UKIP are proposing an amendment to Labour’s budget for the year going forward.
I reproduce them below, this gives us some clues as to their priorities and is a welcome development:
Rotherham Politics
Robust scrutiny of all things political around Rotherham and beyond. Speaking truth to power since 2008
Rotherham Politics 
Why don’t all councillors do it voluntary for a year save a million quid
LikeLike
Now there is an excellent idea.
LikeLike
If they complete one year voluntary that means they are ready to represent their area and deserve to get paid. After every 8 years 1 year voluntary has to be done
LikeLike
Despence with the cabinet system, remove payments for these committee groups, deputy Leader and advisers. Just the basic salary. Discuss everything in open session , all recieving information from the heads of each department, Ie Children’s services, Planning etc.
LikeLike
Special responsibility payments were ceased by Eric Pickles and Group had already come up with their one third reduction proposals as a stunt!
LikeLike
I welcome the gesture and the motive behind what has been proposed (especially members working in a voluntary capacity with the allowances being redirected to something more worthwhile) but £230K for grass cutting and grounds maintenance and yet only £100k for CSE victims ? Really?
Please don’t come up with a really good idea and then blow it by getting the balance of priorities wrong.
The B.
LikeLike
Do you get the impression that Ukip are really tickering around the hedges and not really dealing with this issue about Councillars and their fuctions. I’m not hearing major proposals about reducing numbers, accountability and what general direction they want to town to head in.
Will we be replacing one bunch of power hungry despots with another?
LikeLike
“Will we be replacing one bunch of power hungry despots with another?”
I hope not manc but its got to be better than what we had previously (if a UKIP member is reading, please tell me its going to be better than what we had before).
LikeLike
Damed if we do Damed if we don’t UKIP Councillors have no input what so ever whilst in minority
so why do we bother obviously what ever we do Labour followers have ago
The £100,000 is in addition to other grant money which we will be fighting to redirect from other areas tonThe victims
We have listened to our constituents voices and the grass cutting was one of thr most complained about so I will answer to the majority not the few complain about every thing who post on here
All I will say is instead of having a go stand up your selves up for election and show us how it’s done
And as far as working for Now’t for one year how many of you will volunteer to do the same and donate your salary
Not many of you I’m sure
Even Councillors have to eat and pay rent
LikeLike
If you want to be considered an alternative to the current lot, and that shouldn’t be too hard , you need more credible policies , apart from claiming you could do better than them on CSE . Believe me any decent person wouldn’t have allow this to happen. You need to tell and show the people how you would eliminate abuses by councillors, officials, make local government more transparent. But most of all you to need to look to the future and not constantly harping on about the past. A vision for Rotherham.
LikeLike
Caven ur like Eric pickles never challenges earlier
LikeLike
Good grief! If ever proof were needed that Caven Vines and it would appear the whole UKIP group, is out of his depth then here it is. £352,000 on public realm and only £100,000 for CSE! What about other priorities such as adult social care, domestic violence and childrens services (it isn’t just CSE you know)? Where is the budget for (litter and dog fouling) enforcement? There will be a cost but they don’t seem to have budgeted for it.
Their proposals re cabinet members’ allowances are irrelevant. Don’t they know that commissioners are coming in to run the Council? There will be no need or indeed role for a cabinet whilst the Council is in special measures.
I actually thought this was a spoof. What a bunch of muppets!
LikeLike
At least they have decided on a policy that does something for the benefit of Rotherham and the victims of CSE. The current ruling Labour party don’t exactly have a good record on either aspect do they Robin?
Perhaps they don’t have the figures quite balanced (it could be argued they are new political party who are perhaps finding their feet) but at least they are recognising the problem and not paying lip service to it or sweeping it under the carpet.
I think you miss the point of what UKIP in Rotherham are saying (or more likely not wanting to listen to what they are saying). It seems to me its about taking a block of money from one part of the budget and redistributing it to 2 other important areas that they feel require funding and they have done this based on listening to people in Rotherham (another new novelty for politicians in Rotherham). There are already existing budgets for litter and dog fouling so I think you are trying to muddy the waters here.
I think the big question that should be asked is ‘why are the Commissioners coming into Rotherham’? Answer, because the last bunch of muppets made a total and complete arse of the job. Just remind us of who those muppets were, oh yes, the Labour party.
