Swimmers' fury as council votes through Sutton pool closure

Sutton swimming pool will be mothballed following the council's decision, which will save £180,000 a year Sutton swimming pool will be mothballed following the council's decision, which will save £180,000 a year

FURIOUS swimmers stormed out of a council cabinet meeting tonight after senior politicians went against public opinion and voted through plans to shut the pool at Sutton Leisure Centre.

Officers at St Helens Council recommended closing the pool to save funds and the local authority’s cabinet members unanimously approved the proposals, which would save £180,000 a year.

Swimming enthusiasts, who were strongly against the closure, gathered at the meeting, which was held in public at St Helens Town Hall.

But they left angrily after being unable to ask questions or voice their opinions.

Legally, members of the public can attend hearings but they are not allowed to speak to councillors or officers.

The decision was taken to “close and mothball” the pool. There is thought to be little likelihood of the pool reopening in the near future.

With the council having suffered a £36m cut in funding until 2012/2013 – with a further £14m to be slashed in coming years, leading politicians say painful choices had to be made.

But it was against public opinion.

Ninety eight per cent of the 163 people who responded individually to the council’s public consultation were against the pool being shutdown.

A petition of 1,142 names objecting to the proposals was also submitted.

Agenda papers at tonight’s cabinet meeting stated: “It is understandable that customers are opposed to the closure of a local facility, however this decision is not simply whether the swimming facility should remain open or close it relates to the council having to mitigate the impacts of the financial cuts that are being imposed on it by central government.”

Opening hours at Sutton Leisure Centre are also set to reduced, meaning it will operate only on weekdays between 4pm and 10pm.

Full report to follow on Thursday

Comments(136)

keepitreel says...
6:54pm Wed 9 Jan 13

so let me get this right,to save £180,000 this council has chosen to close a public amenaty in a part of the town that has little else going for it and speel out msries mantra about the nasty tories taking our money,BUT the deside to spend £300,000 on extra bin bags plus the additional cost of vehicles and the extra wages the unions are demanding to alter how we sort our houshold rubbish,for gods sake get this inept bunch of cretins out of power before it gets to late,or is it to late?

eddyspan says...
8:27pm Wed 9 Jan 13

What a town! I agree. The green theft continues. It will go in the same bag. If the council want it they can sort it! More leisure facilities closed. Are we aiming to be the unhealthiest town in Britain. Carole Hudson well worth 140k per year.

Villordsutch says...
8:48pm Wed 9 Jan 13

We build a new McDonalds and close a Swimming Baths...Welcome to St Helens! Better get that Cardiac Unit built sharpish!

tina299 says...
8:48pm Wed 9 Jan 13

98% are against it and they decide to go ahead anyway? They are supposed to represent the people of St.Helens, obviously not!!

I fully understand that they need to make cuts but why get rid of a facility that helps people keep fit, is a social place, provides jobs etc?

Sankey says...
9:16pm Wed 9 Jan 13

No swimming pools or libraries should close while st helens pays its executives huge salaries and cuts back not a one of them and the council has reserves of over £200m on its balance sheet £120m in liquid assets. Yet they sit on all that money and pay themselves salaries a prime minister would earn. But Rimmer was voted in with a landslide. CHECK THE FACTS LOOK AT ST HELENS COUNCIL ACCOUNTS 2012 LOOK AT PAGE 42. SEE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT THIS CRUMMY COUNCIL AND ITS LEADERSHIP TEAM ARE UP TO.

WE EXPECT TOUGH UNPOPULAR DECISIONS IN THESE TIMES BUT WE ALSO EXPECT HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY.

Sankey says...
9:30pm Wed 9 Jan 13

The council had £130m of reserves in 2010 in 2011 it added £90m (£50m via a surplus eg overcharging us and £40m via some undisclosed windfall) that took us to £220m in reserves at 2011 most of which is liquid.In 2012 it used £30m of these reserves leaving £190m in 2012'. This is far excess of other authorities What is going on in this council? Why do they need so much money? In their back pocket and when can we see some as rices from Marie's cronies and fat cats?

anthonywilson says...
9:30pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
No swimming pools or libraries should close while st helens pays its executives huge salaries and cuts back not a one of them and the council has reserves of over £200m on its balance sheet £120m in liquid assets. Yet they sit on all that money and pay themselves salaries a prime minister would earn. But Rimmer was voted in with a landslide. CHECK THE FACTS LOOK AT ST HELENS COUNCIL ACCOUNTS 2012 LOOK AT PAGE 42. SEE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT THIS CRUMMY COUNCIL AND ITS LEADERSHIP TEAM ARE UP TO.

WE EXPECT TOUGH UNPOPULAR DECISIONS IN THESE TIMES BUT WE ALSO EXPECT HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY.
Indeed.
A quick look shows £122m in liquid reserves. I look forward to any explanations concerning this with interest.

Sankey says...
9:31pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Sacrifices

Sankey says...
9:33pm Wed 9 Jan 13

Are we all in this together Marie? It sure does not feel like it. Honestly Marie that's all we ask just tell the truth Please. You are saying the council has no money the accounts say otherwise

Vomitlord says...
6:27am Thu 10 Jan 13

Too right Eddy. In 2011 Carole Hudson earned 182,000 (Incidentally David Cameron Earned 142,000!!!!!!). I can therefore think of a more popular way to save 180k, can't you?

And Justice For All says...
8:18am Thu 10 Jan 13

Typical Council disregard for what the people of the borough need or want. It's amazing how they can spend half a million on Parr baths, yet close a pool that serves a bigger area. It seems to me that according to this council, the less the people of an area pay into the coffers, the more they get. What do the people of Eccleston have? The people of West Park, Rainhill etc? These areas and others have a higher rate of employed people yet get less and less. If you want something, do jack sh*t and the council will hand it to you on a plate. Vote of No Confidence!

suttonboy says...
9:00am Thu 10 Jan 13

The same morons making the same bad decisions. Hang your heads in shame St Helens Council.

Bill Bradbury says...
9:27am Thu 10 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
No swimming pools or libraries should close while st helens pays its executives huge salaries and cuts back not a one of them and the council has reserves of over £200m on its balance sheet £120m in liquid assets. Yet they sit on all that money and pay themselves salaries a prime minister would earn. But Rimmer was voted in with a landslide. CHECK THE FACTS LOOK AT ST HELENS COUNCIL ACCOUNTS 2012 LOOK AT PAGE 42. SEE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT THIS CRUMMY COUNCIL AND ITS LEADERSHIP TEAM ARE UP TO. WE EXPECT TOUGH UNPOPULAR DECISIONS IN THESE TIMES BUT WE ALSO EXPECT HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY.
Sankey, I have tried to type in the www. address you gave on the accounts but keep getting File error or it may have been withdrawn-surely not?
I wonder if the result is that the Council does not own the school anymore now run by the college and Edge Hill I think?
As I wrote before we need to see how "liquid" some of these assets are and whether they can be sold or worth anything as all businesses have such assets which are gradually written off with depreciation. All Councils have investments in banks etc. for you may recall those Councils who stupidly got tied up with the Icelandic Banks.

As I am indicating it is a financial decision beyond "our Ken" whether a Council "realises" such assets for as I wrote earlier once spent then no safety net. Cllrs. have difficult decisions to make (I am trying to address the balance in this thread) and are always open to criticism when their allowances and the cost of highly paid officers salaries are thrown at them. I note there was some discussion today on the Today BBC4 programme on Cllr's allowances.

Still we Cllrs. ( I am a Parish Cllr and who don't get paid) have to suffer the slings and arrows from the public but I do sympathise with all those who bothered to turn up at the meeting, but as I also write, people ought to be reminded from where these cuts are coming-the cuts in Government support for Councils in their Privatisation scheme to get things run by non elected people i.e. volunteers who cost nothing or by "rip-off" merchants like Crapita and Group 4 who "trouser" generous Government grants running prisons etc. with minimal staff.
It's a mess and so is politics but we fight on. It looks as though the Council is in for a hiding!!??

keepitreel says...
9:56am Thu 10 Jan 13

the only way it would seem to get any response from HEIR RIMMER would be if a national press or tv company actually spoke to her and cut through her spin,if the good people of SUTTON took the time to protest how about all the people of this town having a peaceful protest outside the town hall,with placards and banners etc and invited the BBC and SKY tv etc to broadcast it,as our local press seems inept at finding the answers we all keep asking for,thursdays are a good day because statistically it is a slow news day.

malann says...
11:26am Thu 10 Jan 13

First we lost meals on wheels not many know that but Rimmer said things would be ut in place which ment do it your self tipical of our council and it`s leader.

