pressing on with the cuts, (yes and that includes cuts to local authority budgets), in the face of an ever deeper financial crisis and depression.

However, this is a story where party political issues should be put to one side. As I said in my posting, it breaks my heart to think that there will be significant section of the population of the city I love, living on their own without seeing a single real-life face from one day to the next. That is a disgrace and instead of party political point scoring, you should all be working together to make sure that that, doesn't happen.

Blunt enough for you? Do you now understand that there are some of us out there who couldn't care about politics and which side of the divide you are from? There are some of us that wish you would just SHUT UP and try working together for a change without being bound by party political differences.

Again your argument falls down. £60k for a limo is a one of cost set aside the cost of maintaining. It could be saved this year but the money wouldnt be there again next year. The £43 million office (FOR COUNCIL STAFF) is the same. This will be an annual cost set aside teh cost of current rental/maintenance costs so there are no savings to be made there.

The £1.5m a year Delivery and Innovation fund is a new annual cost to the council tax payer. It is being spent solely at the behest of Calamity James. As you quite adequately point out noone seems to know what its going on and what its benefits are.

People are noticing the loss of bins, recyclcling centres and adult social care that have been cut in order to pay for this slush fund.

I think the argument of priorities is clear but if Calamity James and his colleagues want to come on here and demonstrate why this Delivery and Innovation Fund is more important than care for vulnerable adults then I'm happy to listen.

The point I'm making is this council made choices and set its own priorities. It is time they started an honest debate with the public about this and didnt continue to blame the governement.

These cuts were avoidable so it is up to the Cabinet to explain to the public why they chose to take these cuts

Oh and Angry you should care which side of the divide people are on it makes a huge difference. Green Liberal Democrat Conservative and Independent Councillors all voted against this cut. Labour voted for it. Simples. Decisions that affect everyones lives are being enforced on us based on who's on what side of the political divide

Torycouncil2015 wrote:
Oh and Angry you should care which side of the divide people are on it makes a huge difference. Green Liberal Democrat Conservative and Independent Councillors all voted against this cut. Labour voted for it. Simples. Decisions that affect everyones lives are being enforced on us based on who's on what side of the political divide

You really don't get it, do you?

I don't care which side of the political divide people are from - what I care about is their actions and how they conduct themselves. You are a hypocritical disgrace and quite frankly are not morally worthy to spout Tory propaganda if you are not willing to put your real name to it. You have no valid point to make if you are not willing to do it openly. For all his sins, at least JA, when in opposition, posted openly on this site.

You epitomise all that is wrong in party politics in this country - shouting about your idealogical position and manifestos without having the balls to put that to one side for the good of the local people. There are an awful lot of us out there that have had enough of you and people like you, so watch your back at the next election - you may find yourself more unpopular than your ego allows you to believe.

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Torycouncil2015 wrote:
Oh and Angry you should care which side of the divide people are on it makes a huge difference. Green Liberal Democrat Conservative and Independent Councillors all voted against this cut. Labour voted for it. Simples. Decisions that affect everyones lives are being enforced on us based on who's on what side of the political divide

You really don't get it, do you?

I don't care which side of the political divide people are from - what I care about is their actions and how they conduct themselves. You are a hypocritical disgrace and quite frankly are not morally worthy to spout Tory propaganda if you are not willing to put your real name to it. You have no valid point to make if you are not willing to do it openly. For all his sins, at least JA, when in opposition, posted openly on this site.

You epitomise all that is wrong in party politics in this country - shouting about your idealogical position and manifestos without having the balls to put that to one side for the good of the local people. There are an awful lot of us out there that have had enough of you and people like you, so watch your back at the next election - you may find yourself more unpopular than your ego allows you to believe.

At what point have I shouted about idealogical (sic) position?

All I have done is to outline a few facts about budget decisions taken in York.

And as for the accusing of being hypocritical and not using my real name from "AngryandFrustrtaed" is just laughable.

And no I dont get it. Decisions are being made to suit political agendas. Your every day is inextricably bound to what side of the political divide people sit. To say you don't care is ludicrous. It is one of the single most important things in your day to life. You may not like it but were not heading for an independent prime minister anytime soon.

And as for Calamity James' appearance on this site. What happened to that when he lost the popularity of opposition? Now he just sits and posts under various alias and gets his friends from the university to do the same

It looks as if they will be making the changes whatever we say. What the real worry is the lack of plans to help support people to live independent lives. Yes they have £15000 to spend on this but ideas amount to nil.

"And as for Calamity James' appearance on this site. What happened to that when he lost the popularity of opposition? Now he just sits and posts under various alias and gets his friends from the university to do the same”

I don't disagree, and if he is using friends and posting on these threads with an alias, that puts him in the same boat as you - a hypocrite who doesn't have the courage of his convictions to post openly. I do note, however, that he has made various postings using his correct name over recent weeks, something that you appear unable to do.

"And as for the accusing of being hypocritical and not using my real name from "AngryandFrustrtaed" is just laughable."

The difference is, I am an independent person, with no political agenda, posting my thoughts or comments on stories as I feel inclined to do. I am not posting to try and get people to support my political views so that I can feather my own nest at election time.

Oh, and by the way, it may be that I have no choice but to go along with party politics etc because of the insidious nature of party politics in this country. It doesn't mean I have to like it, or indeed care about it, but I am able to comment on it. It also doesn't mean that people like you have to wander after your party bosses like zombies saying, "we must obey what our great leader says". It is down to people like you that the system remains as it is - you have the power to change it - not overnight, but you can change it. It wasn't that long ago that the establishment would say that you would never have a female PM or that there would never be a black American president - how wrong they were!

As a matter of interest - where do your loyalties lie I wonder? Do they lie with your constituents, the people who elected you and gave you your job, or do they lie with the Whitehall muppets that are currently in charge? What on earth would you do if your party political loyalties clashed with the majority of those that elected you?

I challenge you you to conduct a survey in your ward asking people what they would prefer - a local politician who sticks to his party views, come what may, or a local politician who listens to his constituents and works with the other parties to mitigate the damage that these cuts will inflict. I may be wrong, but I suspect the latter would be the answer.

Why is it that individuals are not to blame for anything nowadays? Who was responsible for the 200 wrong letters and what has happened tro them?

I thought all councilors posted under their real names? As such I just presume TC2015 is a member of the public?
Not that its earth-shatteringly important, I just thought its what all councilors do - declare their inside knowledge and allegiances openly?

ian923 wrote:
Why is it that individuals are not to blame for anything nowadays? Who was responsible for the 200 wrong letters and what has happened tro them?

I suspect they got told off and that surely is enough?! Sounds like a clerical error - not sure naming, shaming and hanging from Micklegate Bar is called for. When I think of some of my bloopers over the years.....!

