3 ms·

Let's hope they'll return!

te_chris 3y ago
Not a chance, 13 years of the tories have seen to that. They shredded local authority finances early on and as a result a lot of the services have been closed as they still limit the tax raising powers of local govt - local authorities were and are heavily reliant on grants from central govt. This is one of the biggest weaknesses of the UK: it's a complex country of 60+ million people governed almost entirely from a few blocks in London.
- Obscurity4340 3y ago
  Ever seen Skint? That shit is so fucking dark
- mytailorisrich 3y ago
  It's too convenient to blame the Tories for everything. Many local authorities have very badly managed their finances. We've seen it in the recent bankruptcies of Slough and Birmingham (both Labour-led by the way) where incompetence and possibly corruption was rife.
  - b800h 3y ago
    I was in London in the first decade of the 2000s, and pools were closing left, right and centre then too. The councils are terribly badly run, and the old buildings, with higher upkeep costs, are just too tempting to close when they're on a balance sheet with everything else.
    - cjrp 3y ago
      Are they badly run, or just having to prioritise things like schools, social services, etc. over “luxuries” like leisure centres?
      - mytailorisrich 3y ago
        Many are badly run (I gave two examples above). It does not mean that they don't face challenges in general because of cuts in funding. But, as always, bad management makes the shit hit the fan when times are leaner. I am convinced that it is possible to balance the books on a leisure centre, for instance.
        midasuni 3y ago
        Heating costs for pools quadrupled over the last 18 months. They’ve come down a bit, but that’s still a massive impact. Salaries have shot up too, and have done for 20 years, as minimum wage has increased well beyond average wages or inflation. But the largest impact on council funding in general is the increased money going into looking after the elderly, and that sometimes means selling off the land a leisure centre was on to pay for that for a couple of years, doesn’t matter that the centre was slightly profitable, it was occupying a large amount of land value that could be spent on Generation Me instead.
      - lostlogin 3y ago
        In the UK, I think schools and social services are broadly a central government thing, not local council. This gets less true with schemes like council housing.
        mytailorisrich 3y ago
        Schools are the responsibility of the local council. Then, "free schools" were created during Cameron's time as PM (Gove as Education Secretary), which are 'independent' of the local council.
      - b800h 3y ago
        There's actually remarkably little that they can decide properly for themselves these days, but they have low budgets, and eventually the low budgets lead to underqualified and overstretched staff, who then compound the problem with poor decisions.
    - midasuni 3y ago
      For anyone who might not realise in the 20s london had a labour mayor, and the U.K. had a labour government. The usual rebuttal is something along the lines of “no true labour”.
      - lostlogin 3y ago
        As bad as the mayor and councils may have been, from my outside perspective it would be hard to do as poorly as the UK government has over the last decade. It’s been farcical, and the show continues.
  - 123pie123 3y ago
    the tories used that as an excuse. There has always been badly run councils - so instead of fixing the problem they used it to reduce the power of local councils this is a very common theme in the uk - find an edge case and use it to justify anything you want. But while conveniently and hypocritically coming up with excuses to justfy the things you want (or just sweep crap under the carpet)
    - mytailorisrich 3y ago
      If there has always been badly run councils then it's too convenient to blame them on the Tories. I feel that this is the cost of being in power for 13 years (for either side). At some point some people forget, or don't know, that the other party is not the panacea, either, and that not everything can be pinned on the party in power. There is a massive amount of crap that has nothing to do with the Tories and, again, we've recently seen that in Slough and Birmingham. So if you think that when the next Labour PM is going to be appointed by the King the crap will disappear you're bound to be very sorely disappointed.
      - 123pie123 3y ago
        >So if you think that when the next Labour PM is going to be appointed by the King the crap will disappear you're bound to be very sorely disappointed. until PR is put in place this pantomine will continue (it will still take a long time before it gets much better). For me the main difference is intent - both parties crave power, but the tories have a seriously much lower bar than labour in the things or people they will screw over
        mytailorisrich 3y ago
        Following that angle, don't worry that Labour's intent is to screw over as many people as the Tories. Perhaps different people, but that's about it. The difference, perhaps, is the veneer of "good intentions" but as we know the road to he'll is paved with good intentions... As for PR, we'll the third party is the Lib Dems, who are living in the twilight zone at this point so, no luck there, either.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]

Not a chance, 13 years of the tories have seen to that. They shredded local authority finances early on and as a result a lot of the services have been closed as they still limit the tax raising powers of local govt - local authorities were and are heavily reliant on grants from central govt. This is one of the biggest weaknesses of the UK: it's a complex country of 60+ million people governed almost entirely from a few blocks in London.

Obscurity4340 3y ago
Ever seen Skint? That shit is so fucking dark
mytailorisrich 3y ago
It's too convenient to blame the Tories for everything. Many local authorities have very badly managed their finances. We've seen it in the recent bankruptcies of Slough and Birmingham (both Labour-led by the way) where incompetence and possibly corruption was rife.
- b800h 3y ago
  I was in London in the first decade of the 2000s, and pools were closing left, right and centre then too. The councils are terribly badly run, and the old buildings, with higher upkeep costs, are just too tempting to close when they're on a balance sheet with everything else.
  - cjrp 3y ago
    Are they badly run, or just having to prioritise things like schools, social services, etc. over “luxuries” like leisure centres?
    - mytailorisrich 3y ago
      Many are badly run (I gave two examples above). It does not mean that they don't face challenges in general because of cuts in funding. But, as always, bad management makes the shit hit the fan when times are leaner. I am convinced that it is possible to balance the books on a leisure centre, for instance.
      - midasuni 3y ago
        Heating costs for pools quadrupled over the last 18 months. They’ve come down a bit, but that’s still a massive impact. Salaries have shot up too, and have done for 20 years, as minimum wage has increased well beyond average wages or inflation. But the largest impact on council funding in general is the increased money going into looking after the elderly, and that sometimes means selling off the land a leisure centre was on to pay for that for a couple of years, doesn’t matter that the centre was slightly profitable, it was occupying a large amount of land value that could be spent on Generation Me instead.
    - lostlogin 3y ago
      In the UK, I think schools and social services are broadly a central government thing, not local council. This gets less true with schemes like council housing.
      - mytailorisrich 3y ago
        Schools are the responsibility of the local council. Then, "free schools" were created during Cameron's time as PM (Gove as Education Secretary), which are 'independent' of the local council.
    - b800h 3y ago
      There's actually remarkably little that they can decide properly for themselves these days, but they have low budgets, and eventually the low budgets lead to underqualified and overstretched staff, who then compound the problem with poor decisions.
  - midasuni 3y ago
    For anyone who might not realise in the 20s london had a labour mayor, and the U.K. had a labour government. The usual rebuttal is something along the lines of “no true labour”.
    - lostlogin 3y ago
      As bad as the mayor and councils may have been, from my outside perspective it would be hard to do as poorly as the UK government has over the last decade. It’s been farcical, and the show continues.
- 123pie123 3y ago
  the tories used that as an excuse. There has always been badly run councils - so instead of fixing the problem they used it to reduce the power of local councils this is a very common theme in the uk - find an edge case and use it to justify anything you want. But while conveniently and hypocritically coming up with excuses to justfy the things you want (or just sweep crap under the carpet)
  - mytailorisrich 3y ago
    If there has always been badly run councils then it's too convenient to blame them on the Tories. I feel that this is the cost of being in power for 13 years (for either side). At some point some people forget, or don't know, that the other party is not the panacea, either, and that not everything can be pinned on the party in power. There is a massive amount of crap that has nothing to do with the Tories and, again, we've recently seen that in Slough and Birmingham. So if you think that when the next Labour PM is going to be appointed by the King the crap will disappear you're bound to be very sorely disappointed.
    - 123pie123 3y ago
      >So if you think that when the next Labour PM is going to be appointed by the King the crap will disappear you're bound to be very sorely disappointed. until PR is put in place this pantomine will continue (it will still take a long time before it gets much better). For me the main difference is intent - both parties crave power, but the tories have a seriously much lower bar than labour in the things or people they will screw over
      - mytailorisrich 3y ago
        Following that angle, don't worry that Labour's intent is to screw over as many people as the Tories. Perhaps different people, but that's about it. The difference, perhaps, is the veneer of "good intentions" but as we know the road to he'll is paved with good intentions... As for PR, we'll the third party is the Lib Dems, who are living in the twilight zone at this point so, no luck there, either.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]