LikeLike
You are the muppet Robyn its LABOUR in all the past years who have run Rotherham down let the children down done nothing for the town in any way shape or form and as Caven says all of you you who complain if you can do better then stand for the council anyone can shoot their mouth of but can you back it up. You know as well as i do whatever the UKIP councillors proposed even if it made the town look good Labour would never accept it just because it was proposed by UKIP. So come on all the big mouths on here show us what you can do stand for the council
LikeLike
I think the flowers stuff etc is cosmetic but I’m not against it in principle. As much money as possible needs to be given to helping victims become mentors to other victims and advocates raising awareness of cse in schools/community groups etc. This would not only hasten their own “recovery” it would send a much stronger and newsworthy message around the world: Rotherham is on the road to recovery and is doing all it can towards sorting out it’s own problems. I suggest UKIP and other councillors talk to Jayne Senior about what is needed if they are serious. Victims are themselves the key to getting positive warnings across to the next generation of potential targets. We also still need the police to step up and act on the copious intelligence they have received about perpetrators, of course. A few flowers on a lamp post are fine but not much impact if there is a perpetrator hanging around under the lamp light looking for his next target.
LikeLike
“I think the flowers stuff etc is cosmetic but I’m not against it in principle.”
I am totally against it in principle, it is massively labour intensive and ecologically disastrous and it imposes a top down solution. (and that’s for a start! 🙂 )
.
RMBC did at least make some minimal attempt at introducing self-sustaining wildflower pollinator-attracting meadows on roundabouts a couple of years ago.
… and if you want to pretty-up the streets there are better people-empowered solutions.
____________________
But all this can wait for a few years.
Rotherham has other major priorities – its kids and their safety and recovering from the past errors.
LikeLike
Last year the Council cut £1m from its Integrated Youth Support Service. Amongst other things this resulted in a reduction in the number of youth club and outreach sessions. IMO any additional money that becomes available as a result of savings on Councillors Special Responsibility Allowances (SRAs) should be allocated to reinstating these services before we think about flower beds! Youth workers are front-line workers who engage with young people who are vulnerable to CSE. We need more of them. Also, the new Director of Childrens Services has responded to OFSTED’s findings that social workers’ caseloads are too high by employing an additional 17 social workers. This is necessary and welcome but it will cost about £600,00 plus. So, before we start throwing money at horticulture perhaps we ought to think about funding these extra social workers. I really can’t believe UKIP’s priorities!
LikeLike
But Robin, would the council have needed these additional expenditure on social services, if you friends had done their job, instead of denieing that the Pakistani preptrators were raping children. You new about from 1997, you could’ve stopped it and save all those little girls and their families from this grief. Your right people must’ve been muppets in believing in the Labour Party.
LikeLike
Lets be honest, the Council could have made other cuts such as to the fairly recently appointed H&S officers in each department on £30k plus (who incidentally have created a new level of bureaucracy and additional workloads for frontline staff). That’s new H&S posts in addition to the existing corporate H&S department.
They could have made such cuts but its politically more valuable to the ruling Labour party to say that youth/old peoples services have been cut because of the nasty coalition Government. Cutting non essential management posts doesn’t give the unions and Labour party the headlines they need to keep their power.
Oh and youth facilities have had their funding cut for the last 20 years to my knowledge and that has been a deliberate political policy of the Labour run council.
The B.
LikeLike
Why did we have to have a deputy leader shipped in from North Yorkshire does not say a lot for Rotherham labour councillors does it. Took a year out from NYCC to become our deputy leader
LikeLike
What a load of codswallop £100,000 for the victims of CSE. They deserve more a few flowers will do nothing for the town. Councillors need to come out of the Town Hall and see life as it really is. Get working in their wards.
LikeLike
To listen to you Robin, one might be forgiven for thinking that UKIP are responsible for the outrageous actions of councillors in covering up CSE, Child Prostitution, Rape and much worse then?
Readers might be prepared to take you seriously if you once apologised for Labour’s abject failures. Only once denial by everyone is dispelled, will Labour in Rotherham have anything worth listening to!
LikeLike
Why would I apologise Rik? I do not speak for Labour nor have I ever claimed to. Your comment is really strange. Are you ok?
