At last, a council truly in touch with the majority of Southampton's residents- decent people trying hard to do the best for their families.

I work hard to bring my kids up and so should those who take the easy option and let the authorities do it for them. Let's not forget it was Cllr Bridle who introduced Inclusion into our schools, and look at the results!

If people have any sense they'll endorse these proposals as a victory for working people (real Working Class people). The Tories are the party for the 'working' man, not the striking man Mr Tucker.

the alternative is a massive increase in council tax and more waste. Brave and correct decision i think. We saw what Labour did to the city.

Great plans. Let's cut services for the youth of this city so they are more bored and have more time to go on vandalism sprees that cost a fortune to repair, simply to bribe the blue-rinse brigade into voting Conservative. Sweet...

Good job Tories, its about time we stop funding liberal nonsense. The last 11 years of Labour rule in London has destroyed the fabric of society and turned England into a Socialist state where people believe living off the tit of the government is a right.

alpine_saint wrote:
Great plans. Let's cut services for the youth of this city so they are more bored and have more time to go on vandalism sprees that cost a fortune to repair, simply to bribe the blue-rinse brigade into voting Conservative. Sweet...

Even when there facilities for the "youth" of the city, they still prefer to raom the streets causing vandalism and problems. Well done Tories a step in the right direction ! However, i fear it'll take a while to put right what the other loonies have undone

wake up southamptn people the reason we got these cuts coming in is because the councillors gave themselfs a massive 12% pay raise.as usaul its the weakest person who gets hit next time in election dont vote cons

A great decision.

I learnt a long time ago that, if you are in a hole and its getting deeper STOP DIGGING.

For the past 11 years Labour have had a chance to test out the theory of 'inclusion', trying to take responsibility from where is should be (with parents) and manging it themselves (at no small cost to us the taxpayer). IT HAS NOT AND WILL NEVER WORK. YOU HAVE TRIED IT. STOP DIGGING.

What about using the money to benefit those parents and families that do a good job with their kids?

Well done Southampton council

This one of the most bias peices I've read in along time.Using words like Savage

"A SAVAGE hit list of cuts ...."

The £173m budget - which will need the backing of opposition councillors to pass - would also bring in a controversial and costly ten per cent council tax discount for over 65s households."

Why controversial and costly, they could've just as easily described it as fairer and socialjustice. But I don't live in Southampton.

alpine_saint wrote:
Great plans. Let\\\'s cut services for the youth of this city so they are more bored and have more time to go on vandalism sprees that cost a fortune to repair, simply to bribe the blue-rinse brigade into voting Conservative. Sweet...

What a stupid post from Alpine Saint. We've seen these feral gangs of "bored" kids and this "boredom" is the excuse they put up when questioned about anti their social behaviour. Clearly it fools some people though. The truth is that thanks to the attitudes of their parents they are thick and uninspired not bored, and because they can't think of anything more imaginative or constructive to do it doesn't matter what the council put in front of them - their first instinct will be to trash it. There is already plenty to do but it all involves putting a little effort in. If you do want to blame anyone else blame their parents not the council for Gods sake. What facility do you envisage the council providing anyway that by itself would suddenly turn them into excited, inclusive contributing young adults? Organised Sports? Theatre? Youth Club? Scouts? No me neither. (Riding aimlessly round a skatepark is not sport by the way) Antisocial yobs hang around street corners because it's what they like doing and where they like being, and because they are lazy, sullen and uncommunicative they can't even think of anywhere better anyway. Causing trouble is an amusing little diversion if the opportunity for vandalism comes along. But people like you have to completely absolve them of any responsibility in order to seek some blame far away. Great idea, that's been proved to work well eh? And as for that stupid blue rinse crack, even your prejudice is 30 years out of date. You don;t have a single solution other than to blame a tiny section of society that if anything is the major victim of the problem you describe.

This exemplifies why Tory councils are always the best run. I agree with 601 about the media bias here - You wouldn't hear 'Loony left councillors said..."

Andy wrote:

alpine_saint wrote: Great plans. Let\\\'s cut services for the youth of this city so they are more bored and have more time to go on vandalism sprees that cost a fortune to repair, simply to bribe the blue-rinse brigade into voting Conservative. Sweet...

What a stupid post from Alpine Saint. We've seen these feral gangs of "bored" kids and this "boredom" is the excuse they put up when questioned about anti their social behaviour. Clearly it fools some people though. The truth is that thanks to the attitudes of their parents they are thick and uninspired not bored, and because they can't think of anything more imaginative or constructive to do it doesn't matter what the council put in front of them - their first instinct will be to trash it. There is already plenty to do but it all involves putting a little effort in. If you do want to blame anyone else blame their parents not the council for Gods sake. What facility do you envisage the council providing anyway that by itself would suddenly turn them into excited, inclusive contributing young adults? Organised Sports? Theatre? Youth Club? Scouts? No me neither. (Riding aimlessly round a skatepark is not sport by the way) Antisocial yobs hang around street corners because it's what they like doing and where they like being, and because they are lazy, sullen and uncommunicative they can't even think of anywhere better anyway. Causing trouble is an amusing little diversion if the opportunity for vandalism comes along. But people like you have to completely absolve them of any responsibility in order to seek some blame far away. Great idea, that's been proved to work well eh? And as for that stupid blue rinse crack, even your prejudice is 30 years out of date. You don;t have a single solution other than to blame a tiny section of society that if anything is the major victim of the problem you describe.

Agree with all your points here. Well put.

Observer wrote:

Andy wrote:

alpine_saint wrote: Great plans. Let\\\'s cut services for the youth of this city so they are more bored and have more time to go on vandalism sprees that cost a fortune to repair, simply to bribe the blue-rinse brigade into voting Conservative. Sweet...

What a stupid post from Alpine Saint. We've seen these feral gangs of "bored" kids and this "boredom" is the excuse they put up when questioned about anti their social behaviour. Clearly it fools some people though. The truth is that thanks to the attitudes of their parents they are thick and uninspired not bored, and because they can't think of anything more imaginative or constructive to do it doesn't matter what the council put in front of them - their first instinct will be to trash it. There is already plenty to do but it all involves putting a little effort in. If you do want to blame anyone else blame their parents not the council for Gods sake. What facility do you envisage the council providing anyway that by itself would suddenly turn them into excited, inclusive contributing young adults? Organised Sports? Theatre? Youth Club? Scouts? No me neither. (Riding aimlessly round a skatepark is not sport by the way) Antisocial yobs hang around street corners because it's what they like doing and where they like being, and because they are lazy, sullen and uncommunicative they can't even think of anywhere better anyway. Causing trouble is an amusing little diversion if the opportunity for vandalism comes along. But people like you have to completely absolve them of any responsibility in order to seek some blame far away. Great idea, that's been proved to work well eh? And as for that stupid blue rinse crack, even your prejudice is 30 years out of date. You don;t have a single solution other than to blame a tiny section of society that if anything is the major victim of the problem you describe.