Erics_protege says...
11:39am Thu 10 Jan 13

Opening hours at Sutton Leisure Centre are also set to reduced, meaning it will operate only on weekdays between 4pm and 10pm.


Is this a mis-type?

If not, then it suggests that the centre will be closed at weekends. I picked someone up from there last Sunday and the wasn't a single space free!

There a loads of football teams, judo clubs and athletics groups that use the centre at weekend. Surely they aren't closing it to them?

I suspect it should read that on weekdays it will only open from 4pm to 10pm?

Erics_protege says...
11:40am Thu 10 Jan 13

"are"

Sankey says...
11:43am Thu 10 Jan 13

Bill just type St. Helens council accounts 2012 in google it will come up take a look at the balance sheet it's very clear.

oldlancashire says...
12:15pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Just got thismessage on the Sutton Manoe site: Dina Karim - Hi I work for BBC Radio Merseyside, we would like to speak to some residents who are against the pool closure. Could youb please get in touch with me on 0151 708 6161.

anthonywilson says...
12:19pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Erics_protege wrote:
Opening hours at Sutton Leisure Centre are also set to reduced, meaning it will operate only on weekdays between 4pm and 10pm.


Is this a mis-type?

If not, then it suggests that the centre will be closed at weekends. I picked someone up from there last Sunday and the wasn't a single space free!

There a loads of football teams, judo clubs and athletics groups that use the centre at weekend. Surely they aren't closing it to them?

I suspect it should read that on weekdays it will only open from 4pm to 10pm?
Hello Eric's protege.

Its not a typing error I can assure you. The report submitted to the Council in advance of the cabinet meeting states that the Centre will only be open from 4pm to 10pm. The report can be downloaded here: http://moderngov.sth
elens.gov.uk/documen
ts/s21138/Closure%20
of%20Sutton%20Leisur
e.pdf

Point 2.7 of the report states and I quote:

"The closure of the swimming pool would allow for new opening hours for public use of the remaining facilities, of Monday to Friday 4pm to 10pm and only on weekends as required to accommodate any events. This would significantly reduce the staffing requirements for the center as well as reduce the operational costs. Details of the final staffing structure will be subject to full consultation with the staff and unions and will then be subject to a Delegated Executive Decision. The revised staffing structure will provide the appropriate level of supervision for the site. It is important that the staffing levels ensure that the Centre can continue to provide a high level of customer care but this must be balanced against what is required for a Centre that is only open 30 hours a week (plus any weekend events).

I take this that it won't be open at weekends. The Star has kindly published my letter that I sent in last week about it.

SKAOBO says...
2:17pm Thu 10 Jan 13

I would like to sat that I am disgusted about the decision to mothball Sutton pool. As Sutton residents are aware, there are two dams locally, and the pool provides the opportunity for local children to learn potentially life saving swimming skills, as part of school P.E. provision. As childhood obesity within the borough rises, the reduction of facilities for provision of exercise seems at best poorly thought out. As the majority of the cabinet members are school governors, I am extremely disappointed to see that the health and well-being of children is such a low priority. I would like to ask if schools will be given additional funding to cover transport costs incurred by this decision, or will schools have to chose between providing potentially life-saving skills and exercise, or having the funds to support children's learning. Clearly, the health and well-being of young people of Sutton is not high on the list of present priorities.

Erics_protege says...
2:46pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Anthonywilson - the weekend issue only comes up as a point in the document, it wasn't part of the proposal at the top so how does that become part of the decision? Any ideas???

If it is true then it's a sneaky little addition and wasn't part of the consultation. Is that legit?
Does anyone know?

moonman77 says...
2:54pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Perhaps they could reduce obesity now by doing what we did years ago, walk to their nearest baths. Its sad that this facility has shut but goodness me we have others in the town. You lot are sounding like this is the only pool for a hundred miles away. It’s not its only 2.5 miles away! Twenty-five minutes brisk walk. Stop moaning, we are in times of austerity. Things have to change.

keepitreel says...
3:27pm Thu 10 Jan 13

were do you live moonman77,we are complaining about the desicion to close an asset in a deprived area of the town to save money in the same week the council plan to spend twice the ammount saved on buying bin bags,im sorry but the LABOUR PARTY have outstade their welcome in this area and the town,either they have a shake up and bring new fresh thinking people in or they will be in for a shock come election time,RIMMER OUT!!!!!! and take her non ST HELENS residents on the council with her.

anthonywilson says...
3:37pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Erics_protege wrote:
Anthonywilson - the weekend issue only comes up as a point in the document, it wasn't part of the proposal at the top so how does that become part of the decision? Any ideas???

If it is true then it's a sneaky little addition and wasn't part of the consultation. Is that legit?
Does anyone know?
The honest answer from me is "I don't know."

What I do know is that the Council consultation made no reference to a proposal to close the Leisure centre at weekends (I wasn't at the Cabinet meeting) but it does appear that this will be the case based on the way in which the Star article above has reported it. Perhaps those who managed to attend could enlighten us further and confirm?

I do know that poor consultations in the past could be challenged by a judicial review process although I'm not sure if its possible nowadays due to legislative changes. My complaint is the lack of full honesty in not orginally stating that a change in operating hours for the whole centre were part of the plans as is closure at weekends which appears to now be the pipeline following the cabinet meeting.

anthonywilson says...
3:58pm Thu 10 Jan 13

moonman77 wrote:
Perhaps they could reduce obesity now by doing what we did years ago, walk to their nearest baths. Its sad that this facility has shut but goodness me we have others in the town. You lot are sounding like this is the only pool for a hundred miles away. It’s not its only 2.5 miles away! Twenty-five minutes brisk walk. Stop moaning, we are in times of austerity. Things have to change.
Its a bit more than a 25 minute walk from Clock Face or Sutton Manor to Queens Park Leisure Centre or Parr.
The distance isn't really relevant. Failing to be upfront and honest with local people about the real situation is.
Why is it always Sutton which seems to be the brunt of cuts and not other areas of the borough? (Two libraries a community centre axed previously in the last fifteen years in Sutton) and now the leisure centre to be a part-time one with no swimming pool. Perhaps residents in Sutton should be asking for a Council tax rebate?
Why is the Council simply not up front with people about the cuts they are having to make when it also appears that the money held in reserve is in a realtively healthier position than were often led to believe. We all know that Councils everywhere are being subject to a reduced Central Government settlement and decisions are not easy but if they explained things a little better with more honesty they perhaps wouldnt get the amount of flack which they will do over this decision.
Another point Moonman77 is that money was recently spent on refurbishment work at Parr swimming pool to create a new learner pool. Not so long ago considerable investment was made in extending and upgrading the sports facilties at Parr (in recent years this included new changing facilities and a new Gym). How much has been spent on upgrading and improving Sutton or are they simply the poor and forgotten relations of the Borough?

PM says...
5:35pm Thu 10 Jan 13

the population of Sutton and Bold is arounf 16'000 yet only 160 personally gave their views to keep the pool open.If you are looking at blame there it is.

PM says...
5:38pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Villordsutch wrote:
We build a new McDonalds and close a Swimming Baths...Welcome to St Helens! Better get that Cardiac Unit built sharpish!
Really? If the entire population of St Helens were active swimmers who used the facilities on offer you may have a point , but they aren't and they dont. My only criticism of this decision was the farcical 'consultation' when the decision to close the pool had already been made. Have the guts to be up front about the situation.

PM says...
5:41pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
No swimming pools or libraries should close while st helens pays its executives huge salaries and cuts back not a one of them and the council has reserves of over £200m on its balance sheet £120m in liquid assets. Yet they sit on all that money and pay themselves salaries a prime minister would earn. But Rimmer was voted in with a landslide. CHECK THE FACTS LOOK AT ST HELENS COUNCIL ACCOUNTS 2012 LOOK AT PAGE 42. SEE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT THIS CRUMMY COUNCIL AND ITS LEADERSHIP TEAM ARE UP TO. WE EXPECT TOUGH UNPOPULAR DECISIONS IN THESE TIMES BUT WE ALSO EXPECT HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY.
Can you give examples of other councils that have done as you suggest without any cuts to leisure facilities?

Sankey says...
6:34pm Thu 10 Jan 13

No i cant PM because of the laws of mathematics. However i suggest you look at what trafford council have done reducing the back office fat cats and sharing services such as the maximum amount of money goes into public services something st helens might learn from.

Can I ask whose side you are on? the public and the vulnerable or the labour town hall cronies?

pitbullboxing says...
8:31pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Where have you been PM? Not heard from you in a while.

