Where did I say the new government? Quote:Does flecc REALLY think that in six weeks,the new government managed to resurface many miles of road? REALLY?
How naive.
Putting contracts out to tender and judging the bids, would take MUCH longer than that on its own, not to mention the logistics of getting heavy plant and thousands of tonnes of gravel, workers, and tarmac marshalled in the right place.
My bet is that this work was commissioned by the local councils at least six months ago, if not more.
Public procurement policy
Directives, regulations, policies and guidance relating to the procurement of supplies, services and works for the public sector.www.gov.uk
Maybe they called in some favours from those friends who they gave all the lost money to, after they figured out that they're just as affected by them as the plebs.All repeatable around here, the worst I've ever seen in 57 years, and as said, not just the deservedly broke Croydon borough but Tandridge in Tory north Surrey. But now it's like a miracle has happened, miles of resurfacing and remarking all the lines and even the worst stretch not yet resurfaced, patched over large areas to a quite high standard.
Since we are existing on Government loans in Croydon, the cash must have come from central government to pay the contractors, so it looks like policy at work. Hopefully you'll get a bite of the cherry before long.
.
No. It was lost money but not given to friends, though some of it probably ended up that way. Here and in some other authorities it all started with the crackpot Tory idea to allow Councils to invest. What possessed them to think that councils could successfully run businesses or play the stock market I can't say, but desperation to get out if the trap they'd made for themselves in council financing was probably a motive.Maybe they called in some favours from those friends who they gave all the lost money to, after they figured out that they're just as affected by them as the plebs.
Interesting conceptTelegram app founder Pavel Durov to appear in court after arrest in Paris
Russian-born billionaire said to have ‘miscalculated’ by visiting France during inquiry into crime on his platform
“Enough of Telegram’s impunity,” said one investigator
It was just "resting in their account", like Father TedMaybe they called in some favours from those friends who they gave all the lost money to, after they figured out that they're just as affected by them as the plebs.
No. AGAIN a completely wrongheaded conclusion. Nobody forced any council to make a total bollix of a building company. THEY DID THAT THEMSELVES. The councils in Newcastle and Northumberland, the former a Labour council, the latter a Conservative one are not in that position, and neither made stupid or unwise investments. That is the position with the vast majority of councils in fact. The responsibility for these diabolically stupid decisions lies squarely with the buffoons who made them. They are not infants. They made terrible decisions themselves. Why is it the fault of government? You are just trying to pass off the blame to people who had no hand in the decisions that were made by a small minority of councils out of many others which acted with common sense and caution to make the best use of public money.No. It was lost money but not given to friends, though some of it probably ended up that way. Here and in some other authorities it all started with the crackpot Tory idea to allow Councils to invest. What possessed them to think that councils could successfully run businesses or play the stock market I can't say, but desperation to get out if the trap they'd made for themselves in council financing was probably a motive.
Croydon's Labour council's idea was to start up their own building company to build all the houses needed. They called the company "Brick by Brick", not a promising start. To get it rolling they then awarded it the outstanding contract to refurbish the Fairfield Halls flagship entertainment centre.
Of course a new startup like that didn't have a clue how to tackle such a complex specialised job, so it went the way of most public contracts, duration way beyond plans and an increasingly bottomless pit for money. Eventually Brick by Brick, in finishing the job, was forced into insolvency, leaving the council with an impossible bill to settle, in turn making the council insolvent. Hence the section 114 notice.
Once again at the root was the Tory notion that somehow money could be magicked up out of thin air. One day they'll realise that we must either grow or adopt "degrowth". There are no magic formulas.
.
It's government's duty to govern sensibly. As I posted, what on earth possessed them to think elected local councillors were equipped to make such major investment decisions.Why is it the fault of government? You are just trying to pass off the blame to people who had no hand in the decisions that were made by a small minority of councils out of many others which acted with common sense and caution to make the best use of public money.
Out of 317 local authorities, six have declared bankruptcy. This is not an endemic issue. It is ALL about mismanagement of council finances. One of them owed 2 billion pounds.No. AGAIN a completely wrongheaded conclusion. Nobody forced any council to make a total bollix of a building company. THEY DID THAT THEMSELVES. The councils in Newcastle and Northumberland, the former a Labour council, the latter a Conservative one are not in that position, and neither made stupid or unwise investments. That is the position with the vast majority of councils in fact. The responsibility for these diabolically stupid decisions lies squarely with the buffoons who made them. They are not infants. They made terrible decisions themselves. Why is it the fault of government? You are just trying to pass off the blame to people who had no hand in the decisions that were made by a small minority of councils out of many others which acted with common sense and caution to make the best use of public money.
You seem to think that central government can make every decision and should carry the can for the idiotic decisions of locally elected councillors and the officials they appoint.It's government's duty to govern sensibly. As I posted, what on earth possessed them to think elected local councillors were equipped to make such major investment decisions.
.
Is it not the local authority's duty to use their powers sensibly?It's government's duty to govern sensibly. As I posted, what on earth possessed them to think elected local councillors were equipped to make such major investment decisions.
.
That is closer to the position than you suspect. The national government took control of local government resources and expenditure a very long time ago. Allowing and even encouraging local government to indulge in speculation was strangely inconsistent with the control they normally exert.The obvious logic of your position is that government are the grown ups and the local council are the nursery children, at all costs to be protected from their own stupidity.