Agree with all your points here. Well put.

quote

Jeanne wrote:

Observer wrote:

Andy wrote:

alpine_saint wrote: Great plans. Let\\\\\\\'s cut services for the youth of this city so they are more bored and have more time to go on vandalism sprees that cost a fortune to repair, simply to bribe the blue-rinse brigade into voting Conservative. Sweet...

What a stupid post from Alpine Saint. We\'ve seen these feral gangs of \"bored\" kids and this \"boredom\" is the excuse they put up when questioned about anti their social behaviour. Clearly it fools some people though. The truth is that thanks to the attitudes of their parents they are thick and uninspired not bored, and because they can\'t think of anything more imaginative or constructive to do it doesn\'t matter what the council put in front of them - their first instinct will be to trash it. There is already plenty to do but it all involves putting a little effort in. If you do want to blame anyone else blame their parents not the council for Gods sake. What facility do you envisage the council providing anyway that by itself would suddenly turn them into excited, inclusive contributing young adults? Organised Sports? Theatre? Youth Club? Scouts? No me neither. (Riding aimlessly round a skatepark is not sport by the way) Antisocial yobs hang around street corners because it\'s what they like doing and where they like being, and because they are lazy, sullen and uncommunicative they can\'t even think of anywhere better anyway. Causing trouble is an amusing little diversion if the opportunity for vandalism comes along. But people like you have to completely absolve them of any responsibility in order to seek some blame far away. Great idea, that\'s been proved to work well eh? And as for that stupid blue rinse crack, even your prejudice is 30 years out of date. You don;t have a single solution other than to blame a tiny section of society that if anything is the major victim of the problem you describe.

Agree with all your points here. Well put.

quote

Couldn't have put it better myself - the parents need re-educating then hopefully everything else will follow.

this social inclusion policy has produced a army of morons,well done,now for the birch for the untold cost and misery they,ve caused others.

What the conservatives are doing is what they do best attacking those least able to defend themselves. They did it in the 80's and they are doing it now. Exclusion has never solved social problem it alienates and causes resentment. How is ending free swimming for under sevens a good thing. Throwing children on the scrap heap is not the answer. It make me ashamed to be an adult reading these posts.

Perhaps this may be a wake up call for people who have grown used to being given hand outs without putting in any effort to earn them.

Then be ashamed. Actually I hear you and I agree with you about a lot of the service cuts, but regarding the exclusion point you've got to make provision for the 99% of society who are NOT self-excluded. You can't just just keep trying to include those who by their behaviour don't want or deserve to be included otherwise they eventually ruin the society you are trying to encourage them to be in. Also you can't just legitimise bad behaviour in someone because they are poor - that insults a lot of good people. People excluded from society often need to learn that they have to put something of themselves in to get something outin return - Feral youth can't just sulk and assume everything is someone else's fault and not their own. Bad Lad's Army on Channel 4 was a fantastic example of how you can get people back on track - it's called national Service and it doesn;t have to involve guns.

concerned wrote:
wake up southamptn people the reason we got these cuts coming in is because the councillors gave themselfs a massive 12% pay raise.as usaul its the weakest person who gets hit next time in election dont vote cons

Concerned,
I'm afraid but the echo did a brilliant spin job on allowances as well as the proposed budget!

2006-2007 Allowance: £10,293
2007-2008 Allowance: £10,649

They received an increase of £356 a year, which equates to just over 3% and is thus just under inflation. Total cost to the taxpayer was therefore £17,088 (48 councillors) not the £2.75 million in cuts.

Brilliant spin job by the echo, saved only by their table at the bottom of the page which point out that of the £8 million saving, only £2.75 million is actually from cuts!

Good job on the Conservatives, this has been a long time coming!

foodog wrote:
What the conservatives are doing is what they do best attacking those least able to defend themselves. They did it in the 80's and they are doing it now. Exclusion has never solved social problem it alienates and causes resentment. How is ending free swimming for under sevens a good thing. Throwing children on the scrap heap is not the answer. It make me ashamed to be an adult reading these posts.

You are absolutely right. Sadly it was the failure of New Labour's leadership to stick with good old Labour values that provided first the Lib-Dems and then the Tories the opportunity to get into power and start swinging the Thatcherite axe again.
By the look of it sadly we are in minority on this site today. If most of the views expressed get translated into votes in May it will be a sad situation.

Nothing surprising after all they are the Tories.
Last time they were in power at national level many of us lost our jobs and locally damaged lots of services.
For few years in Southampton when Alan Whitehead was the Labour leader some Tory destruction was reversed. He has remarkable ability of leadership, which his successors have miserably failed to match.
In my view (No doubt some NuLab lot will disagree) their leadership has behaved no better than Conservatives, kept on cutting services and behaved arrogantly, so hardly surprising they lost control of the Council.
I get the impression that their leadership is control freak, they have lost touch with the ordinary people and have either driven hard working and principled people like Parry Macmillan out of the party or have isolated people with exceptional ability like Alan Lloyd. I am told that they will not even allow hard working and out spoken Alan Lloyd become a candidate for election.
On the bright side they still have very able Cllr Denis Harryman and some hard working councillors like Don Thomas Simon Letts and Chris Kelly. But their current leadership doesn’t appear to use these assets properly.
I don’t blame the Tories because it is the personality obsessed NuLab Group that through its failure has provided Conservatives the opportunity to cut our services.
I hope there will be some decent Socialist Party or Green candidate in my ward otherwise I will have to write ‘None of these‘ on my ballot paper

Great plans and not a moment too soon!

The only way to get this country vback on it's feet is to CUT SPENDING drastically and INCREASE EFFICIENCY!

If this means a few casualties along the way then so be it.

We have GOT to get away from the expensive New Labour Borrow and spend policies and the attitude that people that don't nother to work deserve support.

I for one will be voting tory in the next electuion.

I can't believe most of the comments on here in support of the budget. Blaming 'liberal' policies for the problems our society and our city face whilst completley ignoring the fact that since 1979 neo-conservatives have dictated the political agenda in the UK, and as for the Labour Government, many of Blair's policies were a continuation of thatchers legacy with an ever so slightly more human face.