Bill Bradbury says...
9:21pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Sankey thanks,- your advice worked and I have printed the Balance Sheet.
As I suspected much of the assets cannot be touched as investments which we both know if we foreclosed on ours we would lose a lot of cash. All LA's have this sort of portfolio and rarely come into the figure when we look at what a Council can spend from a Government grant/settlement.
How much the Council can draw on what it calls its "usuable reserves" we would need to ask (I will) As they mature I suspect they will be used.

Schools balances in excess of £8.1m has been a contentious issue for the 40 years I was representing trade unions and always the excuse is that they arefor future projects etc but always stay around the same. From time to time the Council tries to claw some back but then give up!

Incidentally I was incorrect the pool has no connection to Sutton Academy who purchases time from the body that owns it.

In our days we only had one pool Boundary Road Baths which remember closed for winter when we could see the delights of The Count Bartelli, the Masked Crusader and such other wrestling delights. So with better transport facilities Parr and pools in other areas/gyms/pools will have to suffice.
I wonder how many libraries will go and other cuts? Who would be a Cllr. these days.

jumper says...
9:46pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Not many get out of it Bill must be somut innit

Sankey says...
9:59pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Glad you found it bill hope you found it interesting. Re the usable reserves they are a substantial sum indeed an far higher the equivalent in warring tons accounts in fact four times and Warrington is twice St. Helens size as authority

janet c says...
10:06pm Thu 10 Jan 13

It appears that fast food revenue is more important to the council than the health and fitness of the people they are elected to represent.I wonder if this will be so when we hav e no Olympic heroes of the future from our area and instead have nothing to be known for but the highest cardiac and obesity rates in the UK .

chasmcn says...
10:31pm Thu 10 Jan 13

Sad that the council came to decision i don't agree with it and i dont agree with how the govt distributes my tax in to millionaire pockets and i lose a service in my town.

bill iam lead to believe that the school was offered the pool but they did not want to open it to public swimming times they just wanted to use it for the schools own use so the council withdrew the offer

@ janet c being a socialist i would levy a tax on the profits of mcdonalds pizza hut etc to fund swimming pools and council run health centers so people could use them for free ,after all our taxes have to pick up the bill of the crap food they provide affecting our health via the NHS

ps mcdonalds and pepsi were one of the main sponsors of the Olympics

chasmcn says...
12:30am Fri 11 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
No i cant PM because of the laws of mathematics. However i suggest you look at what trafford council have done reducing the back office fat cats and sharing services such as the maximum amount of money goes into public services something st helens might learn from.

Can I ask whose side you are on? the public and the vulnerable or the labour town hall cronies?
True Trafford are sharing back offices but they still sacked the library staff installing machines to run the library they are still closing 10 children centers ,meals on wheels ,they have one care home left that is too close but the millionaires in trafford( parts of trafford are the richest people in the country) will get their tax cut

Erics_protege says...
1:15am Fri 11 Jan 13

Many are still missing a key point.. It isn't just the pool anymore! Its now all services at weekends. This includes football pitches, the only athletics facilty in the borough (Wigan have 2) squash courts and a big sportshall that is always busy with netball / judo /non sports activities.

This closure wasn't part of the consultation and has been sneaked in via the back door. As a result even more staff will probably go. When the centre goes part time it will only be a small step to full closure. The local people and 100Ks of weekend users never had the chance to be consulted.

pitbullboxing says...
9:28am Fri 11 Jan 13

Read this chas.
http://www.taxpayers
alliance.com/economi
cs/2012/04/rich-poor
-middle-pay-lot-tax.
html

mikeperry109 says...
10:48am Fri 11 Jan 13

eddyspan wrote:
What a town! I agree. The green theft continues. It will go in the same bag. If the council want it they can sort it! More leisure facilities closed. Are we aiming to be the unhealthiest town in Britain. Carole Hudson well worth 140k per year.
I think that it is closer to £150,000 - and no, she is not!

mikeperry109 says...
10:49am Fri 11 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
No swimming pools or libraries should close while st helens pays its executives huge salaries and cuts back not a one of them and the council has reserves of over £200m on its balance sheet £120m in liquid assets. Yet they sit on all that money and pay themselves salaries a prime minister would earn. But Rimmer was voted in with a landslide. CHECK THE FACTS LOOK AT ST HELENS COUNCIL ACCOUNTS 2012 LOOK AT PAGE 42. SEE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT THIS CRUMMY COUNCIL AND ITS LEADERSHIP TEAM ARE UP TO.

WE EXPECT TOUGH UNPOPULAR DECISIONS IN THESE TIMES BUT WE ALSO EXPECT HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY.
Honesty and transparency from this shower, Sankey? You must be joking!

mikeperry109 says...
10:54am Fri 11 Jan 13

Bill Bradbury wrote:
Sankey wrote:
No swimming pools or libraries should close while st helens pays its executives huge salaries and cuts back not a one of them and the council has reserves of over £200m on its balance sheet £120m in liquid assets. Yet they sit on all that money and pay themselves salaries a prime minister would earn. But Rimmer was voted in with a landslide. CHECK THE FACTS LOOK AT ST HELENS COUNCIL ACCOUNTS 2012 LOOK AT PAGE 42. SEE THE TRUTH ABOUT WHAT THIS CRUMMY COUNCIL AND ITS LEADERSHIP TEAM ARE UP TO. WE EXPECT TOUGH UNPOPULAR DECISIONS IN THESE TIMES BUT WE ALSO EXPECT HONESTY AND TRANSPARENCY.
Sankey, I have tried to type in the www. address you gave on the accounts but keep getting File error or it may have been withdrawn-surely not?
I wonder if the result is that the Council does not own the school anymore now run by the college and Edge Hill I think?
As I wrote before we need to see how "liquid" some of these assets are and whether they can be sold or worth anything as all businesses have such assets which are gradually written off with depreciation. All Councils have investments in banks etc. for you may recall those Councils who stupidly got tied up with the Icelandic Banks.

As I am indicating it is a financial decision beyond "our Ken" whether a Council "realises" such assets for as I wrote earlier once spent then no safety net. Cllrs. have difficult decisions to make (I am trying to address the balance in this thread) and are always open to criticism when their allowances and the cost of highly paid officers salaries are thrown at them. I note there was some discussion today on the Today BBC4 programme on Cllr's allowances.

Still we Cllrs. ( I am a Parish Cllr and who don't get paid) have to suffer the slings and arrows from the public but I do sympathise with all those who bothered to turn up at the meeting, but as I also write, people ought to be reminded from where these cuts are coming-the cuts in Government support for Councils in their Privatisation scheme to get things run by non elected people i.e. volunteers who cost nothing or by "rip-off" merchants like Crapita and Group 4 who "trouser" generous Government grants running prisons etc. with minimal staff.
It's a mess and so is politics but we fight on. It looks as though the Council is in for a hiding!!??
Bill, stop apologizing for Rimmer and her lackeys. They are wasting money on a new re-cycling scheme, and blaming any unpopular decisions on the government.
If this is democracy then heaven help us!

mikeperry109 says...
10:57am Fri 11 Jan 13

Erics_protege wrote:
Many are still missing a key point.. It isn't just the pool anymore! Its now all services at weekends. This includes football pitches, the only athletics facilty in the borough (Wigan have 2) squash courts and a big sportshall that is always busy with netball / judo /non sports activities.

This closure wasn't part of the consultation and has been sneaked in via the back door. As a result even more staff will probably go. When the centre goes part time it will only be a small step to full closure. The local people and 100Ks of weekend users never had the chance to be consulted.
Consultation? This decision was taken months ago, and they care not a jot for what the people of Sutton think. A great example of how not to run a democracy!

mikeperry109 says...
11:08am Fri 11 Jan 13

chasmcn wrote:
Sad that the council came to decision i don't agree with it and i dont agree with how the govt distributes my tax in to millionaire pockets and i lose a service in my town.

bill iam lead to believe that the school was offered the pool but they did not want to open it to public swimming times they just wanted to use it for the schools own use so the council withdrew the offer

@ janet c being a socialist i would levy a tax on the profits of mcdonalds pizza hut etc to fund swimming pools and council run health centers so people could use them for free ,after all our taxes have to pick up the bill of the crap food they provide affecting our health via the NHS

ps mcdonalds and pepsi were one of the main sponsors of the Olympics
Good point, Chas - did no-one think of asking Macdonalds to sponsor Sutton pool? On the point of millionaires, agree totally, although it is worth remembering that Labour only introduced the 50p tax rate a month before they were kicked out of power! The previous thirteen years were spent kissing millionaire's backsides and rewarding them with undeserved honours!
The coalition, for all its faults, has lifted hundreds of thousands of lower paid workers out of paying income tax altogether - and the 50p rate actually cost the treasury millions in lost revenue.

pitbullboxing says...
11:11am Fri 11 Jan 13

The policy is to manage these cuts as badly as possible - to make the coalition look worse than it is. Kid yourself not - if Labour in power the same decisions would have been taken - only Rammer would have been saying "painful decisions have to be made because of the recession". Ask yourself this - how can it be that Parr pool get s a second refit , this time at the cost of half a million pound , yet Sutton has to close. Would it not have been better to not refit a perfectly working pool and keep Sutton open fore a couple more years?

