Bristol Council prepares to vote through new round of cuts

by Jon Rogers - Ashley Ward Lib Dem Councillor Fri Feb 24, 2012 10:26 jon.rogers at bristol dot gov dot uk 20 Windsor Road, Bristol BS6 5BP 0117 914 2558

Full Council on Tuesday will be debating the Liberal Democrat proposed budget for the city. There will also be a series of amendments to that budget, proposed by the Conservative Party, the Labour Party and the Green Party.

The Green Party is proposing a 3.49% increase in Council Tax across Bristol to fund additional investment. The Labour Party and the Conservative Party have accepted the overall budget figure, but are suggesting a number of amendments to spend the council money in a different way.

The Liberal Democrats are the largest party on Bristol City Council, but do not have a majority. We are looking very closely at all suggested amendments, and are in discussions with all parties on how we might reach an agreed budget for the city.

Details of the Revenue Budget and the Capital Budget (including information on our proposed £50m of Capital "Investing in Bristol's Future" ) and the various amendments are on the web at https://www.bristol.gov.uk/committee/2012/ta/agenda/022....html

Many of us are unhappy that cuts are having to be made, but the inherited financial situation means that as a country we cannot continue to spend £400m a day, more than we take in as income.

As a council we must, by law, set a balanced budget. That is a budget that our income matches our expenses.

The budget and all amendments, MUST meet those criteria. They MUST also show "due regard" for equalities issues, so require EqIA Equalities Impact Assessments.

by Mr JJJ Fri Feb 24, 2012 12:55

I would have thought that anarchists would applaud this news - surely from an anarchist perspective, the ideal is to continue cutting both local and national government spending until there's no government left?

by anti-cuts Fri Feb 24, 2012 13:49

'Many of us are unhappy that cuts are having to be made...' says a member of the party that willingly went into a national coalition with the Tories, and has ever since forced cut after cut onto the majority of citizens, whilst bailing out bankers and handing contracts to their friends in the private sector.

The integrity of these yellow Tories, such as Rodgers, and the confirmed pedge-breaker S Williams MP, has sunk well below zero. You arent so unhappy you are going to do anything about it are you Rodgers, like resign from your seat and party in disgust at their and your betrayal? Pathetic hypocrites.

The UK remains one of the world's richest nations, home to some of the world's richest companies & people. Our fundamental problem is the inequality of wealth distribution, with a continuing trend over the last 30 years of the rich getting richer at the expense of everyone else. We need wealth equality, not growth. Redistribute the wealth now and many of our problems would be solved.

From Athens to Bristol, there is absolutely no need for cuts, just different economic & social policies. Here's hoping for a mega turnout next week at the Council House and the removal from all offices of these lying hypocritical politicians.

by watcher Fri Feb 24, 2012 16:27

why is it that people with zero imagination or vision always gravitate into politics at our expense?

by an anarchist against the cuts Fri Feb 24, 2012 21:52

This gets asked a lot, so as much form my own practise as anything else I'll take it as a genuine enquirey.

Anarchists oppose hirearchy and domination. Two forms of hierarchy we come in contact with are capitalism and the state (the two being obviously interlinked). This isn't' to say that other forms of hierarchy such as patriarchy aren't as important, but it is the our opposition to the state that is the question here.

If the cuts that were being made were to lessen the states power and control I would welcome them as a step in the right direction, they are of course not doing this. The domination of the state remains as strong as ever, the cuts are taking away much needed services that were hard won by the poorer sections of society. By taking more away from the poor (whilst continuing to keep the rich in power) the cuts are widening the divide between the rich and poor, and taking us even further away from a world without hierarchy.

Beyond this there is the fact that the cuts are having a very real impact on the lives of millions of people in the UK and elsewhere. If anarchists were to ignore (or even support) the cuts due to some 'idealogical purity' or out of the hope that the retreat in state services would lead to an anarchist society quickly poping up to replace them, we would quickly seem irelevent to anyone we spoke too(insert 'how is that different to now?' joke here) At a time when we need fellow members of our class to see the relevence of ideas such as solidarity, mutual aid, horizontal organising, anticapitalism and equality. Its also worth noting that if camerons recent plee to fight the 'anti-business' views that are creeping into our national consciousness are anything to go by, some of our views are becoming much more popular.