Their tax cut for pensioners is as has been mentioned by others a despicable ploy to bribe traditional Tory voters and the biggest winners in financial terms will be those with the biggest homes i.e the richest. Most poorer pensioners already receive a reduction in their tax bill so won't be eligible for the cut.

To take away services aimed at the young and the most vulnerable only compounds the problems.

We can all sit smugly in our comfortable homes and say that people should take responsibility for themselves and their children, but at some point we all have to deal with the consequences of inequality, poor education resulting in poor parenting, no job prospects resulting in alienation and rejection of the values of mainstream society leading to the embracing of alternative values such as violence.

Unless you are fortunate enough to have the resources to move to a middle-class suburb like Grange Park the chances are that as you are walking down the street at one point the inequality and alienation in the city will smack you in the face.

"the chances are that as you are walking down the street at one point the inequality and alienation in the city will smack you in the face."

No, I will likely be smacked in the face by someone who has benefited from a system that promotes inequality and doing nothing to help yourself!

The only society that can work is one that rewards hard work, maintains a sense of discipline among its population and supports efforts made by people to make their lives better.

And that isnt't what we have now in what is an increasingly ugly country!

Oh boy what a woeful bunch of comments I've just read. I'm mindful that I must not use bad language on this sight. But it's quite clear that the disease that is thatcherite thinking is alive and well here in Southampton. Yes by all means vote for a reduction in services via this Tory proposal but don't then moan when the smaller bins are not emptied; and when those excluded children start fouling up your children's chances in education don't complain. This is not open minded thinking here in Southampton it is small minded, tax reducing obsessives who can't see the benefits of community action even if it jumped up and bit them.

Wronged for years wrote:
"the chances are that as you are walking down the street at one point the inequality and alienation in the city will smack you in the face." No, I will likely be smacked in the face by someone who has benefited from a system that promotes inequality and doing nothing to help yourself! The only society that can work is one that rewards hard work, maintains a sense of discipline among its population and supports efforts made by people to make their lives better. And that isnt't what we have now in what is an increasingly ugly country!

The problem is that in an unequal society hard work isn't rewarded, how many Nurses out there work harder than Wayne Rooney?

alf tupper wrote:
this social inclusion policy has produced a army of morons,well done,now for the birch for the untold cost and misery they,ve caused others.

couldnt have put it better myself i dont think they would come back for a second time if they were given the birch but its never going to happen too many softees and do gooders they were the cause of all these morons ie dont smack your child or they will call the police what utter rubbish theres a old saying spare the rod and spoil the child

My mum came from a disfunctional family and ended up a JP. Why? because she worked bloody hard to get there. She could have used all the excuses under the sun but had the dignity to strive for better things. All it takes to get a decent job is to work three times harder than the priveledged few. I know, that's why I'm going it now. If you want to stay in the gutter, fine. Just don't expect me to pay for it.

As for anti-social behaviour perhaps extending the school day until 5pm is the answer. Oh, that would upset the 2.30pm finishing teachers.

mr.southampton wrote:
I can't believe most of the comments on here in support of the budget. Blaming 'liberal' policies for the problems our society and our city face whilst completley ignoring the fact that since 1979 neo-conservatives have dictated the political agenda in the UK, and as for the Labour Government, many of Blair's policies were a continuation of thatchers legacy with an ever so slightly more human face. Their tax cut for pensioners is as has been mentioned by others a despicable ploy to bribe traditional Tory voters and the biggest winners in financial terms will be those with the biggest homes i.e the richest. Most poorer pensioners already receive a reduction in their tax bill so won't be eligible for the cut. To take away services aimed at the young and the most vulnerable only compounds the problems. We can all sit smugly in our comfortable homes and say that people should take responsibility for themselves and their children, but at some point we all have to deal with the consequences of inequality, poor education resulting in poor parenting, no job prospects resulting in alienation and rejection of the values of mainstream society leading to the embracing of alternative values such as violence. Unless you are fortunate enough to have the resources to move to a middle-class suburb like Grange Park the chances are that as you are walking down the street at one point the inequality and alienation in the city will smack you in the face.

Oh, you must be a namby-pamby liberal. Ha! Ha-ha! My great-great-great grandchildren have one thing to say to you, your like and the tow-rags you defend: FOAD!

Charles Darwin wrote:

mr.southampton wrote:
I can't believe most of the comments on here in support of the budget. Blaming 'liberal' policies for the problems our society and our city face whilst completley ignoring the fact that since 1979 neo-conservatives have dictated the political agenda in the UK, and as for the Labour Government, many of Blair's policies were a continuation of thatchers legacy with an ever so slightly more human face. Their tax cut for pensioners is as has been mentioned by others a despicable ploy to bribe traditional Tory voters and the biggest winners in financial terms will be those with the biggest homes i.e the richest. Most poorer pensioners already receive a reduction in their tax bill so won't be eligible for the cut. To take away services aimed at the young and the most vulnerable only compounds the problems. We can all sit smugly in our comfortable homes and say that people should take responsibility for themselves and their children, but at some point we all have to deal with the consequences of inequality, poor education resulting in poor parenting, no job prospects resulting in alienation and rejection of the values of mainstream society leading to the embracing of alternative values such as violence. Unless you are fortunate enough to have the resources to move to a middle-class suburb like Grange Park the chances are that as you are walking down the street at one point the inequality and alienation in the city will smack you in the face.

Oh, you must be a namby-pamby liberal. Ha! Ha-ha! My great-great-great grandchildren have one thing to say to you, your like and the tow-rags you defend: FOAD!

What I fine example you set young man, are you a feral street urchin by any chance or just a weasel, I'm guessing the latter rather than the former, drinks on me Mr Souhampton

Dorothy wrote:

Charles Darwin wrote:

mr.southampton wrote:
I can't believe most of the comments on here in support of the budget. Blaming 'liberal' policies for the problems our society and our city face whilst completley ignoring the fact that since 1979 neo-conservatives have dictated the political agenda in the UK, and as for the Labour Government, many of Blair's policies were a continuation of thatchers legacy with an ever so slightly more human face. Their tax cut for pensioners is as has been mentioned by others a despicable ploy to bribe traditional Tory voters and the biggest winners in financial terms will be those with the biggest homes i.e the richest. Most poorer pensioners already receive a reduction in their tax bill so won't be eligible for the cut. To take away services aimed at the young and the most vulnerable only compounds the problems. We can all sit smugly in our comfortable homes and say that people should take responsibility for themselves and their children, but at some point we all have to deal with the consequences of inequality, poor education resulting in poor parenting, no job prospects resulting in alienation and rejection of the values of mainstream society leading to the embracing of alternative values such as violence. Unless you are fortunate enough to have the resources to move to a middle-class suburb like Grange Park the chances are that as you are walking down the street at one point the inequality and alienation in the city will smack you in the face.