Sankey says...
12:48pm Fri 11 Jan 13

chasmcn i did not say trafford had made no redundancies or cut services they have. But the point is things would have been even worse had they not sorted out the internal structure of the council and elimated waste first then made the cutbacks thats the way it should be.

Contrast with st helens who leave the executive team intact increase council tax and make concentrated cuts to front line services while making as much noise as possible about it being the coalitions fault.

Why cannot st helens share its central functions with other auhorities? There must be huge duplication and ineffciencies e.g multiple processes and systems. To me its a no brainer and industry has been doing it for years. Of course this will result in the loss of jobs and that is not good I agree. But do we have ineffcient councils wasting money to retain jobs in perpetuity or do we have lean and effcient councils that can charge sensible business rates and keep council tax low so the public has more to spend in the local economy and create new jobs in the local economy and ensure a better long term future rather than just hanging on to a system not fit for purpose. I have still not had an answer why st helens council are sitting on such huge amounts of liquid assets Bill has stated they are for some future contingency but the amounts are excessive and from 2011 when a £50m surplus was made (which is still being held in reserve) this indicates overcharging by the council which they have responded to by increasing the charges yet again while continuing to pocket the £50m windfall. Chas does this really sound like an entity we should continue to dig deep to pay for? If they were more like trafford their position would be more palatable to the council taxpayers. Then we have this situation in sutton which was handled very badly despite a very well paid executive team many on over £100k. It seems there is nothing they can right from the finances, to the structure to day to day operations.

How much longer can this go on?

Bill Bradbury says...
12:56pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Mike you are becoming a closet Tory supporting this Government's cuts, which, whatever the percieved faults of Marie and her backing group, Cllrs.have to take account.
Socialist Party or any other controlling group of a Council cannot ignore year on year cuts which I experienced first hand throughout the 80's.

Someone mentioned the beauties of Trafford the most right-wing authority in closing whatever moves. If anything is to go you could count on the Tories of Trafford being the first. Money is indeed wasted especially on consultants as the re-cyling issue I know very litttle about apart from it having been the flavour of the decade urged on by the Greens. In a broad scheme of things it may make sense but I know little to comment on it. Need to see the figures.

Sankey says...
1:20pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Bill what's this right wing left wing nonsense? What matters is what is the right thing to do and we need to grow up from this categorising policy into left or right whatever that means I suspect most of us don't know. Trafford has got it's house in order before it acted St. Helens has not or so it appears from its accounts

moonman77 says...
1:45pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Its simple. Like it or not we are in a deep deep ressesion. Tighten your belts, take the medicine and accept change, respect the so called 'fat cats' and councillors who I believe have your best interest at heart and back them to get us out of it. If Sutton hadn't have gone it would have been Parr. Both are deprived areas. Finally, I think the worst has yet to come so prepare. Its a pity Margaret Thatcher's not younger to lead us out of it as she did before.

pitbullboxing says...
2:12pm Fri 11 Jan 13

So Bill - Labour would not have made any cuts?

Sankey says...
2:33pm Fri 11 Jan 13

You won't get many agreeing with you about Maggie moonman but I do whatever people thought of her she took radical decisions at a time when the country was on its knees. In some ways today's situation is even worse because its global. I think what annoys people is the council is not joined up and making political capital out of a bad situation when they should be looking after people. And yes as you say hard decisions will have to be taken

Bill Bradbury says...
3:03pm Fri 11 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
So Bill - Labour would not have made any cuts?
Of course they woud but we would have kicked started the economy by investing in capital projects. Does it work? Did so in the 30's American depression and I read in the latest "Socialist Economy Bulletin" that China rejected to current Tory approach and in the last 6 months their economy has boomed. (Mike it's your publication. You ought to start believing in your own propoganda).

And don't trot out the Tory Propoganda about deficits. This country since the last World War has lived on bigger deficits than what we have at present. GOVERNMENT BORROWING HAS INCREASED.

By the way the BIG LIE that Cameron trots out at each PM question time about the Private sector increase in jobs is only that his Government has transferred FE jobs into the Private sector.--not new jobs but a consequence of the privatisation by this Tory Govenment. Public secor jobs now in the private sector. The Tory Goebbels Big Lie machine is in full flow swallowed by many on this site.

Sankey says...
6:03pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Public sector jobs in the private sector bill who would have thought that? Remember the debate we had on the public sector pensions? What did I say?

pitbullboxing says...
7:30pm Fri 11 Jan 13

I think your wrong about the Tory big lie Bill. Not that they are using propaganda - all parties do that - but rather about people buying into it. Most folk are clever enough to use their own minds. I think socialism is just not a popular choice amongst people any-more. Or not as popular as it was. The real damage was done by the amount of immigration and the Iraq war.

pitbullboxing says...
7:38pm Fri 11 Jan 13

...and what about the parr pool Bill - how is that fair? 500k just on the roof , new heating new lighting and new lockers , just a few years after it had another refit , how is that treating areas equally?

Bill Bradbury says...
10:36pm Fri 11 Jan 13

Pittbull Better to not things deteriorate beyond repair. The upgrade was needed.
Agree with you on Immigration and the Iraq War. Did a lot of damage and lost us a lot of Labour supporters.

As to the Tory claim of 1m private sector jobs they are not new jobs nor new private firms but the privatistion of the public sector. As Sankey agrees pensions need to be reduced to the level of the inadequate Private sector as well as wages. This is our main disagreement between the two of us. I did not spend 40 years fighting for the wages and conditions of workers to see them destroyed by the Tories. This country is heading back to the Victorian Mill-owner mentality so once the unions are smashed which are well on the way at the moment (my information is that the TUC is having internal problems-a story that will break soon) in say another 50 years someone will fight back against worker exploitation.

Workers are afraid of losing their jobs and so we have them working on short term contracts and minimum wages. Use your eyes and ears to see this and not the Tory press. Jessops and Honda workers plus Comet and even every other business under threat has its workers fearful of their jobs.
Still the Politicians are doing OK.

Sankey says...
12:37am Sat 12 Jan 13

Jessops and comet were beaten by the Internet labour created a two tier society they destroyed private sector pensions and embellished pubiic sector pensions creating a gratefully client state, to some extent this worked fr them and spilt the vote at the 2010 election with millions dependant on state aid or public sector jobs and pensions the 80 percent rest f societty were left to fend for themselves. 80 of peepe in the uk have a poor or no pension thanks t Gordon brown its the biggest societal change in our history, the public sector have to fall in line with general society they cannot be the elite paid for by the 20 per cent that's not a race vto the bottom that's simply the way it is.

Bill Bradbury says...
10:10am Sat 12 Jan 13

Sankey Your last post is amazing for only late last night having looked at the St.Helens balance sheet again I realised that one item is one you have consistently opposed on this site-Public sector pensions.--and behold it is the first thing I read today from you.

The vast holding by St.Helens is pensions which on the balance sheet is £216,427,000 which we know from your love of the private sector (and which regularly get themselves out of such schemes) as being too costly, that you would be glad to see these trashed along with your penchant for the bosses of private business who are doing the same-the Race to the bottom a phrase the Right wing and yourself do not like as it is so true.

So following your logic St.Helens and all other Local Authorities and public sector workers should have this pension pot raided to make up for the cuts this Tory Government is making and throw in any other funds that can be realised.

Your last posting has at last got to the nub of your dislike of public sector workers. It's their pensions you don't like and I always thought it was the Labour Party who was often accused of being the party of envy.

We are worlds apart. I like to see things improved and you wish them to go the other way to pay off a deficit budget, which has always been with us as I stated above, and the Government waste in procurment-the Military waste this week is eye watering.
We will never agree on this but we at least try to make our points without rancour. It would be a boring world if everyone agreed with me. I like the saying "The world is split into two parts. Those who agree with you and the blind,ignorant prejudiced fools".

Honestly I have not made it up as I thought I must write to Sankey tonorrow on pensions and find you have already done so. Scary!

pitbullboxing says...
11:24am Sat 12 Jan 13

Bill he is right about internet shopping hitting shops. Also I have to disagree with Parr fitness centre - it did not need another upgrade , it was certainly in better condition than Sutton.

pitbullboxing says...
11:32am Sat 12 Jan 13

Also Bill , why ask for people's opinion if it was to be closed anyway. There was also a petition handed in with over a thousand names on it. Now as well as losing their pool these people also feel their opinion doesn't count.

