CAB looks to over rule the government on the bedroom tax

[DRiddle]

Until we have a bigger number of elected members in council, it's largely irrelevant whether or not there's a whip or a block voting policy. Currently we're up against the most unlikely coalition in political history who have an absolute majority and can do basically what they like. (Unless it's exposed as being illegal like CAB's recent attempt at a contract grab).

I agree the PHF would benefit greatly from a manifesto, but that's easily solved... write one.

In terms of ALWAYS disagreeing with Labour, I certainly don't. I agree in principle with the 'free swimming for kids', the development of the old crown house site, and a few other things.

Do I agree with awarding £640,000 to a company co-founded by Angie Wilcox and Kevin Cranney though? Do I agree with a Labour councillor not paying a cleaner national minimum wage? Do I agree with an attempt to control literally all contracts? Do I agree with an egotistical parade in the middle  of a life changing recession?.......... nope.

I also don't agree with money allocated at local level for one purpose, being used to over rule a decision at national level. Which is what's this topic is about.

[Land Phil]

How do they get away with criticising Pam when their own house is in such a mess.

The contracts Pam had awarded to Zavvi Xivvi or what ever it was are piddling compared to the MRA fiasco, sale of Rockhaven etc.

Robbie ar**-Payne must be as guilty as the rest if he is taking it seriously.

[DRiddle]

Well then do it.

I meant the party get together and write one, not me personally. I'm not Mao Tse-tung.

[Land Phil]

No, it is not about being a little bit corrupt, slightly pregnant although the people I am talking about look a lot corrupt and overdue pregnancy wise.

My point is, how can the same people entwined in major dubious events and organisations that overshadow Pam's little contracts to the degree that Men In Black could make a move about them, get away with trying to point the finger of spite at Pam. 

It is like Hitler complaining that British Rail sandwiches are rubbish and expensive in response to us attacking him for his war atrocities.

I am not defending Pam or British Rail sandwiches just pointing out that they are not what needs looking at first.


I am off to dig half a hole 

[ARC86]

It is like Hitler complaining that British Rail sandwiches are rubbish and expensive in response to us attacking him for his war atrocities.

But British Rail sandwiches are rubbish......and very expensive too....   I look at things like this on a zero tolerance basis, its a digital scale not analogue, you cannot be a little bit corrupt, a little bit racist, a little bit of a war criminal. You either are or you aren't. Once you start asigning relative values to these things then you start becoming an appologist for the "lesser" crimes in the name of concentrating on the "more serious" ones. Just my opinion of course, I do acknolwedge the possibility that other opinions are available and may be considered of equal or even greater value 

Spot on Stephen.. people are either corrupt or not

[steveL]

The contracts Pam had awarded to Zavvi Xivvi or what ever it was are piddling compared to the MRA fiasco, sale of Rockhaven etc.

Ah so its not whether something is potentially corrupt or not that is at issue, it's the size of the amount that makes the difference? Are you saying corruption is like common assault, actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm? A little bit of money changing hands is just common assault, wrong but no body suffers lasting damage, larger sums become ABH and equivalent to minor injuries like bruises and grazes and its only when serious money is invoved when it reaches the broken bones level of GBH?

Or is it like being a little bit pregnant or only slightly dead. Its only when you are very pregnant or seriously dead that you have to worry?

The point is academic as Devlin found absolutely nothing to back up CABs bitchy claims irrespective of scale.