Oh, you must be a namby-pamby liberal. Ha! Ha-ha! My great-great-great grandchildren have one thing to say to you, your like and the tow-rags you defend: FOAD!

What I fine example you set young man, are you a feral street urchin by any chance or just a weasel, I'm guessing the latter rather than the former, drinks on me Mr Souhampton

Do forgive should have said A rather than I.
PS does FOAD stand for 'forgive and defend' how sweet

you have to giggle at that labour bint, she would just have put the tax up 15% if she had her way!

we pay a fortune now because of years of her huge increases!

she did'nt complain about the huge pay rise she just took in expenses etc!

It seems to me that we have a proposed budget which will hit hard working families and young children. Taking away free swimming for under sevens, closing football pitches and cricket grounds would be a huge mistake at a time when we should be encouraging our children to lead healthy lives.

anita bush wrote:
you have to giggle at that labour bint, she would just have put the tax up 15% if she had her way!

we pay a fortune now because of years of her huge increases!

she did'nt complain about the huge pay rise she just took in expenses etc!

what are you talking about simpleton. Have you accidentally logged onto a grown ups story by mistake.

I'm completely out of cheese biscuits.

Mister Probiotic wrote:
I'm completely out of cheese biscuits.

Tesco's will still be open

Dorothy wrote:

Charles Darwin wrote:

mr.southampton wrote: I can't believe most of the comments on here in support of the budget. Blaming 'liberal' policies for the problems our society and our city face whilst completley ignoring the fact that since 1979 neo-conservatives have dictated the political agenda in the UK, and as for the Labour Government, many of Blair's policies were a continuation of thatchers legacy with an ever so slightly more human face. Their tax cut for pensioners is as has been mentioned by others a despicable ploy to bribe traditional Tory voters and the biggest winners in financial terms will be those with the biggest homes i.e the richest. Most poorer pensioners already receive a reduction in their tax bill so won't be eligible for the cut. To take away services aimed at the young and the most vulnerable only compounds the problems. We can all sit smugly in our comfortable homes and say that people should take responsibility for themselves and their children, but at some point we all have to deal with the consequences of inequality, poor education resulting in poor parenting, no job prospects resulting in alienation and rejection of the values of mainstream society leading to the embracing of alternative values such as violence. Unless you are fortunate enough to have the resources to move to a middle-class suburb like Grange Park the chances are that as you are walking down the street at one point the inequality and alienation in the city will smack you in the face.

Oh, you must be a namby-pamby liberal. Ha! Ha-ha! My great-great-great grandchildren have one thing to say to you, your like and the tow-rags you defend: FOAD!

What I fine example you set young man, are you a feral street urchin by any chance or just a weasel, I'm guessing the latter rather than the former, drinks on me Mr Souhampton

Ha! Ha! Ha! Were I unfortunate enough to be a so-called ‘feral street urchin’, it would have been someone like you who put and kept me there, by justifying my ‘existence’ with some perverse statement of political correctness. Were I a weasel, well, I’d be a member of the Mustelidae and I’d have a biological function in this world, wouldn’t I? And I’d have to work hard at it to be successful, wouldn’t I? Because there aren’t any handouts in the real world, are there? You have to work at it to become successful. There’s a struggle for existence and you, your like and those you defend will lose the struggle, politically and socially speaking. As a descent, hard-working family man, I don’t appreciate any of the taxes I pay being squandered on politically-correct excuses of any kind. Thank you!

Oh dear what an angry little poppet, but I have to say I'm impressed with you vocabulary, only took you an hour and a half to respond couldn't find the dictionary I suppose.
There are hand outs all around us dear if you look have you never claimed a tax credit.
I can't loose because I have hope and I can forgive the unforgiving, sleep tight and don't get so angry it will give you wrinkles.

Lee Whitbread wrote:
It seems to me that we have a proposed budget which will hit hard working families and young children. Taking away free swimming for under sevens, closing football pitches and cricket grounds would be a huge mistake at a time when we should be encouraging our children to lead healthy lives.

Isnt the main reason for these cuts because of the overspending and money wasting by the liberals that were supported by the labourites in exchange committee seats ???

Lee Whitbread wrote:
It seems to me that we have a proposed budget which will hit hard working families and young children. Taking away free swimming for under sevens, closing football pitches and cricket grounds would be a huge mistake at a time when we should be encouraging our children to lead healthy lives.

Lee you have summed it up very well.
Heartless Tories picking upon even children under seven may have shocked you because you have bit of human heart, but for them it is normal thing, considering their inspiration comes from Thatcher who gained her prominence by taking away milk bottles from small kids.
Yes same woman whom your Blair praised and Gordon Brown invited to Downing Street.
Through these actions, NuLab implementing Thatcherite agenda and Brown looking for talent in Tories your party has provided respectability for mad monks of Thatcherism in public mind. Hence the disaster we are facing now.
Could you tell me why Alan Whitehead (I think he is one of the sharpest Brains in Britain) was ignored by Brown but he gave various jobs to Tories and also to that traitor of Labour Shirley William? All these and other similar other stupidities put together has provided a kiss of life to Thatcherism in public mind. Hundreds of thousands Pounds donation laundering by some New Labour leaders has damaged NuLab’s reputation. Sadly most of us in Southampton could end up paying the price for those stupidities and short term populism.

Daz wrote:

Lee Whitbread wrote: It seems to me that we have a proposed budget which will hit hard working families and young children. Taking away free swimming for under sevens, closing football pitches and cricket grounds would be a huge mistake at a time when we should be encouraging our children to lead healthy lives.

Isnt the main reason for these cuts because of the overspending and money wasting by the liberals that were supported by the labourites in exchange committee seats ???

Daz - Sadly, the reason for these cuts is because we in Southampton have a Conservative run council which is committed to slashing services which people depend on.