Bill Bradbury says...
11:48am Sat 12 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
Bill he is right about internet shopping hitting shops. Also I have to disagree with Parr fitness centre - it did not need another upgrade , it was certainly in better condition than Sutton.
Internet shopping has been blamed for losses eleswhere but Jessops case is the fact that cameras have become obselete due to the excellent quality of mobile phones, i-pads and the like. The footfall into these shops also fell with the absence of printed film.
The writing was on the wall when the most successful Kamera Shop in St.helens closed some years ago. Can't compete with discounts offered such as super stores and the like.
Buying of cameras one has to have hands on and comparing each model, not what you can do on the internet. It's a Pity for Jessops offered a lot of good advice which will now be lost.

chasmcn says...
5:20pm Sat 12 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
Read this chas.
http://www.taxpayers

alliance.com/economi

cs/2012/04/rich-poor

-middle-pay-lot-tax.

html
Thanks PIT for the link i know all about the TPA i read their web site for a laugh ,i am sure they would be pleased at what St Helens council is doing as they abore anything to do with a local authority were a service that is not self supporting the TPA do not believe tax payers money should be used to subsidies that service ie swimming pools

Can you tell me Pit who funds the TPA they argue for greater transparency from government bodies but they have difficulty with transparency in saying who funds them . Just another arm of the Tory party mate

chasmcn says...
6:08pm Sat 12 Jan 13

A good article bill in the paper today about zero contracts another way the tories have of counting that you have a job,how people are suppose to earn a living with a job like that no wonder the growth industry in this country is food banks , people want to wake up to their rights being eroded away before its too late .

pitbullboxing says...
6:54pm Sat 12 Jan 13

I want one of the jobs Ed is promising - for 6 months...that sounds great.

Bill Bradbury says...
9:26pm Sat 12 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
I want one of the jobs Ed is promising - for 6 months...that sounds great.
Not great at all. As people are now waking up examining Tory claims of jobs all on very short term contracts or even turn up and see if they are to be taken on getting back to the old Dock Gate mentality when you took pot luck whether the foreman picked you. As I have written many times we are heading back to Victorian Mill Owner mentality supported by the Tories on this site. As past posts have noted "Burger Flipping" is becoming the main industry in St.helens.

Sorry I am getting quite bitter on the nature of jobs as I am having personal knowledge how it is affecting people by sickness, depression and having to lay off workers with families and why I get cross when some people who blog here think it's good for the economy. I hear more Pilks jobs are on the line with lines put on soak and work switched probably to Germany and Japan, who own the company.

chasmcn says...
10:09pm Sat 12 Jan 13

Bill you also getting exploitation of people as well by companies .My neighbour his son who is 18 and unemployed went to the job center were he was offered a job .His father took him to interview the same day were he as given a job told to come back at 10pm as he was going to work nights unloading wagons he needed his own safety boots .
He started work at 10pm with 4 others who were new that night they had a induction then took outside and told to unload 3 big wagon containers and store in a warehouse which by 12.30 am they had done .
the supervisor came round and told them to go home end of his job a total of 2 1/2 hours at £4.98 a hour for night work so a princely sum of £12.45 ,his work boots cost more then that which his farther paid for in the day
welcome to the future people WAKE UP

chasmcn says...
10:25pm Sat 12 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
I think your wrong about the Tory big lie Bill. Not that they are using propaganda - all parties do that - but rather about people buying into it. Most folk are clever enough to use their own minds. I think socialism is just not a popular choice amongst people any-more. Or not as popular as it was. The real damage was done by the amount of immigration and the Iraq war.
Its easy to disclaim the tory lie PIT if we are employing more there should be a increase in tax being paid into the to treasury so they do not have to borrow more .As we have seen from the govts own figures they are having to borrow more becasue the jobs are either zero contract or part time hardly any full time jobs.
Osborne as not created a single bit of growth in the ecomony in the 2 1/2 years he as been in power he will be the first ever chancellor to take us into a triple recession

smith&weston says...
10:26am Sun 13 Jan 13

chasmcn wrote:
Bill you also getting exploitation of people as well by companies .My neighbour his son who is 18 and unemployed went to the job center were he was offered a job .His father took him to interview the same day were he as given a job told to come back at 10pm as he was going to work nights unloading wagons he needed his own safety boots .
He started work at 10pm with 4 others who were new that night they had a induction then took outside and told to unload 3 big wagon containers and store in a warehouse which by 12.30 am they had done .
the supervisor came round and told them to go home end of his job a total of 2 1/2 hours at £4.98 a hour for night work so a princely sum of £12.45 ,his work boots cost more then that which his farther paid for in the day
welcome to the future people WAKE UP
Bog standard manual labour... what was he expecting... £100 and a seat on the board ?

pitbullboxing says...
11:01am Sun 13 Jan 13

Don't worry Chas , I know your cross - nobody likes staying in on a Saturday night !!
Look at it this way - he has boots for jobs in the future and work experience.
My first job was hard work and low pay , but it did me no harm.
Father doesn't have an "r" in it by the way.

chasmcn says...
11:23am Sun 13 Jan 13

smith&weston wrote:
chasmcn wrote:
Bill you also getting exploitation of people as well by companies .My neighbour his son who is 18 and unemployed went to the job center were he was offered a job .His father took him to interview the same day were he as given a job told to come back at 10pm as he was going to work nights unloading wagons he needed his own safety boots .
He started work at 10pm with 4 others who were new that night they had a induction then took outside and told to unload 3 big wagon containers and store in a warehouse which by 12.30 am they had done .
the supervisor came round and told them to go home end of his job a total of 2 1/2 hours at £4.98 a hour for night work so a princely sum of £12.45 ,his work boots cost more then that which his farther paid for in the day
welcome to the future people WAKE UP
Bog standard manual labour... what was he expecting... £100 and a seat on the board ?
pitbullboxing says...
11:01am Sun 13 Jan 13
Don't worry Chas , I know your cross - nobody likes staying in on a Saturday night !!
Look at it this way - he has boots for jobs in the future and work experience.
My first job was hard work and low pay , but it did me no harm.
Father doesn't have an "r" in it by the way.

i see you tories welcome exploitation he was told it was a full time job by the job center he was not expecting the job to last 2 1/2hours nor were the other people who started that night one who had traveled from wigan by bus to st helens and was expecting to get the bus home at the end of the shift at 6 in the morning but being no buses at that time of night he had to walk home .
He was willing to work for £4.98 a hour he turned up he was not expecting £100 a hour just a job crap job at that but at the time was thrilled he had got a job after trying day after day for months,
.

pitbullboxing says...
11:40am Sun 13 Jan 13

Why do you keep calling me a Tory? We've been one this before - I have no political preference. Job centre - not center.
I think you better lay off the citizen Smith videos Chas.

chasmcn says...
1:11pm Sun 13 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
Why do you keep calling me a Tory? We've been one this before - I have no political preference. Job centre - not center.
I think you better lay off the citizen Smith videos Chas.
"power to the people" foxy and its( on about ) not "one" foxy

pitbullboxing says...
1:44pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Foxy. Love it. Nice one Stephen.

jumper says...
2:12pm Sun 13 Jan 13

The country's biggest problem seems after listening to our so called hierarchy of whatever way of work, seem to be lacking the oomph that bosses had yrs ago. Not only with their ability but the way they man manage.a good foreman yrs ago would have said how to, how long watch what you are doing and a full shifts pay.

Bill Bradbury says...
3:23pm Sun 13 Jan 13

On reflection I have done a diservice to Mill Owners. At least many in those days did provide for their workers, built schools, provided housing and had a social conscience. Don't see much of this about today.
In church this morning I read a memorial of a Mr. Brown of Wigan who did such things caring fro the poor, providing clothes and food and supporting institutions and who died ealy 19th,Century. It had a familiar ring.
Again Chasman's story is par for the course for some exploiting employers.
We read of tax avoidance schemes the latest supported by Her Majesty's Revenue which to my mind is a rich man's/company of a benefit cheat. Do we see the Government doing much about thes bebefits that apart from making some vocal noises that "they are within the law". Do something about the law we should be saying.

pitbullboxing says...
3:42pm Sun 13 Jan 13

We should hammer them with that 50p tax rate that Labour gave them.....a month before losing the election. I can't believe that all those tax loop holes and avoidance tricks that Labour closed have opened up again.
Jesus - all this tripe because the council are inept.

jumper says...
3:49pm Sun 13 Jan 13

That were there things start pit and then it gets to much like a snowball,and we are get rolled into it. Something needs to change or,that's it or!,

pitbullboxing says...
3:56pm Sun 13 Jan 13

It's snowing here jumper !

pitbullboxing says...
4:32pm Sun 13 Jan 13

http://www.bbc.co.uk
/news/uk-politics-20
996278

This is fair comment from Ed. At least he acknowledges Labour got it wrong on immigration.