They say the letters sent in error were due to an IT problem (or at least that's one of the excuses they've used so sar). The problem is how they dealt with the people who got the wrong letters. Only some were resent the correct letter many others just ignore. If you read the report to the cabinet member it is clear the feedback they've had said the letters were so badly written most people didn't understand them anyway. I hope people will get together to show the council their anger over this whol;e situation

Even AndyD wrote:
I thought all councilors posted under their real names? As such I just presume TC2015 is a member of the public? Not that its earth-shatteringly important, I just thought its what all councilors do - declare their inside knowledge and allegiances openly?

I'd be astounded if he was member of the public, (or at least an ordinary Joe from say Clifton) given the depth and level of knowledge he/she has about Council matters, agendas, where to find info etc. He/she has not disputed that he/she is a councillor in any of his/her postings despite being accused of being one. In any event, he/she posts in a far too party political manner for him/her to be an ordinary member of the public, IMO.

If he/she is not a current councillor, he/she has very close ties to the Council, one way or other.

No law against it I suppose. Its just a bit like someone reviewing their own book under an alias. Its kind of.......not right.

Buzz Light-year wrote:
EvenAndy - This story bears you out. I think vindicated is the appropriate word. Bin story: nearly 100 outraged vitriolic comments. Some of which were unnecessarily abusive towards you (again) Loss of care story: 7. Bins, we can deal. As a community we can do whatever, whether that's composting, having to risk dangerous garden bonfires or emptying angrily in JA's garden. Vital care services for real people, people who need help to enjoy the most basic standard of living most of us take for granted easing the strain for hrd-working families - unfortunately we can not deal. What, no irate people demanding that JA comes round to bedbath their gran, or provide independent day support for their children? Well as long the bin situation is sorted... An absolute disgrace.

You miss the point. People aren't saying bins are more important than care..They complain because they all pay their council tax which includes this service, and now they are potentially being asked to pay for it. Many of us subsidise services that we do not use; those with no children don't use schools, those with no car don't use roads, but a chunk of our council tax pays for these. It's all very well expecting us all to help the less fortunate, but, at times there are those that are being discriminated against because they get already get less for their council tax by subsidising others. It is no disgrace fighting for their rights.

Society has many inequalities, but, it's the left wing socialists that use the 'weak and vulnerable' card at every opportunity to take some moral high ground, as an excuse to try and gag valid objections to the constant erosion of entitlements of those who are already doing more than their fair share.

For the record, my comment was apolitical. I was commenting as a human being, not a 'left wing socialist'. As a human and don't forget, a tax payer, I'd rather cuts were made to green bin collection than (say) vital care for the elderly. I say this not to achieve 'moral high ground' but because I believe it. I'd also respectfully point out that we don't even know what these changes are yet.

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section! On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid! In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments. Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

Thanks 'Angry' for mentioning the biggest injustice of all - YORK's HOUSING CRISIS'

The facts:-

* Almost 4,000 on the council's waiting list.
* Housing completions falling in York long before the rest of the country, and not recovering as fast as the rest of the country.
* The Council's irresponsible setting of a 50% AH target for six years, four of which did not comply with the requirement for a AHVS to justify the target.
* The loss to York's economy of hundreds of millions in revenue.
* The loss of building jobs and the closure of housebuilding firms.

The Council and those who belittle this issue are a disgrace.

Angry criticises Thatcher for damaging the social structure of the country, but, under her's and Major's 17-year tenure, an average of 51,000 council and social houses were built every year - under Blair and Brown's 13-year tenure the managed less than half at an average of 25,000/year. Even without the excuse of the credit crunch, Labour nationally, and in York have caused the housing crisis to be worse than it would have been under the conservatives.

AngryandFrustrated wrote:
Blunt enough for you? Do you now understand that there are some of us out there who couldn't care about politics and which side of the divide you are from? There are some of us that wish you would just SHUT UP and try working together for a change without being bound by party political differences.

Very well put.
As well as pretty much every other word A&F has posted here.

It can be so frustrating when people can't see past their politics and particularly when they accuse me of leaning one way or the other to try to defeat what I say. Mentioning no names Crabtree.

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote: EvenAndy - This story bears you out. I think vindicated is the appropriate word. Bin story: nearly 100 outraged vitriolic comments. Some of which were unnecessarily abusive towards you (again) Loss of care story: 7. Bins, we can deal. As a community we can do whatever, whether that's composting, having to risk dangerous garden bonfires or emptying angrily in JA's garden. Vital care services for real people, people who need help to enjoy the most basic standard of living most of us take for granted easing the strain for hrd-working families - unfortunately we can not deal. What, no irate people demanding that JA comes round to bedbath their gran, or provide independent day support for their children? Well as long the bin situation is sorted... An absolute disgrace.

You miss the point. People aren't saying bins are more important than care..They complain because they all pay their council tax which includes this service, and now they are potentially being asked to pay for it. Many of us subsidise services that we do not use; those with no children don't use schools, those with no car don't use roads, but a chunk of our council tax pays for these. It's all very well expecting us all to help the less fortunate, but, at times there are those that are being discriminated against because they get already get less for their council tax by subsidising others. It is no disgrace fighting for their rights. Society has many inequalities, but, it's the left wing socialists that use the 'weak and vulnerable' card at every opportunity to take some moral high ground, as an excuse to try and gag valid objections to the constant erosion of entitlements of those who are already doing more than their fair share.

Oh and there he pops up like the inevitable bad smell when you drive to Naburn from Fulford.

For the record, like AED my post was also apoliical.
For the record tax is tax and it is not a retail model for goods and services.
No-one is playing a "weak" card, like Even Andy says, humans are humans, litter is litter.

Even AndyD wrote:
For the record, my comment was apolitical. I was commenting as a human being, not a 'left wing socialist'. As a human and don't forget, a tax payer, I'd rather cuts were made to green bin collection than (say) vital care for the elderly. I say this not to achieve 'moral high ground' but because I believe it. I'd also respectfully point out that we don't even know what these changes are yet.

Sorry, you do know what they are proposing to do. That is quite enough to pre-judge and object. It is not a choice of money being saved from bins to pay for care, and anyone suggesting this is mischief-making. Care is more important than having free wi-fi in the city centre, so if you want to attack any unnecessary council expenditure, attack the vanity projects of Alexander & Co. I don't give a toss about free wi-fi for the city centre, and I object to paying for it, and object to paying more for my green bin being emptied. I'm already on my arse after suffering an 80% drop in earnings for the last four years, meaning no holidays and no luxuries. I don't drink and don't smoke, don't have sky, and don't claim any benefits. I do my bit, but, am sick of this Labour council's political game playing; causing pain to the weak and vulnerable and pretending that it's down to the governments austerity measures. You left wing socialists should get you own house in order, and stop blaming Thatcher et al.