Dorothy wrote:
Oh dear what an angry little poppet, but I have to say I'm impressed with you vocabulary, only took you an hour and a half to respond couldn't find the dictionary I suppose. There are hand outs all around us dear if you look have you never claimed a tax credit. I can't loose because I have hope and I can forgive the unforgiving, sleep tight and don't get so angry it will give you wrinkles.

Ha! Ha! Ha! Apologies for the delay, I have a life. I support fully working tax credits. Unfortunately, our household income is over £60k, which means we’re not eligible for any. But we don’t have an issue with that. I think you’ll find you have lost; and clearly you were ‘educated’ under the labour government, if at all. Sleep well, I hope your little street urchin friends don’t vandalise your property or keep you awake. If they do, I guess you’ll blame society, that’s easiest, isn’t it? But you can’t take action against society, can you? Who’s actually responsible, again? Don’t think too hard, we don’t expect you or your kind to solve this problem. The rest of us have a workable solution.

PS Please Google ‘FOAD’, it doesn’t take a genius!

what a depressing story, thought we had seen the end of the i am alright stuff the rest of you attitude when the last conservative government was given the boot - looks like its alive and well in deepest bluest hampshire...

a baastaard wrote:
what a depressing story, thought we had seen the end of the i am alright stuff the rest of you attitude when the last conservative government was given the boot - looks like its alive and well in deepest bluest hampshire...

No, you’re wrong. It doesn’t matter which party is in power; they’re all politicians (i.e. complete t*ssers) and become increasingly arrogant the longer they’re kept in power. Society must change the situation by shifting their overall vote as often as they change their underwear, preferably. Admittedly, this might not be that often for some, but the consequence is that our elected political party becomes nothing more than an elongated stain in the rear of one's underwear after about five years. Surely we must change them more often than we do? Keep 'em clean!

More cuts please! Cut, cut and then cut some more.

I'm fed up subsidising the feckless fertile and their feral children.

Stop using my wallet as an ATM.

If you live in Southampton your views will be taken into account. If not fcuk off.

Southampton Resident wrote:
If you live in Southampton your views will be taken into account. If not fcuk off.

If you are literate, your views will be considered; if not, ‘fuckoff’!

Charles Darwin wrote:

Dorothy wrote:
Oh dear what an angry little poppet, but I have to say I'm impressed with you vocabulary, only took you an hour and a half to respond couldn't find the dictionary I suppose. There are hand outs all around us dear if you look have you never claimed a tax credit. I can't loose because I have hope and I can forgive the unforgiving, sleep tight and don't get so angry it will give you wrinkles.

Ha! Ha! Ha! Apologies for the delay, I have a life. I support fully working tax credits. Unfortunately, our household income is over £60k, which means we’re not eligible for any. But we don’t have an issue with that. I think you’ll find you have lost; and clearly you were ‘educated’ under the labour government, if at all. Sleep well, I hope your little street urchin friends don’t vandalise your property or keep you awake. If they do, I guess you’ll blame society, that’s easiest, isn’t it? But you can’t take action against society, can you? Who’s actually responsible, again? Don’t think too hard, we don’t expect you or your kind to solve this problem. The rest of us have a workable solution.

PS Please Google ‘FOAD’, it doesn’t take a genius!

I forgive you sad one.

Yet again Messrs Bahia and Whitbread are failing to see that HARD WORKING FAMILIES ARE NOT BENEFITTING FROM ANY OF THE CURRENT COUNCIL INITIATIVES AND WILL BENEFIT MORE FROM PAYING LESS TAX. the only people who benefit are benefit scroungers on the estates who get the council to wipe their arses for them whilst wasting all our tax money on flashy clothes, fags, booze, massive TV's and lottery tickets.

It's time to face facts, it's not fair on low income workers to subsidise lay abouts. Children of working families rarely qualify for any grants so why shouldn't they pay less tax? I'm sick of all these lefties, who encouraged the promiscuous society of the 60's, attacking people for wanting to pay less tax. Role on 2010 when we can vote out this lame duck government.

Manimal wrote:
Yet again Messrs Bahia and Whitbread are failing to see that HARD WORKING FAMILIES ARE NOT BENEFITTING FROM ANY OF THE CURRENT COUNCIL INITIATIVES AND WILL BENEFIT MORE FROM PAYING LESS TAX. the only people who benefit are benefit scroungers on the estates who get the council to wipe their arses for them whilst wasting all our tax money on flashy clothes, fags, booze, massive TV's and lottery tickets. It's time to face facts, it's not fair on low income workers to subsidise lay abouts. Children of working families rarely qualify for any grants so why shouldn't they pay less tax? I'm sick of all these lefties, who encouraged the promiscuous society of the 60's, attacking people for wanting to pay less tax. Role on 2010 when we can vote out this lame duck government.

Thats funny 1.2m is being given to pensioners and police support officers do they get the council to wipe their arses. It's so easy to play hard done by and its even easier to blame every one else for it.I'm hard working and I've got kids I get on with it and vent my spleen at the ballot box. If you are that concerned stop posting and get active in local politics otherwise stop being a bully.

no free swimming for under 7's?

what a load of rubbish.

Wouldnt need all these budget cuts if these greedy councilors didnt go and give them self all 12% pay rises!!!

FAT C*NTS!

im moving my caravan to eastleigh

I agree with the sentiment of Lee Whitbread's post about sport for children, but what would this be at the expense of, since funds are finite? Some of the left wing views posted on here are of such limited intelligence that such people would be dangerous if let loose with taxpayer's money. I do not want councillors who wasting money on things like making Southampton a "Nuclear Free Zone" or twinning us with Somalia. Local politics always attracts these envious wannabees whose only plan for funding their bizarre schemes is to keep taking it off the middle classes. Local Politics should be about making hard local choices with finite budgets - and if a hard choice has to be made between - say between Meals on Wheels for the old and free swimming for under 7s then it's obvious the swimming has to go, yet trying to get some of the deluded "real socialists" on here to face up to that and make the choice is impossible - no, they'll just keep blaming Margaret Thatcher for the next 50 years while bankrupting the city. You cannot have both, so make the choice. Under 7 swimming is desirable but it is not a life and death matter, and what is to stop parents teaching their own children to swim anyway? I worked hard all my life and every penny I have I have earned. I also had no privileges but worked bloody hard to get where I am. Why would I let someone of the limited calibre of (say) Perry McMillan take what I have worked for and splash it out on creating more dreamt up political posts for labour cronies rather than getting the bins emptied? As far as I can see his "qualification" is that he failed his formal education, and didn;t show shown any ability since. It takes more than a big mouth, a CSE in woodwork, a few memorised slogans and a hatred of the middle classes to run a complex system like a balanced budget.

mandrake wrote:

Manimal wrote: Yet again Messrs Bahia and Whitbread are failing to see that HARD WORKING FAMILIES ARE NOT BENEFITTING FROM ANY OF THE CURRENT COUNCIL INITIATIVES AND WILL BENEFIT MORE FROM PAYING LESS TAX. the only people who benefit are benefit scroungers on the estates who get the council to wipe their arses for them whilst wasting all our tax money on flashy clothes, fags, booze, massive TV's and lottery tickets. It's time to face facts, it's not fair on low income workers to subsidise lay abouts. Children of working families rarely qualify for any grants so why shouldn't they pay less tax? I'm sick of all these lefties, who encouraged the promiscuous society of the 60's, attacking people for wanting to pay less tax. Role on 2010 when we can vote out this lame duck government.