Sankey says...
4:42pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Bill my problem with public sectors pensions is one of fairness. Brown raided the private sector pensions and with that and other things largely are now extinct. At the same time the public sector pensions were left intact save some very small adjustment. The only people in the uk who have any frm f meaningful pension are those employed by the state. In a cruel irony this is paid for by the people who have no pensions who pay more in tax to pay for the state workers than they do fr their own pension. And no you are right I don't like that

jumper says...
4:55pm Sun 13 Jan 13

You'll have to get a "jumper on with a balaclava and rub you chin off those where the days ". Just as you got warm you at to go out for the coal,start all over again.

chasmcn says...
5:11pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
Bill my problem with public sectors pensions is one of fairness. Brown raided the private sector pensions and with that and other things largely are now extinct. At the same time the public sector pensions were left intact save some very small adjustment. The only people in the uk who have any frm f meaningful pension are those employed by the state. In a cruel irony this is paid for by the people who have no pensions who pay more in tax to pay for the state workers than they do fr their own pension. And no you are right I don't like that
Sankey it is in both camps so to say the fatcats at the top in the public sector get great pensions while those at the bottom get poor pensions .Equally in the private sector as we see with chairman of British gas getting a 10 million pay off which comes from the consumer you and me have paid for his pension .All politicians have to start listening to the voter not just pay us lip service at every election ,the system is broken all around will someone fix it before its too late no wonder voter apathy is growing

Bill Bradbury says...
5:15pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Sankey I paid into my pension for 40 years at 6% of salary. If it had been a "real" fund rather than notional it would have been worth a lot more.
We called it "deferred salary". Now teachers are paying in some cases over 11% starting from this year.

As I have told you many times before Brown raided the private pension as they were giving many years of free contributions so he snatched the spare money that was sloshing about in those schemes instead of them using it to provide even better pensions

jumper says...
6:11pm Sun 13 Jan 13

It comes down to the same problem 'tell us one thing and do another'

Sankey says...
7:42pm Sun 13 Jan 13

The fact the pensions were in surplus at. Time of inflated stock market was no reason to raid thm bill as I said many times. Brown calculated (correctly) people would not notice r be concerned because its far into the future. Bill you my have paid 6 percent but the employer probably put far more and any shortfall in fund the Taxpayer met guaranteeing benefits. Other than public. Sector no other person gets that unless they are heads f industry as chas outlines.

jumper says...
8:47pm Sun 13 Jan 13

There's a lot of money somewhere and it should be looked for with the same vigour as they use to catch so called council tax dodgers. Because people who know where it is are the ones who are telling us austerity is the only way.it really should be a major priority to get the population out of the s,,t they have put us in.

Bill Bradbury says...
9:20pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Sankey The Goernmnet used our pension money to spend on other things and why they would never let us go private. The Taxpayer contributed to many other things like illegal; wars, procurement waste, over inflated govt depts. the list is endless so stop singling out teacher pensions as a drain on the tax payer. The scheme was built on a promise to pay at the end. Since then due to the greedy bankers and speculators our pension has now become public enemy No.1 as is the public sector workers and now your Tory press are softening up the greedy pensioners with their free passes TV licences etc.

You have certainly allied yourself to this philosophy of destroying workers rights, gains and conditions of service sorry to mention again-the Race to the Bottom,-- when reached you can sleep peacefully whilst your love of the rich tax avoiders and benefit cheats with their safe schemes of avoidance.

Ask you one question After the 3 years of this Government cuts have you noticed any improvement? Even Cameron is saying not this Government period and not even the next 5 years. By that time they may start rationing especially when the energy runs out through lack of investment. What will we be then paying to keep warm?

Put you a bet on. Within 9 months of the next election watch things suddenly improve aqd watch the Lie/dems run for cover.

jumper says...
9:55am Mon 14 Jan 13

It should come to some better way to see if this coalition is really within the rules of governing without some other scrutiny than another party that finished in the same position as them who are making the rules for the country and beyond.Their is nothing I know of that says they can amalgamate,maybe a sought of status quo but nothing so radical without a outright majority.

Bill Bradbury says...
11:48am Mon 14 Jan 13

To be fair to all the opinions on this thread, which initially began over the Sutton Baths closure, the public have accepted the lies of MP's in why we must do this or that or even do nothing at all fed by the 90% Tory press (Mirror excepted)

Plan A is not working and Labour's plan B of kick starting the economy falls into the trap that the total population has been told there is no money, it's a World/Euro crisis and we all must work harder for less, a god-send to the bosses who put this into operation with a vengeance. So Unions, public sector workers pensioners have become the enemy who are getting undeserved cash at sankey's and other's expense. In fact the size of my meagre pension is a grateful appreciation for his contribution via his taxes as though I am not a tax payer too. Plan B has worked in China having first attempted their Plan A.

We are being conned by politicians comfortable in their Commons and Committees far removed from the people and who emerge at election time with more bogus promises. No wonder the turn-out at elections is so poor.

Back to the subject --the baths closure is due to Government Cuts and not Marie Rimmer's wish to upset the Tories on this site. Will Libraries be next?

keepitreel says...
12:46pm Mon 14 Jan 13

im sorry to contradict you BILL but the desision to close th sutton baths IS a desision made by MARIE RIMMER she hold the purse strings and rather than look for cost cuttings in the wages and expences she and the other overpaid members of the board get she chose an easy target that fits in with here mantra that the tories did it,why BILL in the same week we have our baths closed for a saving of £180,000 she has desided to spend £300,000 on bin bags,closing SUTTON BATHS is a poliotical desision made by the labour group to try and win votes plain and simple.

Sankey says...
1:02pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Bill its true public sector workers also pay tax and pay contributions but that does not meet anything like the full cost of the public sector pensions that is met by the general taxpayer. That would not be so much of a problem had Labour deliberately (and spitefully) destroyed the private sector pensions most of which are ordinary workers many of whom would support the labour party. The public sector pensions whom are almost entirely labour followers were bought by leaving their pensions intact. Not surprisingly there is huge resentment over this. As for plan A, B, C, D etc that is for half wits. We need to earn foreign currency to broadly export what we import, or ideally export more than we import and we need to keep public expenditure below what we generate in taxes. Whatever plan follows that broad trend is the one we need to follow. Ed Balls plan of more borrowing in an uncompetative public sector based economy where we hope for the best is the plan of ruin and why labour are still unfit for office. Do I think the coalition are doing a good job no - but to allow Balls loose would be insane

jumper says...
1:13pm Mon 14 Jan 13

The reason as always that the threads on this paper get hijacked for other gripes surely tell us that we need some way of being kept better informed and more regularly about what is being done on behalf of the people of St Helens and why.Not a puny scribe on the St Helens website.

pitbullboxing says...
2:39pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Bill your a gentleman and a great guy , but I'm sorry this time I do not agree. If The council cannot re-route 180k a year to keep this centre open then it's time to go. Especially as they take 5 million pound alone in tax from Rainhill alone.

Bill Bradbury says...
2:42pm Mon 14 Jan 13

jumper wrote:
The reason as always that the threads on this paper get hijacked for other gripes surely tell us that we need some way of being kept better informed and more regularly about what is being done on behalf of the people of St Helens and why.Not a puny scribe on the St Helens website.
Yet another good idea but it won't happen. Information is power and those that control it are reluctant to share,-- that is after 40 years dealing with Headteachers and tame Chairs of Governors about to get worse under Gove who is asking heads to appoint their own Governors. i.e. those that will do as they are told.

Bill Bradbury says...
3:00pm Mon 14 Jan 13

All has been said on this thread but as soon as practicable I would love to explain to the Tories on this site the error of their economic thinking. The only thing thicker than Tory Economics are the Tories that actually believes it.

Enough and all has been said on the baths. It's a disgrace but the ire should be directed at the Tory-boys who are using austerity as a political cover for further privatisation and the free market.

Export Sankey. Most of our businesses are owned by foreign competition and where the money ends up. Flogging our silver and firms was yet another Tory ruse of the 80's.

pitbullboxing says...
3:33pm Mon 14 Jan 13

..and Gordon sold all the gold...just before the price boomed!