LikeLike
Don’t you? Most casual readers would put you down as an apologist for Labour, at the very least!
LikeLike
I suppose you think its ok for rmbc to keep giving money to magna then up till now with the £350000 promised it comes to £1.6 million pounds that would help a lot of victims
LikeLike
Really? I think if you look back at my posts you will see I have often criticised the Labour group and some of their decisions. To describe me as an apologist is a little odd. I hold no position within the Labour party so should I really be expected to apologise for their actions/inactions? I don’t think any reasonable person would expect me to. BTW you ought to stop using the term “child prostitution”. Most people realise it is an ignorant, outdated term.
LikeLike
what will ukip do to support the connected family carers in Rotherham at the moment our members are taking RMBC to court privately things we have been promised are not forth comming many of us cannot afford to eat and pay the rent our numbers are growing more and more children are being raised by other family members as a result of death drug/alcohol addictions or medical problems
LikeLike
The perpetrators of the abuse of children and those in positions of responsibility in Rotherham used the vile term of child prostitution to cover their criminal tracks and civic failings.
I find that the term used in relation to vulnerable, used and abused children deeply abhorrent.
LikeLike
Whilst I would never want to be considered an apologist for Rotherham Labour – even less that Robin deserves to be, they did publish this on 09 Jan 2013. Are UKIPs amendments on top of this, or instead of it. .
“Labour’s council budget will cut the cost of councillors”
http://www.rotherhamlabour.org/2015/01/09/labours-council-budget-will-cut-the-cost-of-councillors/
LikeLike
This was a ploy to get votes in the upcoming election Peter Thirwall suggested this some years ago but was shot down by the council then
LikeLike
Why on earth should Mr. Symonds apologise for the Labour party or for those connected to the party?
An alternative voice should always be encouraged on any political blog; differing expressions of a political view point must be welcomed.
LikeLike
Getting back to the budget, yes its not perfect, but its the very first alternative budget for years. One has to remember that UKIP are in opposition and do not get to see all the spending figures. You have to remember also, its not the Labour Party Members who do the budget, its the Employees in the Finance Department that put the figures together. Maybe when the Commissioner`s come, more UKIP Members will be allowed onto the Committees and be able to scrutinise the figures better.
LikeLike
Firstly
We have had no offer of input into the budget at all we don’t know what it will be
We have listened to the people
We want to try and make the town attractive and welcoming to visitors to help the local economy
I have talked to CSE victims and their family’s and asked them directly what is needed
We have looked at offering a proposal which will suit the balance at no extra cost to the budget which the labour council will be offering
The reduction in member allowances to pay for the additions (yes Additions )
The Figure of£100,000 for grants to Victims is in addition to what is already available or should be available for the victims
Remember who have received £1000’s in grants in previous years this must now be switched to Victims Of CSE and UKIP will be fighting for this to happen + £100,000 on top
What is really so bad about that.
And Robin please tell what contribution have the Unions made to Helping Victims of CSE in Rotherham
We in UKIP aren’t perfect but we are trying and are open and transparent
And given the same opportunity to put a budget together as the ruling Labour Group
I doubt we could make a worst mess of it
But until we get the chance who can judge us No One
Including my friend Robin
LikeLike
Caven,
I would have thought the UKIP Borough planting scheme ideas are directly contrary to Dept of the Environment policy
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/national-pollinator-strategy-for-bees-and-other-pollinators-in-england
Check out Annex A of the Supporting document to the National Pollinator Strategy – for the types of scheme it really likes.
.
LikeLike
The ideas to make the town feel a better place are a good idea the people of rotherham are still supporting the traders in town so making the town feel better will help . If the planters are against dept environment policy ? Wickersley have been doing it for Years . I am not a member of any political party just think this a small step in the right direction
LikeLike
I am sure they have, as has Aston-c-Aughton, but over the last few years the National Government has been slowly waking up to the impact on biodiversity, and after much foot-dragging and then consultation the current policy was introduced in November 2014.
RMBC itself had already been working in this direction on roundabouts and verges. See: https://flic.kr/p/nJVwFQ ..
All it really means that some of the old “street planting” solutions are now frowned on, whilst others are being recommended. (… and more likely to get funding).
I would have thought that our new Commissioners are hardly likely you go along with policies that contradict government policy.