Thats funny 1.2m is being given to pensioners and police support officers do they get the council to wipe their arses. It's so easy to play hard done by and its even easier to blame every one else for it.I'm hard working and I've got kids I get on with it and vent my spleen at the ballot box. If you are that concerned stop posting and get active in local politics otherwise stop being a bully.

As I understand tax, you pay it to the state, thus if the state does not charge you tax, it is not the state giving people money but rather not taking it. So by not charging them tax how can the state be giving it to them. This is the sort of new labour crap to think that they have to right to tax people to the hilt so everyone lives in poverty

G Brown wrote:

mandrake wrote:

Manimal wrote: Yet again Messrs Bahia and Whitbread are failing to see that HARD WORKING FAMILIES ARE NOT BENEFITTING FROM ANY OF THE CURRENT COUNCIL INITIATIVES AND WILL BENEFIT MORE FROM PAYING LESS TAX. the only people who benefit are benefit scroungers on the estates who get the council to wipe their arses for them whilst wasting all our tax money on flashy clothes, fags, booze, massive TV's and lottery tickets. It's time to face facts, it's not fair on low income workers to subsidise lay abouts. Children of working families rarely qualify for any grants so why shouldn't they pay less tax? I'm sick of all these lefties, who encouraged the promiscuous society of the 60's, attacking people for wanting to pay less tax. Role on 2010 when we can vote out this lame duck government.

Thats funny 1.2m is being given to pensioners and police support officers do they get the council to wipe their arses. It's so easy to play hard done by and its even easier to blame every one else for it.I'm hard working and I've got kids I get on with it and vent my spleen at the ballot box. If you are that concerned stop posting and get active in local politics otherwise stop being a bully.

As I understand tax, you pay it to the state, thus if the state does not charge you tax, it is not the state giving people money but rather not taking it. So by not charging them tax how can the state be giving it to them. This is the sort of new labour crap to think that they have to right to tax people to the hilt so everyone lives in poverty

Talk about confusing both in style and content. We live in the 5th largest economy in the world, you have no conception of poverty Mr Brown. Think about what you want to say before posting and try to make it relevant to the story

Lee Whitbread wrote:

Daz wrote:

Lee Whitbread wrote: It seems to me that we have a proposed budget which will hit hard working families and young children. Taking away free swimming for under sevens, closing football pitches and cricket grounds would be a huge mistake at a time when we should be encouraging our children to lead healthy lives.

Isnt the main reason for these cuts because of the overspending and money wasting by the liberals that were supported by the labourites in exchange committee seats ???

Daz - Sadly, the reason for these cuts is because we in Southampton have a Conservative run council which is committed to slashing services which people depend on.

Shame we can't cut more. I don't use a single one of the services they are considering cutting, hell, i didn't even know they exisited! Probably because i work for a living!

hohum wrote:

anita bush wrote: you have to giggle at that labour bint, she would just have put the tax up 15% if she had her way! we pay a fortune now because of years of her huge increases! she did'nt complain about the huge pay rise she just took in expenses etc!

what are you talking about simpleton. Have you accidentally logged onto a grown ups story by mistake.

This should be good, where am i wrong then???

attack is not always the best form of defence, dopey!

anita bush wrote:

hohum wrote:

anita bush wrote: you have to giggle at that labour bint, she would just have put the tax up 15% if she had her way! we pay a fortune now because of years of her huge increases! she did'nt complain about the huge pay rise she just took in expenses etc!

what are you talking about simpleton. Have you accidentally logged onto a grown ups story by mistake.

This should be good, where am i wrong then???

attack is not always the best form of defence, dopey!

I rest my case

It is time we stopped those claiming unemployment benefit from voting in elections. This may help them back to work and stop the loony left from voting labour

Most people on benefits don't vote as a throw back to the Poll Tax days when they failed to register to avoid paying the tax (which in hindsight was a lot fairer than Council Tax).

Perhaps we should levy a tax on absentee fathers who are reproducing at vast rates in some areas while we have to pick up the tab. If these dads (many of whom have never seen their kids) paid for their kids we wouldn't need all these add on services anyway. Answer that lefties and liberals.

Don Thomas was working in the community as a volunteer supporting youth projects and community action groups, may be nearly 18 years ago if not more, he worked so many unpaid hours, I would give him a pay rise to show how we do appreciate geniune people, who want to bring about change in society, lets have more around like him, he was voted in because everyone knew the effort he put in, and we would see the changes for the better, he did stuff without shouting about it and not risking people's jobs or robbing the rich he supported people, his community to bring change to their areas and he backed ideas, also came along night after night to meetings supporting them.
Lets hope he and all the other's will blow the Torys plans out the window on the 19th Feb, lets see how caring Southampton really is to its children and young people who have been tarred with the same brush by many.

hohum wrote:

anita bush wrote:

hohum wrote:

anita bush wrote: you have to giggle at that labour bint, she would just have put the tax up 15% if she had her way! we pay a fortune now because of years of her huge increases! she did'nt complain about the huge pay rise she just took in expenses etc!

what are you talking about simpleton. Have you accidentally logged onto a grown ups story by mistake.

This should be good, where am i wrong then??? attack is not always the best form of defence, dopey!

I rest my case

was that it? not worth the wait!

i was so sure you might have an answer for me. you started with the childish comments against me but failed to back them up.

you cannot defend the indefendable! i win saddo!

The role of the council is to provide services like streetlights, rubbish collection, libraries, planning and lettings etc. It is not there to do things that should be done in the community in the first place.