Whilst I have a vision of a possible future I want to fight for, it is never going to mean ignoring social injustice in the present, cuz if the means to an anarchist future aren't consistant with its ends, then, well its just not anarchism to me.

by Act or perish Sat Feb 25, 2012 22:13

"Many of us are unhappy that cuts are having to be made, but the inherited financial situation means that as a country we cannot continue to spend £400m a day, more than we take in as income".

Okay if the country is spending £400 million a day, why not cut back on items that are not necessary such as new aircraft carriers which are part of the supposed £6 billion overspend on military projects ? Then there is the huge govt overspends within Whitehall itself which also run into billions of pounds.

How about also reforming the tax system so that it is generally a fair and equitable system ? If this occurred and the tax that should be correctly paid is produced, I'm sure that actually the govts books would be more than balanced and the idea of cuts would vanish just as quickly as they have materialised from seemingly every politicians mouth in all of the major parties, whether in Westminster or locally.

by alternatives always exist Sun Feb 26, 2012 11:52

£325 billion has already been 'printed' by the Bank Of England through 'Quantitative Easing'. Nearly £600 billion is earmarked in total to be 'printed'. This equals about £5,000 per head of population so far, and will become £10,000 per head once all that is so far earmarked for printing has been 'printed. The figures may go even higher.

Where has this money gone? It has gone onto bank balance sheets. It's gone into the Stock Market, artificially inflating it's figures, and making it prone to simply vanish again if and when the stock market again nosedives. Very little of it has gone into the economy either as loans to small and medium sized businesses, or into direct circulation as spending.

Where Could The Money Go Instead?

This £5 - £10,000 per head would be much better reddireced into the economy, and then allowed to recirculate. The 'multiplier effect' of this would end up as more like £50,000 per head once it has changed hands again and again, boosting spending, and through that boosting small and medium sized businesses the Tories and Liberals claim to represent.

There's no end of ways you can get that 'printed' money into the economy. An obvious way is to subsidize local government spending for a time. Ease the burden of cuts, and give that 'printed' money time to recirculate, which will then allow some of it to return into local government coffers as various taxes, which the population can then more readily pay.

There are alternatives Jon. They've been spelt out to you before.

It's quite astounding how deaf you are to them, as indicated by your capitalisation of 'MUST' which is really no different to Thatcher's blinkered use of 'TINA' (There Is No Alternative).

There always alternatives Jon.

The alternative offered above is really just a more intelligent and effective application of a very bodged 'Quantitative Easing' programme, which isn't filtering into the wider economy.

by Act or perish Sun Feb 26, 2012 18:22

Assuming that some of the Bristol council's budget comes from the public purse through taxes why don't they on Tuesday discuss this issue and possible reforms ? For instance what about laws to prevent corporations from hiring people to look at loopholes in the system on a commission basis ? They are obviously being hired to evade tax. There are more loopholes in the system than a J cloth !!!

I've been once to a council meeting and it was little more than a mini Westminster. Why don't the councillors stop being "lackeys" to Westminster and start acting in a positive and autonomous manner ? The budget doesn't need to be cut, the council just needs to act in unison for everybody in Bristol, particularly the poor who will be most effected. This requires them going to Westminster and defending their corner.

by Act or perish Thu Mar 01, 2012 19:32

I'm no economist but know how to work a calculator, so let's have a look at Councillor Roger's figures.

Assuming that the UK govt is spending £400 million a day and the council cuts are £27 million, then over a year this amounts to 0.0185% of the overall spend. By analogy this is like having £100 in your pocket and worrying over 1.85p !!!!

Now I know the saying "squeezing the pips" but this in my mind is smashing them to bits.