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote: EvenAndy - This story bears you out. I think vindicated is the appropriate word. Bin story: nearly 100 outraged vitriolic comments. Some of which were unnecessarily abusive towards you (again) Loss of care story: 7. Bins, we can deal. As a community we can do whatever, whether that's composting, having to risk dangerous garden bonfires or emptying angrily in JA's garden. Vital care services for real people, people who need help to enjoy the most basic standard of living most of us take for granted easing the strain for hrd-working families - unfortunately we can not deal. What, no irate people demanding that JA comes round to bedbath their gran, or provide independent day support for their children? Well as long the bin situation is sorted... An absolute disgrace.

You miss the point. People aren't saying bins are more important than care..They complain because they all pay their council tax which includes this service, and now they are potentially being asked to pay for it. Many of us subsidise services that we do not use; those with no children don't use schools, those with no car don't use roads, but a chunk of our council tax pays for these. It's all very well expecting us all to help the less fortunate, but, at times there are those that are being discriminated against because they get already get less for their council tax by subsidising others. It is no disgrace fighting for their rights. Society has many inequalities, but, it's the left wing socialists that use the 'weak and vulnerable' card at every opportunity to take some moral high ground, as an excuse to try and gag valid objections to the constant erosion of entitlements of those who are already doing more than their fair share.

Oh and there he pops up like the inevitable bad smell when you drive to Naburn from Fulford. For the record, like AED my post was also apoliical. For the record tax is tax and it is not a retail model for goods and services. No-one is playing a "weak" card, like Even Andy says, humans are humans, litter is litter.

WTF are you on about, you complete tw*t !

I suspect free wifi is intended to encourage investment and tourism, which brings benefits. But I could be wrong. Ditto TdF.
For the record though, I don't think everything JA and Labour in York do is fine - I'm not into blinkered political banner following. Ideologically, I lean to the left, but so what.
In this instance, I just realise cuts have to be made and personally, if the bin thing is the price we pay for less cuts to frontline services, then that is fine by me. Key here being 'by me'. I can see your point, Mr C and if that is your stance, you are entitled to it too.

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote: EvenAndy - This story bears you out. I think vindicated is the appropriate word. Bin story: nearly 100 outraged vitriolic comments. Some of which were unnecessarily abusive towards you (again) Loss of care story: 7. Bins, we can deal. As a community we can do whatever, whether that's composting, having to risk dangerous garden bonfires or emptying angrily in JA's garden. Vital care services for real people, people who need help to enjoy the most basic standard of living most of us take for granted easing the strain for hrd-working families - unfortunately we can not deal. What, no irate people demanding that JA comes round to bedbath their gran, or provide independent day support for their children? Well as long the bin situation is sorted... An absolute disgrace.

You miss the point. People aren't saying bins are more important than care..They complain because they all pay their council tax which includes this service, and now they are potentially being asked to pay for it. Many of us subsidise services that we do not use; those with no children don't use schools, those with no car don't use roads, but a chunk of our council tax pays for these. It's all very well expecting us all to help the less fortunate, but, at times there are those that are being discriminated against because they get already get less for their council tax by subsidising others. It is no disgrace fighting for their rights. Society has many inequalities, but, it's the left wing socialists that use the 'weak and vulnerable' card at every opportunity to take some moral high ground, as an excuse to try and gag valid objections to the constant erosion of entitlements of those who are already doing more than their fair share.

Oh and there he pops up like the inevitable bad smell when you drive to Naburn from Fulford. For the record, like AED my post was also apoliical. For the record tax is tax and it is not a retail model for goods and services. No-one is playing a "weak" card, like Even Andy says, humans are humans, litter is litter.

WTF are you on about, you complete tw*t !

You've crossed a line there Crabtree.
Absolutely unacceptable unnecessary abuse.

Still doing your cause no favours at all.

Point surely is that there are many, many options on priorities available.

Each party put forward its budget proposals in February. They can still be found on the Councils web site.

Only Labour thought that withdrawing care from 180 vulnerable residents was more acceptable than abandoning some of JAs vanity projects.

Perhaps more serious is the 29% increase in Care costs (for adults) seen during the last financial year and now revealed in the Councils annual accounts.

Some of this may be down to an increase in demand but alot is because Labour have failed to grasp the nettle of escalating wage rates (comparing the public and private sector rates for the same job).

Its about time from some transparency on the number of customers, pay costs, waiting lists ect

I am not bothered about political colour... I will vote for whoever will legalise weed

Torycouncil2015 wrote:

who are ya wrote: I see that tory council thinks its all York council fault. lets see here YOUR coalition refused to ring fence money for disability and care, they have made DLA a joke because now people with real problems have keep appealing.Scrapping Remploy Nationally against all advice! That has not been reported I see. So dont just blame local authorities for National decision as Cameron says 'We're all in it together' of course we are , thats the biggest joke ever!!

As I understand it the proposal is to close 27 factories. That is less than the 28 the Labour government closed in 2008? And was it not the Labour government that closed Remploy in York?

You missing my point totally that your lot "goverment "so are not at fault whats so ever. Your lot in power are not cutting Remploy then? so one less than Labour makes it ok then, "http://www.dpac.uk.
net/2012/07/remploy-
strikes-build-worker
s-confidence-in-the-
face-of-closures/; http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/business-18900
449 I Also undersatnd the goverment sh*t themselfs as they wanted to get rid of DLA and was threatend with human rights vilation if they did this, so droped this idea like ahot potato. You Polititions are all the same i think you are Mr Sturdy torycouncil. Power crazed people that only think of themselves. So the coalition are doing a great job huh, I see recession is gone, whoops not http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/business-18977
084. Get of your high horse and help people with disabilities and stop point scoring what ever party your on.

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote: EvenAndy - This story bears you out. I think vindicated is the appropriate word. Bin story: nearly 100 outraged vitriolic comments. Some of which were unnecessarily abusive towards you (again) Loss of care story: 7. Bins, we can deal. As a community we can do whatever, whether that's composting, having to risk dangerous garden bonfires or emptying angrily in JA's garden. Vital care services for real people, people who need help to enjoy the most basic standard of living most of us take for granted easing the strain for hrd-working families - unfortunately we can not deal. What, no irate people demanding that JA comes round to bedbath their gran, or provide independent day support for their children? Well as long the bin situation is sorted... An absolute disgrace.

You miss the point. People aren't saying bins are more important than care..They complain because they all pay their council tax which includes this service, and now they are potentially being asked to pay for it. Many of us subsidise services that we do not use; those with no children don't use schools, those with no car don't use roads, but a chunk of our council tax pays for these. It's all very well expecting us all to help the less fortunate, but, at times there are those that are being discriminated against because they get already get less for their council tax by subsidising others. It is no disgrace fighting for their rights. Society has many inequalities, but, it's the left wing socialists that use the 'weak and vulnerable' card at every opportunity to take some moral high ground, as an excuse to try and gag valid objections to the constant erosion of entitlements of those who are already doing more than their fair share.