If you want to see true community work look at what The Community Church are doing in Bassett. Out of their own pockets they are funding youth work, paying for food and utility bills for needy families and offering the sort of support most people need. What do the council run schemes do? they offer quick fixes which rarely work and employ graduates who have no idea how their audience live.

Jesus challenged people who took the ****, like the money lenders in the temple. He also showed love and compassion for others. It's a pity the churches in Southampton can't mobilise to tackle the massive social ills that blight this place. Many may not believe it but only Jesus can turn lives around, not cheap swimming or after school football on a Tuesday night. Perhaps if we all loved others as we love ourselves the city would be a better place.

Manimal wrote:
Yet again Messrs Bahia and Whitbread are failing to see that HARD WORKING FAMILIES ARE NOT BENEFITTING FROM ANY OF THE CURRENT COUNCIL INITIATIVES AND WILL BENEFIT MORE FROM PAYING LESS TAX. the only people who benefit are benefit scroungers on the estates who get the council to wipe their arses for them whilst wasting all our tax money on flashy clothes, fags, booze, massive TV's and lottery tickets. It's time to face facts, it's not fair on low income workers to subsidise lay abouts. Children of working families rarely qualify for any grants so why shouldn't they pay less tax? I'm sick of all these lefties, who encouraged the promiscuous society of the 60's, attacking people for wanting to pay less tax. Role on 2010 when we can vote out this lame duck government.

It is unfair to tarnish people living in council estates with the same brush of scroungers. Having represented them in the past I can only say that most of them are decent hard working families, who contribute to national and local government’s coffers like everybody else. I have also dealt with cases from Bassett and Chilworth, unfortunately I am duty bound to maintain confidentiality, so all I can say is that I refused to help because ripping off the system going on was disturbing. But we have all read about what one rich UKIP MEP was doing and has been found guilty.
I am not aware of anybody in public life who will justify cheating of the welfare system, I certainly do not and I doubt if Lee Whitbread will. It is the government’s duty to catch and prosecute who ever cheats the system. Policing the system is not my job.
It is a fact that upper and middle classes are much better at making use of the state benefits than ordinary working people and the Old Age Pensioners. But other way around myths have been created and many decent families on the estates have been stigmatised.
Also total benefit fraud in our country is far less than the tax evaded by the multi millionaires, thanks to the loopholes introduced even by the current Prime Minister when he was the Chancellor of the Exchequer. We have all read about the cleaners paying tax on their meagre earnings while their bosses do not pay any.
Multi Millions are being handed over to owners of some industries as subsidies and grants, but hardly anybody talks about it. Billions have been handed over to the rich people’s club called EU. But nobody calls them scroungers.
What about £56 Billion and still counting to Northern Rock?
Lee may be supporter of Brown I most certainly am NOT. To me this govt is no better than Thatcher’s. But we may differ regarding replacement.
I agree with you that very little has been done for the kids of hard working families. They have introduced student fees and loans which is scaring many youngsters from working class background to go for higher education and improve their life. But this is not the fault of some disabled person or old age pensioner who may be claiming benefit.

Hasmukh Patel wrote:
I agree with the sentiment of Lee Whitbread's post about sport for children, but what would this be at the expense of, since funds are finite? Some of the left wing views posted on here are of such limited intelligence that such people would be dangerous if let loose with taxpayer's money. I do not want councillors who wasting money on things like making Southampton a "Nuclear Free Zone" or twinning us with Somalia. Local politics always attracts these envious wannabees whose only plan for funding their bizarre schemes is to keep taking it off the middle classes. Local Politics should be about making hard local choices with finite budgets - and if a hard choice has to be made between - say between Meals on Wheels for the old and free swimming for under 7s then it's obvious the swimming has to go, yet trying to get some of the deluded "real socialists" on here to face up to that and make the choice is impossible - no, they'll just keep blaming Margaret Thatcher for the next 50 years while bankrupting the city. You cannot have both, so make the choice. Under 7 swimming is desirable but it is not a life and death matter, and what is to stop parents teaching their own children to swim anyway? I worked hard all my life and every penny I have I have earned. I also had no privileges but worked bloody hard to get where I am. Why would I let someone of the limited calibre of (say) Perry McMillan take what I have worked for and splash it out on creating more dreamt up political posts for labour cronies rather than getting the bins emptied? As far as I can see his "qualification" is that he failed his formal education, and didn;t show shown any ability since. It takes more than a big mouth, a CSE in woodwork, a few memorised slogans and a hatred of the middle classes to run a complex system like a balanced budget.

Mr Patel, Southampton Labour Council used to subsidise meals on wheels for vulnerable people although it was the responsibility of Tory run Hampshire and also provided facilities for the children. If we did it then with far lower tax then why can’t your Tory darlings do it now?
Through hard work you have become wealthy. Congratulations. But didn’t you ever take advantage of subsidised facilities when you were not so well off? Or do you refuse to use these facilities now on a matter of principle?
In our democracy people’s ability to represent is decided through ballot box, not by their bank balances, or belonging to upper and middle classes. Considering people elected Perry McMillan as councillor and keep on electing him to a respectable union office confirms his ability and appreciation by people for spending his time helping others rather trying to become a selfish snob.
I do not know anything about Perry’s qualifications, but do know and like many others (including many of his political opponents) that he is highly principled person with decent human values.
By the way Mr. Patel even head of our state the Queen whose loyal subject you are hasn’t did not get many university qualifications either, nor did Jesus Christ or Lord Krishna.

Manimal wrote:
The role of the council is to provide services like streetlights, rubbish collection, libraries, planning and lettings etc. It is not there to do things that should be done in the community in the first place. If you want to see true community work look at what The Community Church are doing in Bassett. Out of their own pockets they are funding youth work, paying for food and utility bills for needy families and offering the sort of support most people need. What do the council run schemes do? they offer quick fixes which rarely work and employ graduates who have no idea how their audience live. Jesus challenged people who took the ****, like the money lenders in the temple. He also showed love and compassion for others. It\'s a pity the churches in Southampton can\'t mobilise to tackle the massive social ills that blight this place. Many may not believe it but only Jesus can turn lives around, not cheap swimming or after school football on a Tuesday night. Perhaps if we all loved others as we love ourselves the city would be a better place.