LikeLike
That is such a desperate response to UKIP’s suggestion of planting flowers. To say it is directly contrary to the Dept of Environment policy is an absolute nonsense and is clutching at straws in order to discredit the idea. It must have taken you ages to find something that remotely challenges UKIP’s suggestion!
The document linked to relates mainly to rural environments and in particular pollinators that are valuable to the health and productivity of plant/crop species and linked to the life cycles of invertebrates. It doesn’t really relate to a few planters and hanging baskets in a town centre!
The sections that specifically mention Local Authorities talks about their sympathetic management of land for pollinators rather than the management of flowers beds/planters/baskets.
If it were against the Dept of Environment policy, it would mean that RMBC would have been working contrary to that policy in the way it has managed every flower bed in Clifton Park, Boston Park as well as every other urban park in Rotherham.
Poor effort.
LikeLike
The national government has NOT been slowly waking up to the impact on biodiversity, they have down an incredible amount of work over many years.
For example,in 1992 our Government signed up to the international convention on biodiversity in Rio de Janerio and 2 years later in 1994 it produced its first UK Biodiversity Action Plan. It stipulated that authorities should produce their own local plans and Rotherham produced its in 2002.
As for ‘old street planting schemes now being frowned upon’ its not that they are frowned upon, its simply that other schemes have more biodiversity value. The example you give of roundabouts and grass verges being worked on in Rotherham is not a new one, in fact Rotherham are way behind other council’s for example, many verges in Nottinghamshire have been managed to benefit wildlife for decades so much so that quite a few are now designated as Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI).
I would think the incoming Commissioners would be more likely to be concerned with proper democracy being installed, standards of public officers being improved and policies that protect children than what type of flowers are being planted in baskets.
Or perhaps you think we should just gloss over the years and years of corrupt management of RMBC and just concentrate picking apart an effort to bring some pride back to the town?
The B. (I love plants)
LikeLike
Caven is right to an extent UKIP councillors have never had to do this before and i agree about making the town look nicer, but unfortunately with what has happened to the children of the borough i would think twice before investing in Rotherham
LikeLike
Several statements on this thread from Mr Vines worry me greatly; they should also worry others with an interest in local democracy and accountability to ALL. They indicate in reality nothing has changed when it comes to transparency and accountability to ALL the people in Rotherham – not just party interest. And most alarmingly they remind me of the MO of Mr Stone – a man who has thankfully gone – but his ethos of ‘I know better – I’ve got power – don’t criticize’ sadly remains.’
Firstly I will look at this quote from Mr Vines:
“All I will say is instead of having a go stand up your selves up for election and show us how it’s done a- nd as far as working for Now’t for one year how many of you will volunteer to do the same and donate your salary Not many of you I’m sure.”
Caven you have used this strange and questionable defence of ‘you can’t question me because I am elected you are not’ before; and always when trying to avoid a difficult question. In fact in particular I can recall you doing so when you were asked on RothPol to give alternatives to the proposed closures of certain Children’s Centres. I and others asked you then for alternative solutions and and alternative budget – you promised me and others they would be provided; we never got them. Indeed all I got was ‘If you want to question me stand for election – see you at Magna.’ Like I said nothing has changed – that was and still is sooooo Mr Stone to a ‘T’.
Caven – as for ‘working for nowt’. I and many in Rotherham do already. It’s called ‘voluntary work’. To a great extent many of the essential services in Rotherham rely on it.
Caven – can you please begin to understand that whether someone is a councilor or not they still have a right to ask questions – get answers – seek clarification – raise issues – give an opinion – even criticize – whether they are councilors or not. In fact an individual doesn’t have to have ANY interest in politics or party politics or want to seek office at all to raise and issue or ask a question and expect to be given answers. All they have to be is an’ individuals with concerns or queries regarding an issue. Nothing more nothing less. As an elected official you are beholding to them – not them to you.
Caven – the local talents in the Borough regarding opinion and solutions are not simply to be found in the elected chamber; or for that matter within the meetings and machinations of any political group. Indeed many would question whether there is sufficient ‘talent’ within the elected chamber at all. (Especially the Casey Report – which damned all – and I am sure the Government Team will do so too)
Caven the solutions to the issues in Rotherham – including CSE are complex and ‘you need to understand’ (I’m borrowing one of your often used patronizing’ phrases there) that your insistence that someone has to be elected or be part of a party machine to have a voice is wrong; so very wrong in every way. We all have something to offer in our own way. What makes you think that unless people are councilors or part of the political elite (whatever party) they are not allowed to question you or anyone? Please explain.