Oh and there he pops up like the inevitable bad smell when you drive to Naburn from Fulford. For the record, like AED my post was also apoliical. For the record tax is tax and it is not a retail model for goods and services. No-one is playing a "weak" card, like Even Andy says, humans are humans, litter is litter.

WTF are you on about, you complete tw*t !

You've crossed a line there Crabtree. Absolutely unacceptable unnecessary abuse. Still doing your cause no favours at all.

So saying I smell like sh*t, is acceptable and necessary, is it ?

You absolute hypocrit !

Even AndyD wrote:
I suspect free wifi is intended to encourage investment and tourism, which brings benefits. But I could be wrong. Ditto TdF. For the record though, I don't think everything JA and Labour in York do is fine - I'm not into blinkered political banner following. Ideologically, I lean to the left, but so what. In this instance, I just realise cuts have to be made and personally, if the bin thing is the price we pay for less cuts to frontline services, then that is fine by me. Key here being 'by me'. I can see your point, Mr C and if that is your stance, you are entitled to it too.

Oh, when they are cutting essential front line services, this is okay, is it ? It's okay to provide free wi-fi, while there are almost 4,000 on the housing waiting list in York, and yet the council do nothing to help the situation. Don't defend the indefensible, just cos you're a Labour voter, and Labour apologist !

Buzz Light-year wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote: Blunt enough for you? Do you now understand that there are some of us out there who couldn't care about politics and which side of the divide you are from? There are some of us that wish you would just SHUT UP and try working together for a change without being bound by party political differences.

Very well put. As well as pretty much every other word A&F has posted here. It can be so frustrating when people can't see past their politics and particularly when they accuse me of leaning one way or the other to try to defeat what I say. Mentioning no names Crabtree.

Both claim they couldn't care less about politics, and are apolitical, yet, both use sometimes thinly-veiled, and other times not so thinly veiled attacks, against the right which are in effect so overtly political, it's untrue. Attacking Thatcher and Cameron, instead of Blair, Brown or Alexander - so obvious ? !!!

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section! On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid! In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments. Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

I have to be honest that I don't see what Thatcher's policy on chilren's milk 30 years ago has to do with how Labour in York are cutting care for vulnerable people to pay for James Alexander's pet projects to be an MP, however we will go through it once more.........

Maggie 'milk snatcher' Thatcher - she gave local authorities the choice on wheter to provide milk or not. The majoity of councils choosing to stop providing milk were..........you guessed it.........Labour.

Don't let the facts get in the way though.

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Torycouncil2015 wrote: Oh and Angry you should care which side of the divide people are on it makes a huge difference. Green Liberal Democrat Conservative and Independent Councillors all voted against this cut. Labour voted for it. Simples. Decisions that affect everyones lives are being enforced on us based on who's on what side of the political divide

You really don't get it, do you? I don't care which side of the political divide people are from - what I care about is their actions and how they conduct themselves. You are a hypocritical disgrace and quite frankly are not morally worthy to spout Tory propaganda if you are not willing to put your real name to it. You have no valid point to make if you are not willing to do it openly. For all his sins, at least JA, when in opposition, posted openly on this site. You epitomise all that is wrong in party politics in this country - shouting about your idealogical position and manifestos without having the balls to put that to one side for the good of the local people. There are an awful lot of us out there that have had enough of you and people like you, so watch your back at the next election - you may find yourself more unpopular than your ego allows you to believe.

Angry,

You talk a load of contradictory drivel, designed to cloud or change the issue.

Torycouncil2015 is making factual, valid arguments adainst Labour policies that are not for the good of anyone, other than the Labour party.

You are just another left wing stooge who can't defend Labour policies and resorts to personal attacks and insults instead.

Labour lost the last election, and will lose the next one, meanwhile Alexander does as much damage as he can in York and pretends it's the fault of the Con-Dems - totally devious, yet so totally obvious, and so totally disgraceful !.

Even AndyD wrote:
I suspect free wifi is intended to encourage investment and tourism, which brings benefits. But I could be wrong. Ditto TdF. For the record though, I don't think everything JA and Labour in York do is fine - I'm not into blinkered political banner following. Ideologically, I lean to the left, but so what. In this instance, I just realise cuts have to be made and personally, if the bin thing is the price we pay for less cuts to frontline services, then that is fine by me. Key here being 'by me'. I can see your point, Mr C and if that is your stance, you are entitled to it too.

Okay, then let's have the detailed cost/benefit analysis, to show exactly how these projects generate income that benefits York people, rather than a few hotels and restaurants.

Then, compare this with the hundreds of millions lost through the council's affordable housing policies, the lost jobs, the lost investment, the lost council tax and the lost housing.

Then tell me, if Alexander's crackpot policies are helping York and it's residents ?

I want green bins emptied for no extra cost,
I want more housing to be built.
I want no reductions in care for those who need it.

I DO NOT WANT :
Free city centre wi-fi
The TdF to come to York
James Alexander using York Council funds for his vanity projects, as a route to a safe seat in the next general elections !

It's time Alexander's despotic, power-crazed, rule came to an end. He needs to go !

Torycouncil2015 wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

Comments appreciated but I'm sick of these Labour lot constantly bombarding the public with rubbish about £40million in cuts in 3 years. Nothing we can do ya di ya di ya. Its important the public know the truth that there is a reduction in government funding but it is not of the scale alleged and our glorious Guildhall masters are not simply automatons implementing cuts. I mean if so why are we even paying them. They are making choices every day. £1.5 million per annum for a Delivery and Innovation fund or £1.5 million for adult social care Beckfield Lane Bin collections etc etc. Labour have chosen their Delivery and Innovation Fund over adult social care and they should be honest with the public about this not try and blame the government. If you check the twitter feeds of both Calamity James and Councillor Simpson Laing, they are harassing the "Free Press" for not blaming the government in this article. "@GavAitchison @cllrtraceysl You failed to mention cuts locally are result of national funding cuts. Cutting £40m over 3 years means cuts " They spread their lies and try and bully anyone that doesnt assist them. Ask them a simple question if they scrapped their Delivery and Innovation Fund could they have avoided these changes to Adult Social Care? Could they have avoided closing Beckfield Lane? Could they have avoided removing the city's bins? Could they have avoided charging for green waste collection? Could they have maintained Ward Committee budgets? Could they have avoided stinging cuts to the voluntary sector? The honest answer to all the above is yes, but they will just answer you with spin

Yes, instead of attacking posters about their objections about green bins etc, it's time that Angry, Buzz, Digeorge and EAD asked these questions to Alexander and Simpson-Laing.

It's these two Labour mischief-makers who are using York as a political football, and causing unnecessary hardship, and they should be made to answer these questions !

Mr Crabtree wrote:

So saying I smell like sh*t, is acceptable and necessary, is it ?

You absolute hypocrit !

