Comment posted Argyll First endorse Michael Breslin in Dunoon vote by Integrity? Not in the CondemAll.
You may well be right David regarding the New Schools for the Future Grant. I believe this was matched funding of 50% and therefore the Council had committed 50% of non funded capital expenditure to the project (which could clearly either be used elsewhere or removed from the capital programme).
As I haven’t see any award letter from the SG for this funding it is not possible to comment on what terms, conditions and restrictions were placed upon the SG’s 50% award however that is something that councillor Walsh should have been asking officers to determine.
I am not sure what the timescales are but I notice there was a paper that went to full council on April 19th which discusses the Funding of Schools for Future Projects and the proposed school facilities in Dunoon and Campbeltown. It states in it that the SG ‘have set out the key conditions and guidance for procuring bodies receiving revenue finance and the conditions and guidance have been accepted by the Council’ It would therefore be interesting to see what these conditions and guidance were as we could then be in a better position to judge whether the SG were ringfencing a portion of the funding to the Dunoon project and the Dunoon project only.
Integrity? Not in the CondemAll also commented
- Good for her. It will be nice to see an independent councillor in an A&B administration actually be allowed to be independent without being thrown out of a party that doesn’t officially exist!
- Dougie is correct and any argument made by Cllr Walsh along these lines is either demonstrating his ignorance and that of those supposed to be advising him or (and this is what I suspect) is a feeble attempt to score political points.
As much as A&B’s financial work around the school closure left them open to criticism there is no way they are not fully aware of how revenue support is made up and the very small portion of it that might be subject to ring fencing. It is common knowledge in local government finance.
Put simply revenue support from central government has three main components.
1. Ring fenced grants (a very low percentage of overall support) which are awarded with fairly clear instructions about what they are to be used for and often tie in with more national policy. There used to be a lot more ring-fencing than there is now but it was reduced significantly when the Concordat was first introduced.
2. Non –domestic rates which need little explanation.
3. The general revenue grant – which is the big pot given to the Council to use as they deem appropriate. Out of that they have to pay for service delivery, servicing of debt etc etc (basically pay to operate)
Cllr Walsh has been in the game more than long enough to be aware of this and the corporate management team are aware of it too. Any claims that he didn’t know are utter nonsense and suggest he feelt the electorate will just believe him because they don’t know better.
Recent comments by Integrity? Not in the CondemAll
- Mandela an exemplar for redemptive spiritual largeness
I am fully aware of that Karl (that was exactly why I used Suharto to highlight the irony thing – or maybe it should be hypocrisy).
I have no problem with highlighting the ‘bad points’ – it would be ridiculous to deny them and paint Mandela as if he was the Archangel Gabriel his whole life – he clearly wasn’t nor does he claim to have been.
What I think though is that when you consider his actions (both before and after imprisonment) they need to be properly considered within the context of the political environment.
The ANC took money from Suharto (and others) to fund a fight against an evil government – Thatcher took money from Suharto….well just to get money.
- Mandela an exemplar for redemptive spiritual largeness
Far too simplistic is being very generous. It is certainly true that Mandela wasn’t opposed to using violence when he felt other avenues had been exhausted or were clearly never going to make any inroads against one of the most hideous regimes of modern times. He has often expressed a strong preference for peaceful methods but he never fully bought into the entirely peaceful methods more associated with the likes of Martin Luther King – he once said aid that non-violence is a good policy if conditions permit however the period of apartheid in South Africa was ruled over by one of the most odious and oppressive governments the world will ever be unfortunate to know.
For many many years the ANC was a non-violent organisation and only moved toward more violent methods when it became apparent that things were just getting worse rather than better. This wasn’t terrorism, it was civil war brought about by tyranny and unadulterated evil. If the likes of Churchill and William Wallace are held up as historic heroes for their battles against an odious regime then Mandela deserves the same accolade. The US took years to take him off the terrorist list yet they rejoice the name of George Washington. It is total hypocrisy – and let’s not forget Guantanomo Bay detention camp is still open for business.
It, of course shouldn’t escape the ‘irony meter’ that he was classified as a terrorist (and more specifically a ‘black terrorist’ by members of Thatcher’s Government – the same Govt who sold £500m of weapons to Suharto which allowed him slaughter the people of East Timor. Whilst I welcome the various tributes being paid to Mandela by politicians of all parties I feel David Cameron missed an opportunity to include an apology on behalf of the members of his party who took umpteen opportunities to disgrace Mandela during the Thatcher years.
I realise there are people who think that violence is never the answer and ideally that would be a great philosophy to live by but is it really realistic when the ‘enemy’ is so bloody evil that those committed to non-violence see their communities constantly at fear of attack, mutilation and every ounce of self-esteem bled from them by a Government who treats them as human vermin. Of course there are a few examples but they are very much the exception rather than the rule and I don’t think people who will never in their lives have to experience the sort of tyranny that the black people of South Africa did are in much of a position to throw the terrorist accusation around.
- Argyll and Bute Council seriously misleads Holyrood Education Committee
I read the submission about a week or so ago. An astounding airbrushing of history. This is quite clearly not an issue of semantics. It is an embarrassing attempt to paint the council in a better light than their actions merit.
Just further evidence that Cllr Walsh’s claims that the recent statutory report had hard messages which had to be addressed (or words to that effect) was nothing more than empty words. Nothing has changed in the culture of the council.
- Politics and council budgets – the Walsh stratagem
Such a move would have a devastating effect on local economies. It would be the nail in the coffin for many local businesses and consequently small rural villages.
- Helensburgh group calls for Argyll and Bute Council to take action against defiant developers
Apologies newsroom. You are absolutely correct. That was largely a copy and paste from something written prior to the last election and I forgot to update it.
powered by SEO Super Comments