Minimal, I only believe in humanity not any religion. But by the look of it you are follower of Jesus Christ I was recently told by a priest that he sacrificed his life for the poor and vulnerable. If that is the case I fail to understand your prejudices against decent people living in Council estates and supporting the nasty political set up that wants to take away enjoyment of swimming from small children and sports grounds from the youngsters. How can you square these contradictions with 'Love Thy Neighbour' stuff?
I take your word that your church is helping the needy, but is it big enough meet the increasing demand because thanks to Thatcher’s policies implemented by New Labour deprivation has increased? That role can only be fulfilled by the government which like your church also needs the resources, but you are arguing against that. Perhaps you should spend bit more time studying the teachings of Christ, but I think few books of economics and social sciences will certainly help.
Good Bye

I have nothing against anyone who lives with any sort of morality but I think it's time that people who don't are brought to account.

Sadly the Labour government have bought middle-class votes but pushing the tax burden onto lower paid workers through increases in council tax, fuel duty and other stealth taxes. At the same time they have screwed around with the education system to a point where it's virtually impossible for a young person in Millbrook or Thornhill to achieve anything. Is that fair or just?

If we restored the link between work and achievement rather than expecting handouts a right we'd be in a much better state- and help could be given to people in genuine need like the disabled and the elderly. If you've ever worked with some of the people who are killing this city you'd appreciate my point of view.

If Jesus Christ or Lord Krishna stand as candidates in Basset Ward we'll have to ask how they intend to balance the books too, otherwise it doesn;t matter what their qualifications are. When I came to this country from Uganda many of these so called "essential services" did not exist, so no, I did not take advantage of them. Now, we have 13 year old mothers just assuming the state (ie my council taxes) will give them a flat, and worse still, we get well meaning but foolish councilors who address the problem but do not eradicate the cause. Being a good person is not the same as being a good or a brave or a visionary politician. I accept that most labour councillors are good people motivated by a desire to help, but sadly that is not the kind of person who makes a good leader. That requires detachment, courage, strategy and sometimes a very thick skin

I find it interesting that this paper, which appears to be part of the same newspaper group that provides my local newspaper also has an anti-tory agenda.

My local council (about 120 miles from you) has just been acknowledged by the Audit Commission, after it's recent CPA, to be one the most improved councils in the country, yet, to read our Evening Echo you would think the opposite.

I have just checked the website of both our paper and this one and yes it's the same The Gannett Company.

Does anyone know who they are?

Lee Whitbread wrote:
It seems to me that we have a proposed budget which will hit hard working families and young children. Taking away free swimming for under sevens, closing football pitches and cricket grounds would be a huge mistake at a time when we should be encouraging our children to lead healthy lives.

No just the feral children and by the looks of it the scroungers of my tax

Hasmukh Patel wrote:
If Jesus Christ or Lord Krishna stand as candidates in Basset Ward we\'ll have to ask how they intend to balance the books too, otherwise it doesn;t matter what their qualifications are. When I came to this country from Uganda many of these so called \"essential services\" did not exist, so no, I did not take advantage of them. Now, we have 13 year old mothers just assuming the state (ie my council taxes) will give them a flat, and worse still, we get well meaning but foolish councilors who address the problem but do not eradicate the cause. Being a good person is not the same as being a good or a brave or a visionary politician. I accept that most labour councillors are good people motivated by a desire to help, but sadly that is not the kind of person who makes a good leader. That requires detachment, courage, strategy and sometimes a very thick skin

Balancing the books of local Council? Main cause of the problem is the financing policies introduced by Thatcher Govt and continued more or less by the current people in power. So local councils have been forced into making some hard decisions. For me destroying the services for keeping tax levels down is not an option. It may attract votes of people who think like you but it most certainly will never be my cup of tea. Unlike you I am not a rich man, but I do not mind contributing my share if it is used for maintaining decent services especially for children youth disabled and the elderly.
I don’t know when you came from Uganda. But I remember when Black Hitler Amin threw lots of Asians out I was involved in helping them, because most of them were almost penniless having lost massive fortunes in Africa.
Yes that time UK’s welfare state was providing help to the needy in similar manner it is doing now. In fact welfare system those days was comparatively much better. Through my involvement with JCWI at national level I was involved in helping those people so clearly remember having filled forms for many East African Asians.
So I have come across SOME now posh people who not only benefited from the system but also in SOME rare cases even abused it.
If you were in need and you did not apply for help available it should not mean that we stop doing it for others.
Yes I admire you for having worked hard and made life better for yourself, but in this world one can never predict when the things could go wrong. That’s why one should help the needy, one day we ourselves may end up in their situation. As a person from Uganda you should know it better than I.

Manimal wrote:
I have nothing against anyone who lives with any sort of morality but I think it's time that people who don't are brought to account. Sadly the Labour government have bought middle-class votes but pushing the tax burden onto lower paid workers through increases in council tax, fuel duty and other stealth taxes. At the same time they have screwed around with the education system to a point where it's virtually impossible for a young person in Millbrook or Thornhill to achieve anything. Is that fair or just? If we restored the link between work and achievement rather than expecting handouts a right we'd be in a much better state- and help could be given to people in genuine need like the disabled and the elderly. If you've ever worked with some of the people who are killing this city you'd appreciate my point of view.

Definition of morality can be subjective.

I share SOME of your reservations about NuLab. That is why I left them many years ago. I believe in old Labour values and think helping the genuine needy is morally right thing to do. On other issues let us agree to disagree.

What I don;t understand is why labour supporters on here pretend the tories do not want to help people in the community who have a real need. That is not true! It is clear that ALL parties believe that a welfare state is a good thing - it is the SIZE of the welfare state they disagree with. So we must not argue about the things we all agree in, like helping the poor, the disabled and so on who have a genuine need. It is NOT the job of local Government to impose socialism by forcing the redistribution of wealth. Free TV sets for single mothers are not a matter of life and death - they are a luxury!
I agree that Perhaps local Government should get more money but there is no point arguing that because we have to deal with what we can afford and that means making hard choices about which services to keep and which to throw away. we all want a world in which everyone is happy but Tories are realists, not idealists.

Mr, Patel
Sadly there is very little difference between all three major Parties. All of them have been following Thatcher’sr agenda of destroying our welfare state over many years. Some are doing even more than the others. If you see the budget Tories are even trying to pass on some of council's responsibilities to charities. This is bit by bit destruction of our welfare state, and going back to system where vulnerable will be left without any guaranteed safety net. Of course there will always be some kind hearted people who will do charitable work and provide them with some support, but overall situation will become like America or India Where world’s richest live in virtual heaven and poor can’t even afford to feed themselves.
I believe in socialism but am not member of New Labour have friends in all major parties. So I am not part of their political ping pong. Perhaps we could exchange views some other time. This thread has gone too long. Kind Regards.