Sankey says...
5:13pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Our industry was destroyed after the Second World War many reasons but the unions played a very big part. As for the Tories policy at least they have some semblance of an economic policy what would your shower do bill borrow borrow and more borrow and be lead by the unions who provide 80 percentage of labour funds now.

jumper says...
5:35pm Mon 14 Jan 13

I was promised that it was going to be done that good idea Bill yrs ago about 8 or so, so put your hand up and agree still waiting, as for a few more.

chasmcn says...
7:16pm Mon 14 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
..and Gordon sold all the gold...just before the price boomed!
take a look at this foxy

http://blogs.telegra
ph.co.uk/finance/tho
maspascoe/100018367/
revealed-why-gordon-
brown-sold-britains-
gold-at-a-knock-down
-price/

according to the torygraph is was done to bail out the banks only for them to do it again years later

pitbullboxing says...
7:54pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Interesting reading Stephen J. I still think that the council could re-route some funds to keep Sutton open , and that some areas are treated more fairly than others.
Banks are awful though. I would like to see them nationalised. If a man could do that I would vote for him.

jumper says...
9:11pm Mon 14 Jan 13

What is going to happen as always,don't worry we know what's best for you.

Sankey says...
9:52pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Good article about brown chas he clearly knew the financial system was overheating 5 years before it collapsed but propped it up and carried on spending on the public sector. Making labour look good was the all powering aim. I did not think I could think any worse of him his behaviour was bordering on criminal America or Iceland he would have been jailed.

Bill Bradbury says...
10:11pm Mon 14 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
..and Gordon sold all the gold...just before the price boomed!
And not one of his better ideas As people know I was no supporter of Brown

pitbullboxing says...
10:19pm Mon 14 Jan 13

I see there are plans to develop something on Ruskin drive.

Bill Bradbury says...
10:20pm Mon 14 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
Our industry was destroyed after the Second World War many reasons but the unions played a very big part. As for the Tories policy at least they have some semblance of an economic policy what would your shower do bill borrow borrow and more borrow and be lead by the unions who provide 80 percentage of labour funds now.
I will answer this tomorrow if I have some time. I found out tonight at our Parish Council Meeting which I chair that some Councils are making up the loss for the benefit Council tax changes but St.Helens withso many around it cannot affors in our case £6000 chicken feed in Council terms.

I will give you your economic lesson tomorrow which you will deny. The figures I use are from Govt. sources not from the Labour propoganda machine. As near to the truth you will get.
As the unions give to Labour so does big business give to Labour as does their rich bankers and Millionaires. So what is your problem?

jumper says...
11:10am Tue 15 Jan 13

Does anybody know whose money where saving I include the world and why, as we all live in the same sphere ?

Bill Bradbury says...
11:33am Tue 15 Jan 13

Sankey often raises the debt crisis according to the Holy Book of Cameron et al.
Currently it is at £1.1trillion which is a large number, but from where did it come? Sankey's thesis is that it comes from years as a Nation of living beyond our means, but when this figure is examined closely an interesting picture emerges. It's true when Labour came into power in 1997 the inherited debt was 40% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP) but by 2007 the debt was 36.4% GDP.

The thanks to the recklessness of some national banks in particular the Royal Bank of Scotland a devastating financial collapse was averted by swift Labour action that required £1.3 trillion to restore liquidity. Therefore the current £1.1trillion represents a doubling of what was the pre banking crisis of 6 years ago.

At the last General Election 2010 the debt was reducing and the bulk of the consequent increase since then is a whopping 80% [projected by Governmnet into 2014 due to the economic policies of this tory/LieDem Government, not Brown or Labour.

It is interesting to note that Government Bonds or Gilts are isuued by the Treasury with the current largest holder being the Bank of England. Sankey's error is to confuse a national economy for a household economy shown by the term "living beyond our means" and that greatly beloved chestnut "the public purse". They are not the same thing and wiser economic commentators than I condemn this approach as a deliberate attempt to confuse people. His beloved austerity changes when the figures are put into a proper context, with it being a major cause of our Stagnation.

As I wrote earlier the Government's finances are actually stronger than we are led to believe with austerity being a cover for privatisation and free market experimentation. It is also used to force down wages and pretending that there are 1m private sector jobs have been made when in essence they are public jobs privatised, no new jobs except those of minimum wages, and temporary and part-time work.

jumper says...
12:12pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Are we still a socialist town?

Sankey says...
2:37pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Bill I have seen that argument before on unison,s website was that where you read it? The argument is essentially the country is not as broke as they say so we can spend on the public sector with impunity. I don't doubt your figures but as we know Gordon loved to massage the figures. A lot of his spending was off balance sheet PFI alone and un funded public sector pensions add to £1.5 trillion meaning our debt is £2.5 trillion. Unison ignore this factor also the debt s not falling now its increasing every day by about £40m the deficit is falling and many confuse the two the deficit is the difference between the tax take and public extenditure that is the one coming down. As for jobs not sure you are right the one million private sector jobs are all public sector jobs privatised but some will be as I told you all governments will be forced to in part due to the prohibitive cost of public sector pensions ths will happen more and more now. I agree with you on the lack of jobs but this is due to us no longer having an industrial base to speak of all work is either state funded low paid service sector or financial sector and distribution where we shift the billions of goods now made overseas. Look at Germany who don't have the problems we have with youth unemployment. So I am afraid your synopsis is a selective set of facts in order that the unions can become more powerful and let rip on the public sector without and industrial base to pay for it out of current taxation so they want to borrow. The other matter on jobs is high public expenditure means high tax high tax means loss of jobs in small business and emerging business something the country desperately needs if it is to have a future for the young. So I would say you and the unions are completely wrong and the reverse should happen. We should have a good but efficient public sector run not for the unions but the public and our national efforts should be on getting back our industrial base something ALL political parties have allowed to wither. A country is just like a household those who say otherwise are misquoting Keynes who never said creating a over sized public sector but in certain conditions to stimulate the economy via the multiplier theory which does not and never has said borrow until you are bust. If it did and it worked every country in the world would be doing it and be fabulously rich, I would also point out this debate is nothing new it was tried in desperation in the 1970,s which resulted in stagflation and 25 percent inflation which brought the country to its knees. I would ask you bill to listen to jim callaghans speech to the unions in I think 1976 where the public sector unions where saying exactly the same as today.

Sankey says...
2:59pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Bill the other thing I would say is the public sector does not drive the economy although accepted some private sector companies rely on public sector contracts and public sector people with state cash send in shops etc. but that is not enough to run the economy alone what matters is confidence and a favourable environment fr business to thrive that will create millions of jobs and raise the tax for the public sector. That cannot occur without sound state finances and simply opening the borrowing taps is the path to ruin especially when you have a weak industrial base. All this of course is a long way from Sutton baths and off topic which is my fault and yours

Sankey says...
3:16pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Finally the banking crisis was not a sudden unforeseen event as per the link chasmcn put up Gordon Brown knew the extent of the banks problems in 2002 when he sold the nations gold at rock bottom prices as a swindle to refinance the banks so he could carry on using their corporation tax to hike the public sector. This was 6 years before the eventual crash and given he was responsibe for regulating the banks this was criminally negligent of him and little better than theft. This is something always glossed over by those who blame the banks and ignore those who had overall responsibility e.g the treasury and the government who run the treasury. Many people think Gordon brown was an idiot I think he was anything but he knew the implications but risked it all in a reckless gamble for his ambition to be PM

pitbullboxing says...
3:17pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Excellent posts Sankey.

janet c says...
4:44pm Tue 15 Jan 13

i am amazed today to read Sports England are awarding funding to sports as part of a legacy to the Olypmics and St Helens council are shutting down every sport venue available. Unbelievable .

Bill Bradbury says...
7:54pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Sankey so it's "Brown the Clairvoyant" and the Governor of the Bank of England complicit and allowed him to do this which according to you knew that the gold fiasco (which it was) will cause a Bank crash--according to you. That ought to be headlines in tomorrow's National Press. send them your eveidence.

As for Unison I have never read any of their publications so you have an advantage on me if you reckon what I wrote was taken out of their publicity.

My figures were Government sources not from any left wing publication. I repeat using austerity to keep down wages but watch for an improvement near to the election showing things are not as they make out.

I have now bigger fish to fry over Gove's"flexible" pay policy with HT deciding who gets what. I wonde what the role of their Governing Bodies will be and be strong enough to stand up to them-my arse!!

