Nowt Left In The Coffers Say Scc

[Planner1]

9 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

Rightly so. That Queens Rd right hand turn is an absolute joke, should be no right turn really (I know it isnt) but people sit there in the box junction for ages and block a whole lane off in the process.

The turn isn’t banned and it’s perfectly legitimate for a driver waiting to turn right to enter the box junction.

 

That isn’t the reason they want to camera enforce. It’s other queuing traffic blocking the junction and abuse of the bus only right turn restriction out of Shoreham St.

[fools]

Every breath you take, every move you make

[harvey19]

48 minutes ago, HeHasRisen said:

And its been stated, numerous times, the money couldnt be spent on anything else. That was a central government decision.

As I posted earlier approaches could be made to relocate the money into areas where the population desires improvements to be made instead of what seems to be a waste of money.

[Mr Bloke]

1 hour ago, harvey19 said:

As I posted earlier approaches could be made to relocate the money into areas where the population desires improvements to be made instead of what seems to be a waste of money.

Hmmm...

Well I understand what you're saying, Mr Harvey, and it would seem like a good idea on the surface...
... but ONLY IF everyone played fair... and they don't!

Just think of all the allegations of underhand dealings if money given for one project was 'diverted' to the latest SCC vanity project.

Even if 'left-over' money from a project was put into some sort of 'pool', then there'd be someone somewhere claiming that all the money allocated to that project had deliberately NOT been spent and someone must be getting a back-hander!

The trouble I see with this 'apparent waste of money', is that grants are received AND THEN SCC decide what to spend it on.

If the full budget is NOT spent, then presumably any subsequent grants will be reduced...
... so it's in SCC's (and our) interest to spend all we're given, which is probably why buying a job lot of massive plant pots came about, but to the rest of us seems like a 'waste of money'!

Righty-ho...
... SCC apologists at the ready, do your worst!

[Planner1]

57 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

As I posted earlier approaches could be made to relocate the money into areas where the population desires improvements to be made instead of what seems to be a waste of money.

Perhaps you should consider that whilst you and a few others on here might consider something a waste of money, there will be plenty of others out there who think it’s a spending priority and are actively campaigning for even more money to be spent on it. Active travel schemes are a good example.

 

We elect our representatives at central and local government levels based on the manifestos and spending programmes they present. 
 

Spending priorities at local level in many areas ( like transport) are largely dictated by the government and the funding programmes they develop.

 

In transport funding, many of the government’s funding programmes are awarded on a competitive basis, with city regions putting in bids containing schemes which will satisfy the funding requirements. 
 

How ridiculous do you think SCC and the Mayoral Combined Authority would look if they bid for and won millions of pounds for specific transport schemes ( like low traffic neighbourhoods) then later went back to government and said, Well Minister, some of our folk think this active travel programme is a waste of money and would rather we spend it on reopening public toilets, so can we give you back this £XXXmillion and ask you to come up with a public toilets programme instead?

 

Do you think that the local politicians who handed back £millions of potential investment in this city would be re-elected? Do you think we’d be successful in any future bids?

 

If you don’t like the government’s funding priorities, tell them and vote for candidates who share your views. It is simply impossible to have ballots on every scheme and project which is carried out to see whether everyone agrees with them and wants to spend the money on that.

[harvey19]

Active travel schemes ? Am I right in thinking this is a scheme to reduce the use of cars and encourage walking and cycling ?

If so I think it is a great theoretical plan but a realistic non starter.

How many people have changed from car to cycle use ?

What is the percentage of cycle users in Sheffield ?

All the plant pots due are direct cars to the next street they do not stop the use of cars.

The money could be used to improve bus services which could reduce the use of cars for personal use.

I was not talking about refusing the money from central government but putting it to better use.

Whilst I am on about the use of our money does anyone think the containers at the top of Fargate were a good use of money ?

[Planner1]

13 minutes ago, Mr Bloke said:

... so it's in SCC's (and our) interest to spend all we're given, which is probably why buying a job lot of massive plant pots came about, but to the rest of us seems like a 'waste of money'!

As I’m sure you already know, the planters are an integral part of the low traffic neighbourhood schemes.

 

They allow the restrictions on traffic to be implemented quickly and so they are useful for trying out the schemes to see if they work as planned and are easy to remove if any amendments to the scheme are needed. They are also more pleasant to look at than the alternatives, concrete blocks.

 

Nowadays, there’s very little potential for surplus funding being left at the end of highways schemes. Construction price inflation means that programmes are being cut to stay within budgets. 

[bassett one]

theres about nearly a million stood doing nothing in the unused levy from council tennants ,but it has as it stands can only be bid for by small groups for small amounts , but its a huge amount not being used, how this has come about is all council housing tennants pay 5 p per house for the money to be used by local taras ,but if theres not one in the area its put in the bank,if a tara closes all the cash goes in that kitty ,so its a big pot of cash.

[Planner1]

5 minutes ago, harvey19 said:

Active travel schemes ? Am I right in thinking this is a scheme to reduce the use of cars and encourage walking and cycling ?

If so I think it is a great theoretical plan but a realistic non starter.

How many people have changed from car to cycle use ?

What is the percentage of cycle users in Sheffield ?

All the plant pots due are direct cars to the next street they do not stop the use of cars.

The money could be used to improve bus services which could reduce the use of cars for personal use.

I was not talking about refusing the money from central government but putting it to better use.

Whilst I am on about the use of our money does anyone think the containers at the top of Fargate were a good use of money ?

Yes. Schemes to promote walking and cycling. It’s a bit early to evaluate the Sheffield schemes, but ones elsewhere have been successful.

It isn’t a theoretical plan.
 

The government have huge funding programmes for exactly that type of scheme. If I recall correctly, South Yorkshire got circa  £160 million in the CRSTS funding award, which is essentially for active travel / public transport schemes.

 

No, you can’t put forward an active travel scheme then decide to spend the money on supporting bus services. Which bit of this don’t you understand? The government give the money for specific schemes and initiatives, you can’t change it once you’ve got the money.
 

The council and the combined authority spend millions on developing the funding bids to government. They have to state what outputs they are delivering and the funding can be clawed back if they don’t deliver what they say they will.

 

The schemes are monitored and evaluated and reporting is done on what they’ve achieved.

[fools]

The word you're looking for is spaff

 

budget day soon

Edited November 15, 2022 by fools