Keith Fisher's ward budget

[DRiddle]

This is a link to next weeks neighbourhood forum meeting. If you download the agenda and go to item 9 you can see what has been spent (or hasn't been spent) by the councillors out of their £5,000 and £5,500 ward budgets.

Keith Fisher has spent literally nothing out of his £10,500.

Apparently, he doesn't agree with the budgets in principle and refuses to spend his. So if you live in the Hart Ward, not only are you number one contender for the gypsy site, your residents are £10,500 worse off than every other ward because one of your councillors doesn't agree with the rules.

http://www.hartlepool.gov.uk/egov_downloads/02.04.14_-_North_and_Coastal_Neighbourhood_Forum_Agenda.pdf

[Inspector Knacker]

Just how are they worse off......? This whole scheme is a load of patronising nonsense. Giving councillors a budget to spend like this results in them lookingl ike Lord  or Lady Bountiful giving out money to their selective projects and getting their faces in the Mail. If you gave some prople a free bus pass they'd phone the aMail up to photograph them every time they boarded a bus.
Fishers right on this one.

[fred c]

I have never thought this little "Councilors Handout" a very good idea, i feel sure that £165,000 over 10 or 15 years spent on a Major facility would be a far better way to spend council tax payers money.

How much would a Decent swimming pool cost ? the council look as though they are doing a good job at Brierton with the new sports pitch, so why not continue with the Sport Centre theme & add a Pool ?

[HarryBlackwood]

Riddler5. Well said. Fisher is absolutely right this amounts to nothing more than a system to allow councillors to buy votes. Totally corrupt and undemocratic.

[DRiddle]

Riddler5, I absolutely totally agree with you. I've maintained right from the off that ward budgets should never have been allowed in the first place. My views on it are all over different forms of social media.

The whole system was introduced by existing councillors to buy votes and maintain power. See my comments on the Hartlepool Mail on the article about white goods being disposed of for free on Owton Manor.

My point about fisher is his £10,500 is just sitting there doing nothing. Surely there must be SOME things on the Hart ward that it could be used for?

My point about them being worse off (hart residents) stands because if other residents in other wards are reaping benefits from other councils using the money (eg free disposal of white goods in owton Manor), then the people of the hart ward are being short changed.

Presumably if Fisher is voted out, the councillor who takes over will have access to the money and he/she can then do something meaningful with it.

Even if this is Mr Fisher sticking to not spending it as a matter of principle, that is one man digging his heals in to the detriment of his residents, the people he was elected to serve (in my opinion).

For example, on Clavering there is a patch of land that has become a haven for people to allow their dogs to foul it, as well as needles and all sorts of dangerous rubbish. I'm sure his residents would prefer that to be cleaned up and made safe for their children rather than one man being stubborn because he was out voted on an issue he didn't agree with.

[HarryBlackwood]

David Riddle. Just a thought although I know you'll find this one very tough to grasp. Had you considered that Mr Fisher might be sticking to his principles?

[Inspector Knacker]

Fisher is standing by his principles. There's no point saying everybody else is doing it so sod my principles and run about like a demented loadsamoney.... if he did.... his opponents would denounce him as an hypocrite. If all councillors pooled there dosh a project could be funded annually.

[Pwilson]

I suppose he could cynically host a funday 2 weeks before election to celebrate the opening of a play area that is only about a decade behind schedule & owes its existence to a private company. 

[DRiddle]

Riddler, I see your point but mine is this.

A ward councillor is there to represent and look out for the wishes of his or her residents.

Thus, Fisher has a pot of money totalling £10,500 at his disposal. There will, undoubtedly, be residents of the Hart Ward who have some projects and ideas that £10,500 would do wonders to help with.

But.... Keith Fisher, a man elected by them is now refusing to spend it because he doesn't agree with the decision to issue it.

The vast majority of residents who voted in the Hart ward in the all outs certainly did not vote for Keith Fisher. But now, here we are with many of them having their wishes denied because he's being obtuse to make a political point.

If a resident came forward and said "Hey Keith, how about using that money to ensure we have a lollipop man/woman at the local school during lunchtime, possibly preventing an RTA?"

Keith Fisher will say "No, I don't believe in ward budgets".

In my view, there comes a time when you put the views of your residents ahead of your own personal views............... and that time starts the day you're elected.

[Pwilson]

Do you have any proof Keith Fisher has had proposals put to him by residents that he has refused to fund?

[Inspector Knacker]

Such a scheme is more trouble than it's worth and should never have seen the light of day. It 's a godsend to the publicity seekers and puts pressure on those who don't comply to be portrayed as some miserly Scrooge depriving the poor people of their.....lollipop man. Sorry, it won't wash, it's wrong.

[Pwilson]

Its clearly open to abuse as a campaign fund for sitting councillors.

Its not enough money to make a real difference to anyone but if pooled town wide could have achieved a lot of good .

[HarryBlackwood]

Interesting post from David Riddle attacking Keith Fisher.

Another question for you lightweight. Standing in his ward are you? Again yes or no will do.

[DRiddle]

Such a scheme is more trouble than it's worth and should never have seen the light of day

Again I agree, but it was approved, it has seen the light of day. So, it shouldn't be up to one man to decide he doesn't agree with it and deny his residents opportunities to fund projects.

That's not representing your electorate, it's being autocratic.

[Inspector Knacker]

Such a scheme is more trouble than it's worth and should never have seen the light of day

Again I agree, but it was approved, it has seen the light of day.

That's not representing your electorate, it's being autocratic.

Just a second... just because something was approved and has  been put into practice doesn't mean something is right. Hitler could have said the same thing but it wouldn't have made his actions acceptable.