Crabtree, surely your grip of English isn't that poor?
In English we have these things called expressions. One of these is "pops up like a bad smell" meaning something or someone unwelcome comes along to spoil things.
In no way does that say "you smell like sh*t"

Just because your English is poor doesn't give you licence to dish out the swears like that.

As it is, you did come along and spoil things as you invariably do every single day on here.You ruined what was a sensible discussion and turned it into your own personal soapbox yet again.

You break TOS every day.
You say the same things over and over and again, whether it's relevant to the article or not. You personally abuse everyone except your little posse from councillors to users of this site, you are happy to casually dish it out all day long.
You should have been banned from nere a long time ago.. oh wait you were... twice... duck hedge... thorn side.

For a spell when I addressed you I used "With respect" because I knew you are volatile and prone to personal abuse.
Well no more.
I don't know how anyone can have respect for you.

Well said! But let's face it Buzz - the only issue worth talking about is affordable housing and how Mr C and his family are the only residents in York to have lost money thru' the building and housing crisis!!

Micklegate wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section! On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid! In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments. Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

I have to be honest that I don't see what Thatcher's policy on chilren's milk 30 years ago has to do with how Labour in York are cutting care for vulnerable people to pay for James Alexander's pet projects to be an MP, however we will go through it once more......... Maggie 'milk snatcher' Thatcher - she gave local authorities the choice on wheter to provide milk or not. The majoity of councils choosing to stop providing milk were..........you guessed it.........Labour. Don't let the facts get in the way though.

The point I was making is that every regime, whether it be Labour, Tory or the LibDums leave behind an unwelcome legacy. As Thatcher, followed by Major led the last Tory government, and as I was responding to a Tory councillor's posting, I used a Maggie Thatcher analogy.

I could quite as easily rant about Brown, Blair, Cameron and Clegg - over the years they have all shown themselves up as spineless barstewards.

Ultimately, the point I was making is that instead of back biting and point scoring (something that Tory Council seems to specialise in), politicians of all backgrounds should work together to make sure that the victims of this story, in all likelihood elderly and disabled, should not suffer as a result.

Is that such a bad wish to have?

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Even AndyD wrote:
I suspect free wifi is intended to encourage investment and tourism, which brings benefits. But I could be wrong. Ditto TdF. For the record though, I don't think everything JA and Labour in York do is fine - I'm not into blinkered political banner following. Ideologically, I lean to the left, but so what. In this instance, I just realise cuts have to be made and personally, if the bin thing is the price we pay for less cuts to frontline services, then that is fine by me. Key here being 'by me'. I can see your point, Mr C and if that is your stance, you are entitled to it too.

Oh, when they are cutting essential front line services, this is okay, is it ? It's okay to provide free wi-fi, while there are almost 4,000 on the housing waiting list in York, and yet the council do nothing to help the situation. Don't defend the indefensible, just cos you're a Labour voter, and Labour apologist !

No, you misunderstand me. I am the last thing we should be cutting is front-line services. Care for the elderly, disabled etc. Bin cutting I'd put as less of a priority.
The wi-fi I openly admitted I don't know the thinking behind. But it *might* be because its perceived to be an investment for more gain. But I really don't know.
I think you need to calm down a little and quit with the name calling.

Sorry - full of typos that. I'm saying the last thing we should be cutting are services where there is a genuine risk to human life. The so called front-line services. If the price of keeping these, or keeping more of these, is reducing green bin services, then so be it. I'll learn to compost! :-)

I am a little lost since I last joined in the conversation the posts have rocketed up to 64 with green bins!

Poor Even AndyD and Angry, I am at a loss!

I know of late that I have been doing far too much DiGeorge support work but now that is closing and things are a little more organised for the future generations and the heart thing near at its closure, I will have more time.

However at least two/three days per week are done at a CAB (not York), so feel I do my bit of Big Society.

I have lost touch as to the young adults/teenagers as don't have one so unless you are 'in the thick' it is very difficult to know what is going on locally with all these changes but on a positive note I DID think the investment in the autistic centre near York College for 18-25 years olds was a good thing for them. That's money well spent and useful respite.

Autistic centre was the best news in a while. Care falls off a cliff edge once young people reach 19. In fairness, I think that is something the Council have been actively trying to redress This is not a 'Labour apologist' comment before anyone starts, York autism provision and indeed special needs provision (for children) has been excellent now under many Council regimes - Hob Moor Oaks and Applefields testify to this. Ditto The Glen.

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

So saying I smell like sh*t, is acceptable and necessary, is it ?

You absolute hypocrit !

Crabtree, surely your grip of English isn't that poor?
In English we have these things called expressions. One of these is "pops up like a bad smell" meaning something or someone unwelcome comes along to spoil things.
In no way does that say "you smell like sh*t"

Just because your English is poor doesn't give you licence to dish out the swears like that.

As it is, you did come along and spoil things as you invariably do every single day on here.You ruined what was a sensible discussion and turned it into your own personal soapbox yet again.

You break TOS every day.
You say the same things over and over and again, whether it's relevant to the article or not. You personally abuse everyone except your little posse from councillors to users of this site, you are happy to casually dish it out all day long.
You should have been banned from nere a long time ago.. oh wait you were... twice... duck hedge... thorn side.

For a spell when I addressed you I used "With respect" because I knew you are volatile and prone to personal abuse.
Well no more.
I don't know how anyone can have respect for you.

As always, you resort to pomposity and exaggeration. I personally abuse everybody do I ? The truth is, I seldom abuse anyone. The majority of my posts attack councillors and officers for the wrongs that they are guilty of, and the only time I "abuse" anyone else, is when they abuse me first.

What smell emanates from a sewage treatment works ? You talk it, as well as use it to describe me. Touché

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

So saying I smell like sh*t, is acceptable and necessary, is it ?

You absolute hypocrit !

Crabtree, surely your grip of English isn't that poor?
In English we have these things called expressions. One of these is "pops up like a bad smell" meaning something or someone unwelcome comes along to spoil things.
In no way does that say "you smell like sh*t"

Just because your English is poor doesn't give you licence to dish out the swears like that.

As it is, you did come along and spoil things as you invariably do every single day on here.You ruined what was a sensible discussion and turned it into your own personal soapbox yet again.

You break TOS every day.
You say the same things over and over and again, whether it's relevant to the article or not. You personally abuse everyone except your little posse from councillors to users of this site, you are happy to casually dish it out all day long.
You should have been banned from nere a long time ago.. oh wait you were... twice... duck hedge... thorn side.

For a spell when I addressed you I used "With respect" because I knew you are volatile and prone to personal abuse.
Well no more.
I don't know how anyone can have respect for you.

As always, you resort to pomposity and exaggeration. I personally abuse everybody do I ? The truth is, I seldom abuse anyone. The majority of my posts attack councillors and officers for the wrongs that they are guilty of, and the only time I "abuse" anyone else, is when they abuse me first.

What smell emanates from a sewage treatment works ? You talk it, as well as use it to describe me. Touché

AngryandFrustrated wrote:
Well said! But let's face it Buzz - the only issue worth talking about is affordable housing and how Mr C and his family are the only residents in York to have lost money thru' the building and housing crisis!!

You're patronising sarcasm, about a serious issue, is pathetic.

Hundreds of thousands of construction jobs have suffered hardship because of this, and the many businesses that have losts fortunes have not been given any government assistance. Instead, unreasonable regulatory burdens have been left in place, which are threatening to cause long-term damage to housebuilding which will in turn create even more hardship.

Even AndyD wrote:
Autistic centre was the best news in a while. Care falls off a cliff edge once young people reach 19. In fairness, I think that is something the Council have been actively trying to redress This is not a 'Labour apologist' comment before anyone starts, York autism provision and indeed special needs provision (for children) has been excellent now under many Council regimes - Hob Moor Oaks and Applefields testify to this. Ditto The Glen.

Neither are the services you describe down to Labour. Remember, the council use OUR money for these services. The council staff who do a good job in the care sector are paid with OUR money and the credit should go to them not councillors or officers particularly those who are behind the cuts !

Mr Crabtree wrote:
As always, you resort to pomposity and exaggeration

Show me.

The truth is, I seldom abuse anyone. The majority of my posts attack councillors and officers for the wrongs that they are guilty of, and the only time I "abuse" anyone else, is when they abuse me first.

That's odd cos I haven't called you any names at all but I'm sure you just called me a tw*t and a hypocrite just because I correctly predicted you would turn up and hijack this thread to roll out the daily rant.

You're not helping yourself

Still, as long as you're only attacking councillors, well, no harm done eh.

Buzz................
get over yourself !................

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote: As always, you resort to pomposity and exaggeration

Show me.

The truth is, I seldom abuse anyone. The majority of my posts attack councillors and officers for the wrongs that they are guilty of, and the only time I "abuse" anyone else, is when they abuse me first.

That's odd cos I haven't called you any names at all but I'm sure you just called me a tw*t and a hypocrite just because I correctly predicted you would turn up and hijack this thread to roll out the daily rant. You're not helping yourself

Exaggerations;

"As it is, you did come along and spoil things as you invariably do every single day on here.You ruined what was a sensible discussion and turned it into your own personal soapbox yet again.

You break TOS every day.
You say the same things over and over and again, whether it's relevant to the article or not. You personally abuse everyone except your little posse from councillors to users of this site, you are happy to casually dish it out all day long. "

Spoil things every single day ?
Ruined this thread ?
Break the TOS every day ?
Abuse everyone ?

Isn't the following as bad as namecalling ?

"Oh and there he pops up like the inevitable bad smell when you drive to Naburn from Fulford...... "

and you can't help yourself, either !

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Still, as long as you're only attacking councillors, well, no harm done eh.

The ones I attack, deserve to be attacked !

Alexander, Merrett and Simpson-Laing - York Council's own politburo !

Mr Crabtree wrote:

AngryandFrustrated wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Hmm - Tory Council. Suddenly a refreshing apolitical discussion gets the cut n paste political makeover. No I bet that really you can you discuss things like a regular human being without ranting from the hustings? Go on - give it a try. As for millionaires - I think we both know that modern politics in the UK is geared towards the wealthy, the markets and big business. Sadly this model has proven flawed- first the banks went bust, now nations. Scary stuff. Nothing wrong with capitalism per se - but when the markets are more important than people - when countries are at the mercy of the ratings agency, when our banks are gobbling up £1trillion in taxpayers money but still paying huge bonuses, fiddling Libor and now drug-money laundering (allegedly) - you know the system is broke.

I quite agree - Tory Council - we couldn't care about your political viewpoint and all your political point scoring - yes Labour are in charge now, but Maggie Thatcher, the milk snatcher, is no-one to be proud of and she did more damage to the the social structure of this country than Blair and Brown were ever able to do. And as for Cameron - his choice in friends leaves a lot to be desired! All we need now is a suitable rant from Mr Crabtree about the affordable housing quota and how Labour are single handedly killing the building trade in York and all will be complete in the comments section! On a more serious note, I just find it absolutely atrocious that any half wit, let alone semi-intelligent officer, would consider bathing and eating not be top of the agenda. If a person is unable to bathe properly, it is likely because of a lack of mobility - that just doesn't apply to bathing, it applies to shopping, trips to the toilet etc. Being clean and tidy is a matter of dignity for a lot of older and disabled people and what price is put on dignity? Clearly zero, given these plans. Not being able to eat a proper diet will kill you, something that you would have thought the authorities would want to avoid! In addition, what price do you put on a face to face conversation? Thru' surgery, I was housebound last year. I live on my own. Yes, I could talk to people on the phone and text, message and e-mail them but it's just not the same as seeing someone's facial expressions when they talk to you. I found my self craving visitors for this alone. Again, it breaks my heart that there will be a whole heap of people that will go from one day to the next without seeing a face with expression. It's soul destroying and in my view amounts to a form of torture - even animals in kennels and catteries are visited daily by the owners of the establishments. Maybe Digeorge and Even Andy D you should get together and start a support group - big things have grown from humble beginnings.

Thanks 'Angry' for mentioning the biggest injustice of all - YORK's HOUSING CRISIS' The facts:- * Almost 4,000 on the council's waiting list. * Housing completions falling in York long before the rest of the country, and not recovering as fast as the rest of the country. * The Council's irresponsible setting of a 50% AH target for six years, four of which did not comply with the requirement for a AHVS to justify the target. * The loss to York's economy of hundreds of millions in revenue. * The loss of building jobs and the closure of housebuilding firms. The Council and those who belittle this issue are a disgrace. Angry criticises Thatcher for damaging the social structure of the country, but, under her's and Major's 17-year tenure, an average of 51,000 council and social houses were built every year - under Blair and Brown's 13-year tenure the managed less than half at an average of 25,000/year. Even without the excuse of the credit crunch, Labour nationally, and in York have caused the housing crisis to be worse than it would have been under the conservatives.

This is the so-called "hijacking" that Buzz alludes to ?

In fairness, I only responded to 'Angry's taunt/invitation, and hardly attacked anyone in the unpleasant way Buzz seems to suggest. I used valid reasonable facts/points to back up my argument - something he seldom manages.

As I said, Buzz suffers from hyperbole, as well as paranoia..... ? !!!!

"Under the changes, those with moderate needs would be supported by alternative arrangements, rather than personal social care budgets and services from the council".

Moderate needs range from "check-up visits to advice and support with shopping, bills and paperwork, daytime activities, help showering or bathing and help with meals".

Can we return to the issue please! Does anyone have any idea how these needs will be met for people? Tracy Simpson Laing is making a decision on Wednesday to take away peoples support. Can we stop bickering and look for some solutions please!

Crab wrote

Spoil things every single day ?
Ruined this thread ?
Break the TOS every day ?
Abuse everyone ?

