LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!

kingstongraham

I assumed that the 4d chess bit was that she had thrown herself into the firing line to take incoming away from Sunak and his "get this into perspective, 95% of your children aren't at risk from collapsing buildings".

If the theory is that she actually thinks that her whining "why can't I get some credit for doing something" helps her, then it is still a blunder, because that is delusional. I'd go with simple incompetence and arrogance.

tailwindhome

rick_chasey

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

rick_chasey

Could be either tbh.

Austerity and lack of whitehall funding has put a lot of the councils under stress.

MidlandsGrimpeur2

No, Birmingham City Council's problem came from underpaying female staff for decades (I know several people affected). They have had to pay out huge sums of money over the last decade and have been hit with another payout bill. They have never caught up with this and it triggered various other financial issues. For once, this is not the Tories fault (as much as I hate to admit it!).

The line that essential spending on vulnerable groups is a bit misleading. I know of funded projects around mental health and social care that have not been renewed this year as there is no money.

TheBigBean

NAO has weighed in on the schools debate. This is the organisation that played its part in ending PFI.

Getting good value for public spending means giving sufficient priority to unflashy but essential tasks such as efficiently maintaining public buildings and replacing obsolete technology, as well as to more eye-catching new projects.

Two recent National Audit Office (NAO) reports demonstrate the problems caused by underinvestment in the physical estate for two essential public services: education and health. In June we reported on the condition of school buildings, concluding: “Following years of underinvestment, the estate’s overall condition is declining and about 700,000 pupils are learning in schools that the responsible body or Department for Education (DfE) believes needs major rebuilding or refurbishment. Most seriously, the DfE recognises significant safety concerns across the estate and has escalated these concerns to the government risk register.” This week pupils, parents and teachers are experiencing the disruptive impact of addressing those safety concerns with reinforced autoclaved aerated concrete (Raac) ….

The underlying challenge is that adequately funding responsible capital programmes for our public services leaves less for higher profile projects. Failure to bite this bullet leads to poor value, with more money required for emergency measures or a sticking-plaster approach.

pblakeney

Birmingham Council getting its defence in early regarding school building?

rjsterry

...

tailwindhome

rick_chasey

What’s the latest in “I woke up and suddenly everything is sh!t”

https://x.com/pickardje/status/1699127637598187843?s=46&t=Q7O5dnx-0MXQv9qE3vz1vg

One of those added to the roster in May, Hinchingbrooke Hospital in Cambridgeshire, confirmed that since 2020 it had had to confine treatment of some heavier people to the ground floor owing to concerns about the
state of the building.

rjsterry

tailwindhome said:

I still can't quite believe that is real. It's like some sort of self-harm.

Pross

rjsterry said:

tailwindhome said:

I still can't quite believe that is real. It's like some sort of self-harm.

Shapps currently being questioned about the cancellation of the school rebuilding programme that may have dealt with the RAAC problem. Apparently it’s all OK as most schools are primary and not secondary schools.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

You're probably right; I get the strong sense they're bounced into these hairbrained schemes (of which there is plainly no oversight) in a desperate attempt to make up the difference.

Which makes sense; these are usually D-list politicians who want to make a name for themselves.

rjsterry

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

You're probably right; I get the strong sense they're bounced into these hairbrained schemes (of which there is plainly no oversight) in a desperate attempt to make up the difference.

Which makes sense; these are usually D-list politicians who want to make a name for themselves.

The vanity-politics intersection has a lot to answer for.

rick_chasey

Not wrong. The one MP i know really well is all sorts of wrong on various psychological axis.

Jezyboy

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

Did the Birmingham commonwealth games cost more than the Manchester games? I feel like Manchester made a lot more of them...

Jezyboy

rick_chasey said:

Not wrong. The one MP i know really well is all sorts of wrong on various psychological axis.

Sure, but I think the working conditions are such that you'd never get anyone remotely normal applying.

MidlandsGrimpeur2

@Jezyboy Bham cost £770 million, way more than the £300 mill that Manchester cost but that was over 20 years ago. As Brum stepped in as late cover for South Africa, UK government stumped up 75% of the costs and BCC 25%. Govt. reports suggest that it made a net profit of £100 million.

It was a proper success though, well planned and it sold more tickets than any CG games in history. Genuinely did make a difference to the city and atmosphere I felt.