Sankey says...
8:49pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Bill you have misunderstood the gold issue I barely understood it but here goes brown announced in advance he was going to sell our gold putting an oversupply in the market which would depress the price before he sold. Ths might seem madness but it was deliberate he wanted the price to be as low as possible. The gold was sold and bought on by the banks and then sold on at a massive profit. It was browns way of refinancing the banks because he knew they were in trouble 6 years before they eventually crashed. So he screwed taxpayers fr billions to give to the banks so they coud carry on reckless trading. Both balls and milliband in would not be surprised were in on this. There was nothing clairvoyant about it the ma n deliberately screwed the people of the uk to keep himself in office under the illusion of economic growth. If you have misunderstood this is it not possible you might be wrong about Michael gove I am not party to the detail but let's face it we can hardly say our education system is not due for reform like much of the public sector it's a conspiracy to Cheat the public and run the organisation for the benefit of those who work it And no where is this more apparent than the teaching unions. Good luck Michael the parents and pupils of Britain are behind you.

Sankey says...
8:49pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Bill you have misunderstood the gold issue I barely understood it but here goes brown announced in advance he was going to sell our gold putting an oversupply in the market which would depress the price before he sold. Ths might seem madness but it was deliberate he wanted the price to be as low as possible. The gold was sold and bought on by the banks and then sold on at a massive profit. It was browns way of refinancing the banks because he knew they were in trouble 6 years before they eventually crashed. So he screwed taxpayers fr billions to give to the banks so they coud carry on reckless trading. Both balls and milliband in would not be surprised were in on this. There was nothing clairvoyant about it the ma n deliberately screwed the people of the uk to keep himself in office under the illusion of economic growth. If you have misunderstood this is it not possible you might be wrong about Michael gove I am not party to the detail but let's face it we can hardly say our education system is not due for reform like much of the public sector it's a conspiracy to Cheat the public and run the organisation for the benefit of those who work it And no where is this more apparent than the teaching unions. Good luck Michael the parents and pupils of Britain are behind you.

Sankey says...
9:07pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Bill the article on brown is above chasmcn provided it see him is you hint it's false. But why else would he delicately sell off the gold in a firesale ? Incompetence ? I think not it was planned and if you think it's nor true then provide an alternative explanation? Countless billions people have worked so hard for used to make bankers rich and pump into the public sector to create votes and make a lot of people rich in the upper levels of the public sector. Socialism right?

chasmcn says...
11:23pm Tue 15 Jan 13

At present we have £156 billion pounds worth of gold sat in the old canteen of the bank of england ,when do we sell ? it earns nothing just sat there .

But according to Financial Times

"On this one occasion, Mr Brown’s decision was the right one. Let speculators go gambling on a shiny metal, if they want to. For most governments in rich countries, holding gold remains a largely pointless activity."

Alan Bettie FT International Editor .

Sankey says...
11:43pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Some will feel brown made the right decision the speculators in the banks for one. But the point is ths....

Brown knew exactly what trouble the banks were in 6 years before they crashed and nearly took the whoe financial system down in 2008'. But to listen to labour MP!s and their apologists you would think it was an out of the blue that could not have been foreseen. It also demonstrates how meshed up labour was with the city and the knighting of Freddie Goodwin and browns sycophantic mansion house speech weeks before the crash.

Sankey says...
11:43pm Tue 15 Jan 13

Some will feel brown made the right decision the speculators in the banks for one. But the point is ths....

Brown knew exactly what trouble the banks were in 6 years before they crashed and nearly took the whoe financial system down in 2008'. But to listen to labour MP!s and their apologists you would think it was an out of the blue that could not have been foreseen. It also demonstrates how meshed up labour was with the city and the knighting of Freddie Goodwin and browns sycophantic mansion house speech weeks before the crash.

Bill Bradbury says...
7:35am Wed 16 Jan 13

Sankey your comment on Education predictable. A smack in the face of ll teachers in St.Helens whose school results are second best in the country. Gove knows nothing about State Education and is determined to privatise the service along the lines of his Eton experience.

As a Governor of 4 schools and experince of over 48 years you don't know what you are talking about.

The only thing yo have right is that it is all about smashing the teacher unions.

chasmcn says...
8:13am Wed 16 Jan 13

All our problems are caused by a economic thinking called Neoliberalism started by Thatcher and continued by Blair and Brown and with relish by Cameron

Neoliberalism as resulted in the shift from the manufacturing sector to the service sector in the UK the rise in unemployment ,zero contracts ,temporary and part-time work.

Neoliberalism as resulted in the growth of the financial speculative market with deregulation of banking rules eg casino banking

Neoliberalism as resulted in the privatisation of public wealth into private wealth held by a minority of the population

Neoliberalism deregulation of govt rules which affects the public as protection and peoples rights are removed in the pursuit of profit for a minority

Neoliberalism does believe in social spending eg public swimming pools

Neoliberalism as now started to consume our NHS and Education in pursuit of profit for the minority at the expense of the majority

http://academic.broo
klyn.cuny.edu/educat
ion/progler/writings
/published/neolibera
lism.html

Bill Bradbury says...
9:05am Wed 16 Jan 13

Spot on Chasman. I await in a few years time when the bribes to schools to become Acadenies run out how much parents will be asked to pay. The abolition of National pay scales i.e. flexibility is the fore-runner of this. Teachers will subsidise their own schools by reduction in pay.

pitbullboxing says...
9:46am Wed 16 Jan 13

I still think funds are distributed unfairly amongst the borough. I also think that if you can't re-route 180k a year when areas like Rainhill alone pay 5 million pounds in council tax a year then your not worth your corn.

pitbullboxing says...
9:49am Wed 16 Jan 13

Not to mention the centre must bring in some revenue itself.

jumper says...
11:10am Wed 16 Jan 13

We never seem to get any reaction regarding people's points are worries on the threads that people take time out to give their opinion, what are the points that we try to make get any recognition are response from the appropriate dept. I hope that they just don't think people are just letting of steam,because we don't want facilities just closing at a whim are anything else we discuss with out some type of response which could be on the council website if need be

Sankey says...
11:23am Wed 16 Jan 13

Jumper no one will take any notice the council have a long history of ignoring the public they never take account of public opinion despite paying a manager of public affairs over eighty grand a year plus huge pension. As for Marie Rimmer she knows you will vote labour whatever they do,

Sankey says...
11:29am Wed 16 Jan 13

Well chas and bill you have ignored all my points totally declaring it all a right ing plot. I presume you agree with them then. As for the neoliberal thing it may have some truth but the destroying of manufacturing from thatcher does not work with me our manufacturing was wiped out in the industrial relations issues of the 60 's and 70.s along with poor management.

But if it is easier to blame Maggie go ahead.

Sankey says...
11:34am Wed 16 Jan 13

Bill how you can justify national pay scales for teachers I don't know how can it be right a teacher in parr gets the same pay as one in London? It's not only cheating the payer but also those teachers who work in the more expensive parts of the country.

mikeperry109 says...
12:44pm Wed 16 Jan 13

pitbullboxing wrote:
Interesting reading Stephen J. I still think that the council could re-route some funds to keep Sutton open , and that some areas are treated more fairly than others.
Banks are awful though. I would like to see them nationalised. If a man could do that I would vote for him.
That could have been done when they were collapsing in 2007, pit. Instead, taxpayer's money was poured into them by the Labour government.

Sankey says...
1:45pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Mike it seems they were in trouble in 2002 and labour kept it quiet

Bill Bradbury says...
2:10pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Sankey wrote:
Bill how you can justify national pay scales for teachers I don't know how can it be right a teacher in parr gets the same pay as one in London? It's not only cheating the payer but also those teachers who work in the more expensive parts of the country.
This proves you know nothing about teacher pay scales. Teachers in London and the area do get an extra allowance ever since I began teaching in the 60's called "the London Allowance"

As to your Tory jibe about improving standards, so much so Gove has abandonned the pay increase/scale for Excellent teachers And advanced skilled teachers.

Keep to your Tory propoganda on economics and that you obviously read Unison literature, if not how did you know what it contains.
And for your further information teaching Yr 9 & 10 bottom sets is just as hard in St.Helens as in the deep South and a lot harder than in Independent schools where mater and pater pay the fees. Any trouble from their little lords they are told to take them elsewhere probably to mainstream where my members have to deal with them. Nice small classes with well motivated pupils.

jumper says...
2:24pm Wed 16 Jan 13

It's an interesting point as to why we could not have councillor's surgery's in the locals (papers).Obviously without the confidentiality issue they have to deal with.If the mountain won't go to.

Sankey says...
3:23pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Bill I wish you well in defending the Spanish practices in the teaching profession I don't think the public is on your side and I hope you have more luck than king Canute did

pitbullboxing says...
4:48pm Wed 16 Jan 13

I don't think we have ever had this many comments on a thread. But I'll have to check those figures with the guardian.....

jumper says...
7:33pm Wed 16 Jan 13

Who listens only us ?

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree