Nowt Left In The Coffers Say Scc

[dave_the_m]

34 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

Why was government funding slashed ?

Because in 2010 We got a Tory government which was ideologically committed to cutting government spending. They cut most things by around 25-33%, including central government support of local councils. And this support makes up a large proportion of council spending, because ....

 

Prior to the poll tax we had council rates, which meant that - roughly speaking - if you lived in a house worth 50 times more than your neighbour's house, you paid 50 times more in rates than your neighbour. With the poll tax this was reduced to a flat rate per household. When that blew up in their faces, the Tories replaced it with the Council Tax. That was loosely based on your house price, but with the proviso that a person living in the most expensive house would never pay more than 3 times that of someone living in the poorest house.  So rich people don't (proportionately) pay much, and if councils want to increase their spending, any increase in tax comes disproportionately from the poor. And in their rush to get the Council Tax up and running, central government basically committed to paying a larger proportion of council costs from central taxation, so that the new bills coming out wouldn't invoke the level of civil unrest caused by the Poll Tax.

[Bargepole23]

2 hours ago, ukdobby said:

Have they wasted it all on the stupid plant pots around crookes  and walkley?

Didn't know you lived in Walkley?

[S35_2o21]

2 minutes ago, dave_the_m said:

Because in 2010 We got a Tory government which was ideologically committed to cutting government spending. They cut most things by around 25-33%, including central government support of local councils. And this support makes up a large proportion of council spending, because ....

 

Prior to the poll tax we had council rates, which meant that - roughly speaking - if you lived in a house worth 50 times more than your neighbour's house, you paid 50 times more in rates than your neighbour. With the poll tax this was reduced to a flat rate per household. When that blew up in their faces, the Tories replaced it with the Council Tax. That was loosely based on your house price, but with the proviso that a person living in the most expensive house would never pay more than 3 times that of someone living in the poorest house.  So rich people don't (proportionately) pay much, and if councils want to increase their spending, any increase in tax comes disproportionately from the poor. And in their rush to get the Council Tax up and running, central government basically committed to paying a larger proportion of council costs from central taxation, so that the new bills coming out wouldn't invoke the level of civil unrest caused by the Poll Tax.

In answer to post #19, this. Council Tax accounts for about 30% of the income for Council.

 

Tory Council's have been bailed out by the government throughout the previous decade:  https://www.theguardian.com/society/2018/nov/29/tory-run-northamptonshire-county-council-bailed-out-by-government

 

 

[AndrewC]

32 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

In some European cities cycles are used more but that is probably because the land is flatter, it has always been done and they cycle to a reliable bus/train station and different climate.

I think only a tiny y minority of people will turn to cycling regardless of prompting from central or local government. As mentioned in another thread we have an ageing population.

Sorry, but you are rolling out often-quoted cliché arguments against cycling in the UK that are rarely backed up by reality. Does mainland Europe not have an ageing population? Do Denmark & Netherlands (strong cycling countries) have less rain & wind that the UK? If flat land is a major factor, how come cycling isn't big East Anglia? Or the majority of large UK cities which are relatively flat?

 

You say 'it has always been done'. This is a fallacy. The Netherlands & Denmark were car-clogged countries where the bike was rarely used - just as the UK today - but they spent several decades since the 1970s investing in public transport, active travel, and restricting car use to get where they are today. They look like it's natural to them, but it's just the result of the right political choices. In the last 24 months, Paris & London have transformed some of their central car-clogged throughfares and seen huge increases in the number of people cycling, just with the right political choices.

 

I agree that our public transport infrastructure lags behind, but that isn't something that can't be changed with the right investment. It's already a big part of the conversation alongside the funding for active travel schemes (such as the LTNs in Walkley/Crookes etc)

Edited August 2, 2022 by AndrewC

[harvey19]

24 minutes ago, dave_the_m said:

Because in 2010 We got a Tory government which was ideologically committed to cutting government spending. They cut most things by around 25-33%, including central government support of local councils. And this support makes up a large proportion of council spending, because ....

 

Prior to the poll tax we had council rates, which meant that - roughly speaking - if you lived in a house worth 50 times more than your neighbour's house, you paid 50 times more in rates than your neighbour. With the poll tax this was reduced to a flat rate per household. When that blew up in their faces, the Tories replaced it with the Council Tax. That was loosely based on your house price, but with the proviso that a person living in the most expensive house would never pay more than 3 times that of someone living in the poorest house.  So rich people don't (proportionately) pay much, and if councils want to increase their spending, any increase in tax comes disproportionately from the poor. And in their rush to get the Council Tax up and running, central government basically committed to paying a larger proportion of council costs from central taxation, so that the new bills coming out wouldn't invoke the level of civil unrest caused by the Poll Tax.

Do people in the richer areas get more services for their council tax ?

[hackey lad]

Have they paid off Amey yet ?

[harvey19]

6 minutes ago, AndrewC said:

Sorry, but you are rolling out often-quoted cliché arguments against cycling in the UK that are rarely backed up by reality. Does mainland Europe not have an ageing population? Do Denmark & Netherlands (strong cycling countries) have less rain & wind that the UK? If flat land is a major factor, how come cycling isn't big East Anglia? Or the majority of large UK cities which are relatively flat?

 

You say 'it has always been done'. This is a fallacy. The Netherlands & Denmark were car-clogged countries where the bike was rarely used - just as the UK today - but they spent several decades since the 1970s investing in public transport, active travel, and restricting car use to get where they are today. They look like it's natural to them, but it's just the result of the right political choices. In the last 24 months, Paris & London have transformed some of their central car-clogged throughfares and seen huge increases in the number of people cycling, just with the right political choices.

 

I agree that our public transport infrastructure lags behind, but that isn't something that can't be changed with the right investment. It's already a big part of the conversation alongside the funding for active travel schemes (such as the LTNs in Walkley/Crookes etc)

Interesting but I do not think things will change in Sheffield.

I do not know a single person who has started cycling because of the council's efforts to encourage it.

I do know of people who cycle for pleasure though.

[ads36]

15 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

I do not know a single person who has started cycling because of the council's efforts to encourage it.

I do know of people who cycle for pleasure though.

The council has *barely* started creating cycle routes - the blocks and planters that you see are just the start, because they're quick and easy to place.

 

The real magic happens when a network of safe routes is created - allowing A-B / A-C / B-C / etc - journeys to be made. 

 

The Netherlands is still building cycle routes, and they've been doing it for 40+ years. We're a long way behind, but at least we know what needs to be done.

 

(The Netherlands is also easy to drive around, because everyone else is cycling, and roads avoid going through city centres)

Edited August 2, 2022 by ads36

[HeHasRisen]

9 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

Interesting but I do not think things will change in Sheffield.

I do not know a single person who has started cycling because of the council's efforts to encourage it.

I do know of people who cycle for pleasure though.

The only person I know who has started is due to the increase in petrol prices, absolutely sod all due to any third party encouragement.

[ukdobby]

2 hours ago, Bargepole23 said:

Didn't know you lived in Walkley?

I don’t l live in Crookes

Edited August 2, 2022 by ukdobby