It also didn't really contribute to the current mess, the real issue as I highlighted earlier is the equal pay catastrophe. BCC has always been badly run and has had pay disputes with various public sector staff and Unions over the last decade.

surrey_commuter

Jezyboy said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

Did the Birmingham commonwealth games cost more than the Manchester games? I feel like Manchester made a lot more of them...

Manchester was £200m and Brum was £750m

surrey_commuter

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

You're probably right; I get the strong sense they're bounced into these hairbrained schemes (of which there is plainly no oversight) in a desperate attempt to make up the difference.

Which makes sense; these are usually D-list politicians who want to make a name for themselves.

But if they faced personal financial penalties and or jail time they would not be bounced.

Pross

surrey_commuter said:

Jezyboy said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

Did the Birmingham commonwealth games cost more than the Manchester games? I feel like Manchester made a lot more of them...

Manchester was £200m and Brum was £750m

Do these numbers include the infrastructure? Manchester built a load of new facilities whereas Birmingham was mainly existing with events held outside of the city where they didn't have something suitable e.g. a velodrome so even allowing for the 20 year gap it's hard to understand why Birmingham was more expensive.

rick_chasey

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

You're probably right; I get the strong sense they're bounced into these hairbrained schemes (of which there is plainly no oversight) in a desperate attempt to make up the difference.

Which makes sense; these are usually D-list politicians who want to make a name for themselves.

But if they faced personal financial penalties and or jail time they would not be bounced.

No disagreement here.

In general we need more punishment for white collar crimes/mismanagement.

TheBigBean

Did anyone follow the equal pay case? If you listed the jobs in question, I would definitely want more to do the jobs that were paid more, so is it a question of the structure used i.e. not paying bonuses to everyone on the same band.

rjsterry

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

You're probably right; I get the strong sense they're bounced into these hairbrained schemes (of which there is plainly no oversight) in a desperate attempt to make up the difference.

Which makes sense; these are usually D-list politicians who want to make a name for themselves.

But if they faced personal financial penalties and or jail time they would not be bounced.

Perhaps improving the rewards is a better strategy than thinking this is something legal action can solve.

TheBigBean

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

You're probably right; I get the strong sense they're bounced into these hairbrained schemes (of which there is plainly no oversight) in a desperate attempt to make up the difference.

Which makes sense; these are usually D-list politicians who want to make a name for themselves.

But if they faced personal financial penalties and or jail time they would not be bounced.

Panarama did an episode on Thurrock council recently and they tracked down the former CFO. It's very odd he is not facing any form of prosecution.

surrey_commuter

rjsterry said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

You're probably right; I get the strong sense they're bounced into these hairbrained schemes (of which there is plainly no oversight) in a desperate attempt to make up the difference.

Which makes sense; these are usually D-list politicians who want to make a name for themselves.

But if they faced personal financial penalties and or jail time they would not be bounced.

Perhaps improving the rewards is a better strategy than thinking this is something legal action can solve.

I just think there should be a downside to making sh1t or illegal decisions. Some of them are gambling with other peoples money and they should be forced to have some skin in the game.

A quick Google would suggest they are not underpaid

surrey_commuter

Pross said:

surrey_commuter said:

Jezyboy said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

surrey_commuter said:

rick_chasey said:

Birmingham city council declaring its budget cannot be financed so has issued a section 114 notice (banning all new spending except for vulnerable people, statutory services and pre existing commitments)

surely this should be in the Labour thread

I do think it is cynical politics to put the major councils under pressure via cutting funding and then blaming the incumbent labour council when one inevitably fails.

so this illegal problem of their own making had been rumbling on since 2012 and yet in 2017 they bid for the second most expensive sporting occasion in UK history.

and yet it is the fault of the Tories.

I have said it before and I will say it again that there has to be stronger governance and individual repercussions for negligence (at best) in local govt.

We treat these organisations like the village fete yet they are running up debts of billions

Did the Birmingham commonwealth games cost more than the Manchester games? I feel like Manchester made a lot more of them...

Manchester was £200m and Brum was £750m

Do these numbers include the infrastructure? Manchester built a load of new facilities whereas Birmingham was mainly existing with events held outside of the city where they didn't have something suitable e.g. a velodrome so even allowing for the 20 year gap it's hard to understand why Birmingham was more expensive.

That is not the point.

The point is that they were in a financial crisis and they bid to host a mickey mouse sports event and even paid £25m for the privilege.

These people should be making sure the bins are emptied not paying for people to do some running and jumping