Isn't the following as bad as namecalling ?

Yep.
Yep.
Yep.
Yep.

No.



You have no respect for others and you earn no respect in return.
Why is it that without fail when you do your thing round here it ends up off topic and bickering never mind who else is posting?

Has to be something about you.

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Even AndyD wrote:
Autistic centre was the best news in a while. Care falls off a cliff edge once young people reach 19. In fairness, I think that is something the Council have been actively trying to redress This is not a 'Labour apologist' comment before anyone starts, York autism provision and indeed special needs provision (for children) has been excellent now under many Council regimes - Hob Moor Oaks and Applefields testify to this. Ditto The Glen.

Neither are the services you describe down to Labour. Remember, the council use OUR money for these services. The council staff who do a good job in the care sector are paid with OUR money and the credit should go to them not councillors or officers particularly those who are behind the cuts !

My comment wasn't political. I am saying we are lucky in York to have good special needs provision (for children) compared to other areas. I went OUT OF MY WAY to show that I am being apolitical, hence mentioning that these services have built up under VARIOUS councils over the years. But you still turn me into (your words) a Labour stooge, apologist, whatever you want to call me. I despair.
You are also wrong, whilst the staff are wonderful (and they are), we are lucky in York that there is more actual provision than in most other areas in the country. When our children were diagnosed, we scoured the UK to see if we might be better off elsewhere (we were considering moving for other reasons to do with our childrens' condition - such as less people, traffic, stress etc) and York came out as one of the best. Other areas (if you are interested) were Sunderland, Barnsley, Aberdeen - if I recall correctly. We have friends in the same situation in Nottingham who don't get half the help we do with respite. Even getting their child statemented was a real struggle.
Now NONE of what I say here is political. Do you understand? I don't care who was in power - I'm simply saying we get superb provision in York and have done for the last fifteen years.

nearlyman wrote:
Buzz................

get over yourself !................

No. I don't take abuse like that in the wider world and I'm not going to take it here.
I will always stand up for myself.

Torycouncil2015 wrote:

m dee wrote:
AngryandFrustrated
Very well said,any Councillor with half a backbone should be up in arms about this cut and how it will effect the most vulnerable,the heads of these departments and superiors sanctioning this should be ashamed of their actions and hope it comes back to bite them at the next election .

Couldn't agree more. Here are the minutes of the council meeting where this budget was passed

http://democracy.yor

k.gov.uk/documents/g

6280/Public%20minute

s%2023rd-Feb-2012%20

18.30%20Council%20Me

eting.pdf?T=11

You will see on two occasions under minute 61 amendments were proposed that would have overturned this brutal cut

"Remove the following proposals from the savings
schedule
o ACES02a – Fair Access to Care Services £80k"

"Remove the following proposals from the savings
schedule
...
o ACES02a– Fair Access to Care Services
£80k"

On both occasions these were voted down by the Labour group on the council.

Most Councillors were in up and arms about this back in February, these motions came from the Lib Dems and the greens and were supported by the Conservatives.

The ones not up in arms, the ones that voted FOR these cuts were the Labour Councillors. Remember their names each and every one

Cllr Alexander
Cllr Barnes
Cllr Boyce
Cllr Burton
Cllr Crisp
Cllr Cunningham-Cross
Cllr Douglas
Cllr Fitzpatrick
Cllr Fraser
Cllr Funnell
Cllr Gunnell
Cllr Hodgson
Cllr Jeffries
Cllr King
Cllr Levene
Cllr Looker
Cllr McIlveen
Cllr Merrett
Cllr Potter
Cllr Riches
Cllr Scott
Cllr Semlyen
Cllr Simpson-Laing
Cllr Watson
Cllr Williams

Thanks, just to clarify the opposition Councilors seem more interested in retaining bins they do not seem to be up in arms about this am I missing something ?.

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Crab wrote

Spoil things every single day ? Ruined this thread ? Break the TOS every day ? Abuse everyone ? Isn't the following as bad as namecalling ?

Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. No. You have no respect for others and you earn no respect in return. Why is it that without fail when you do your thing round here it ends up off topic and bickering never mind who else is posting? Has to be something about you.

Seems that the only person who has a problem is you. The bickering from others is mainly about the controversial issue I debate 'the council's affordable housing policy disaster'.

With respect, Buzz, you need to find an issue that you can channel your energy into, rather than stalking me. Your obsession with me is worrying.

Even AndyD wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Even AndyD wrote: Autistic centre was the best news in a while. Care falls off a cliff edge once young people reach 19. In fairness, I think that is something the Council have been actively trying to redress This is not a 'Labour apologist' comment before anyone starts, York autism provision and indeed special needs provision (for children) has been excellent now under many Council regimes - Hob Moor Oaks and Applefields testify to this. Ditto The Glen.

Neither are the services you describe down to Labour. Remember, the council use OUR money for these services. The council staff who do a good job in the care sector are paid with OUR money and the credit should go to them not councillors or officers particularly those who are behind the cuts !

My comment wasn't political. I am saying we are lucky in York to have good special needs provision (for children) compared to other areas. I went OUT OF MY WAY to show that I am being apolitical, hence mentioning that these services have built up under VARIOUS councils over the years. But you still turn me into (your words) a Labour stooge, apologist, whatever you want to call me. I despair. You are also wrong, whilst the staff are wonderful (and they are), we are lucky in York that there is more actual provision than in most other areas in the country. When our children were diagnosed, we scoured the UK to see if we might be better off elsewhere (we were considering moving for other reasons to do with our childrens' condition - such as less people, traffic, stress etc) and York came out as one of the best. Other areas (if you are interested) were Sunderland, Barnsley, Aberdeen - if I recall correctly. We have friends in the same situation in Nottingham who don't get half the help we do with respite. Even getting their child statemented was a real struggle. Now NONE of what I say here is political. Do you understand? I don't care who was in power - I'm simply saying we get superb provision in York and have done for the last fifteen years.

So, just remind me what this story is about ? Then, tell me what Labour's justification is for cutting these needy services ?

Singing the council's praises for the good things that it's care staff do is all very well, but, in the context of the cuts Labour are making, it seems that you are trying to distract readers from the harm that they are doing.

You are not being political, but, perhaps you should ?

Open for business wrote:
"Under the changes, those with moderate needs would be supported by alternative arrangements, rather than personal social care budgets and services from the council". Moderate needs range from "check-up visits to advice and support with shopping, bills and paperwork, daytime activities, help showering or bathing and help with meals". Can we return to the issue please! Does anyone have any idea how these needs will be met for people? Tracy Simpson Laing is making a decision on Wednesday to take away peoples support. Can we stop bickering and look for some solutions please!

Tracey Simpson-Laing is good at causing harm with her policies. She will blame the government cuts. It is more important to her to make political mischief to attack the Con-Dem coalition. Whilst this governement are in power don't expect TSL to do anything that will improve things in York. This is why she resists reductions to the affordable housing targets, so the housing crisis in York gets worse, so she can blame the government.

You ask that we look for solutions ? The solution is, get rid of the problem - starting with Coun Simpson-Laing, and then other Labour members like Merrett who sing from the same hymn sheet. In fact, get rid of the lot of them, Labour are the problem in York, and don't be fooled into believing the spin and lies they peddle. Same old Labour always cheating !

The councilors who are for this, regardless of their party simply have the wrong priorities.
Who really needs free WiFi in the city center. Most people who want WiFi have phones with 3g. This is NOT a priority.
We had a car for the mayor which granted was getting on a bit, but did not need to be replaced now. It was NOT a priority.
Giving £50k to welcome to Yorkshire may have been a worthwhile investment in the long term, but it is not the councils job to invest our money for the future, its to spend it wisely now on things we need.
This money could have gone into things like adult social care which ARE a priority.
Landfill taxes are being put up by our masters in Europe, so we need to recycle more, this IS a priority.

I cant comment without further unbiased information about the "£20 million slush fund" or the "£1.5million / year delivery and innovation" fund, or the ££££Millions spent on the new HQ, but I do think that these are almost certainly of lower priority than looking after the needy, however these higher priority needs don't tickle the ego's of those in charge regardless as to the party they have joined.

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Crab wrote

Spoil things every single day ? Ruined this thread ? Break the TOS every day ? Abuse everyone ? Isn't the following as bad as namecalling ?

Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. No. You have no respect for others and you earn no respect in return. Why is it that without fail when you do your thing round here it ends up off topic and bickering never mind who else is posting? Has to be something about you.

Seems that the only person who has a problem is you. The bickering from others is mainly about the controversial issue I debate 'the council's affordable housing policy disaster'.

With respect, Buzz, you need to find an issue that you can channel your energy into, rather than stalking me. Your obsession with me is worrying.

That's a laugh.
There's no obsession deeper or more worrying than yours with councillors.

I would have left this thread well alone if you hadn't crossed the line and called me a tw*t.
I wasn't going to let that go.
An apology would be appropriate.

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Crab wrote

Spoil things every single day ? Ruined this thread ? Break the TOS every day ? Abuse everyone ? Isn't the following as bad as namecalling ?

Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. No. You have no respect for others and you earn no respect in return. Why is it that without fail when you do your thing round here it ends up off topic and bickering never mind who else is posting? Has to be something about you.

Seems that the only person who has a problem is you. The bickering from others is mainly about the controversial issue I debate 'the council's affordable housing policy disaster'.

With respect, Buzz, you need to find an issue that you can channel your energy into, rather than stalking me. Your obsession with me is worrying.

That's a laugh.
There's no obsession deeper or more worrying than yours with councillors.

I would have left this thread well alone if you hadn't crossed the line and called me a tw*t.
I wasn't going to let that go.
An apology would be appropriate.

Buzz Light-year wrote:

Mr Crabtree wrote:

Buzz Light-year wrote:
Crab wrote

Spoil things every single day ? Ruined this thread ? Break the TOS every day ? Abuse everyone ? Isn't the following as bad as namecalling ?

Yep. Yep. Yep. Yep. No. You have no respect for others and you earn no respect in return. Why is it that without fail when you do your thing round here it ends up off topic and bickering never mind who else is posting? Has to be something about you.

Seems that the only person who has a problem is you. The bickering from others is mainly about the controversial issue I debate 'the council's affordable housing policy disaster'.

With respect, Buzz, you need to find an issue that you can channel your energy into, rather than stalking me. Your obsession with me is worrying.

That's a laugh.
There's no obsession deeper or more worrying than yours with councillors.

I would have left this thread well alone if you hadn't crossed the line and called me a tw*t.
I wasn't going to let that go.
An apology would be appropriate.

Enough now guys, im sick of having to scroll past your bickering

Wow, I cant believe that worked ;)

m dee wrote:

Torycouncil2015 wrote:

m dee wrote:
AngryandFrustrated
Very well said,any Councillor with half a backbone should be up in arms about this cut and how it will effect the most vulnerable,the heads of these departments and superiors sanctioning this should be ashamed of their actions and hope it comes back to bite them at the next election .

Couldn't agree more. Here are the minutes of the council meeting where this budget was passed

http://democracy.yor


k.gov.uk/documents/g


6280/Public%20minute


s%2023rd-Feb-2012%20


18.30%20Council%20Me


eting.pdf?T=11

You will see on two occasions under minute 61 amendments were proposed that would have overturned this brutal cut

"Remove the following proposals from the savings
schedule
o ACES02a – Fair Access to Care Services £80k"

"Remove the following proposals from the savings
schedule
...
o ACES02a– Fair Access to Care Services
£80k"

On both occasions these were voted down by the Labour group on the council.

Most Councillors were in up and arms about this back in February, these motions came from the Lib Dems and the greens and were supported by the Conservatives.

The ones not up in arms, the ones that voted FOR these cuts were the Labour Councillors. Remember their names each and every one

Cllr Alexander
Cllr Barnes
Cllr Boyce
Cllr Burton
Cllr Crisp
Cllr Cunningham-Cross
Cllr Douglas
Cllr Fitzpatrick
Cllr Fraser
Cllr Funnell
Cllr Gunnell
Cllr Hodgson
Cllr Jeffries
Cllr King
Cllr Levene
Cllr Looker
Cllr McIlveen
Cllr Merrett
Cllr Potter
Cllr Riches
Cllr Scott
Cllr Semlyen
Cllr Simpson-Laing
Cllr Watson
Cllr Williams

Thanks, just to clarify the opposition Councilors seem more interested in retaining bins they do not seem to be up in arms about this am I missing something ?.

All opposition councillors opposed his at the meeting in February and no doubt are skin what they can now. There is an option. £1.5 million a year Delivery Innivation Fund. I repeat my challenge tO Calamity James come on here and explain why this is more important than care for the vulnerable. He was quick to comment on the taxi story when he thought he'd been misquoted. Where is he here (hiding under aliases)

Ps I'm not a councillor but any public body spending £150 million a year deserves proper scrutiny. If that involves reading a few web pages and attending he odd few meetings it's the least we can do as informed citizens. Otherwise idiots like Calamitu James will continue to get elected along with other monkeys in rosettes

why not cut some of the fat cat wages on the york council??

as anybody seen how many people at the council are on over 100K a year??

and lets be honest, none of them are worth it, what a bunch of criminals they are specially when 1 executives wage went up 108% in one year!

best people for the job my arse!

http://www.taxpayers
alliance.com/town-ha
ll-rich-list-2012

CHECK EM OUT!

crooks the lot of em

Surely no one takes the tax payers alliance seriously?

They had Dr "takes his mates abroad on tax payer funded holidays" Fox fronting up their latest campaign. You couldn't write a funnier story line.