Secondly I will turn to this statement from Caven
“I will answer to the majority not the few complain about every thing who post on here.”
Caven this approach reminds me of the many criticisms of Mr Stone in the Casey Report – ““He didn’t want debate.”’ Regarding this approach I will reiterate – you are accountable to ALL the voters (even none voters) and citizens of your ward – no matter their politics or lack of politics. Likewise, in addition, as the leader of the Official Opposition you are answerable to ALL in this town whether they vote for you or not. (Or even don’t vote) Your role as an elected official is to deal with the issues raised by the citizens – not pick and chose who you deal with or what issues you ‘decide’ to answer . Like I said you are beholding to the citizens not them to you – and not just at election time – 24 – 7. Caven – you have rightly criticized the Labour Group in Rotherham for being aloof – stop acting like the ’foe you damn’ or be damned in the same manner too.
Thirdly I will look at this.
“And Robin please tell what contribution have the Unions made to Helping Victims of CSE in Rotherham.”
Caven you are well aware of the support Unison gave me and others 24 – 7 during my (their) official complaints with RMBC re the issue of CSE and operational malpractice. You are well aware of the issues I and others raised many years ago re CSE and more – and the cost we paid. You are well aware of the support Unison gave me and others 24 – 7 through the various meetings with RMBC and others, official Inquiries and ‘hearings’ I and they had to attend when standing up for my family and many victims. You are well aware of the legal and emotional support Unison gave as the bullying continued, the targeting continued and I and others lost life long career for speaking out. You are well aware that – without having to be asked – of the additional supportive and care Unison gave me’ personally as my physical health and future disappeared and the tears fears and depression resulted as the ‘cases’ we fought unfolded hit home. But most importantly you are well aware of the public legal restrictions placed upon me and those that supported me during the whole process – and how if we had simply relied on soundbites and point scoring for the sake that would have put an end to all the complaints at source. You are well aware of it all – and I find your lack of acknowledgement of this to be nothing more than ‘political posturing’ at its worst. Hopefully the Government Team will address the latter)
Caven, Now while I am glad the guilty in the Labour Group have been held to account and the cabinet have resigned I would now like to turn to something you have not acknowledged and have failed to address – responsibility.
Quotes form the Casey Report.
“The problems with culture in RMBC are however wider and deeper than two former Councillors no matter how prominently they are cited. There was a degree of obvious factionalism both within the Labour group and across the Council and not enough evidence of colleagues pulling together to take a new or fresh approach. Divisions and back-biting were evident despite the serious events that unfolded in Rotherham, not only within the leading group but across the political divide.”
“We do not accept that Councillors with a long history in Rotherham did not know about the scale and extent of CSE. We conclude that they did not act.”
“Overall, Inspectors have not been impressed with the calibre and grip of leading Members. We have reluctantly concluded that they cannot be left on their own to lead the Council out of its current responsibilities.”
“Whilst the opposition in Rotherham is small, we saw limited evidence of them raising concerns and putting pressure on the leadership. In terms of CSE, we could not find evidence that the opposition had been at all effective in scrutinising and challenging, or active in getting the matter on the agenda.”
“In 2004, the Chief Executive directed the Executive Director of Children and Young People’s Services to commission the ‘Report on Organisations Delivering Services to Young People with Experience or at Risk of Experiencing Sexual Exploitation’. The findings of this report caused the then Leader Roger Stone to commission a Sexual Exploitation Task & Finish group – consisting of six Councillors and five senior officials – to get CSE ‘sorted’.”
Then there’s the issue of the famous seminar – all councilors at the time – whether they attended or not – received full details. Then of course the Police Authority 2004 – 06 and their refusal to take up the offer of outside professional guidance. Issues I believe will be looked in to further in the future.
In regards to all the above – answers in detail please Caven. You were there. Say sorry please, explain in detail and let’s stop avoiding the fact that while the Casey Report rightly damned the Labour Group it in fact damned ALL.
SKT xxxx
PS: as for UKIP’s ‘Alternative Budget’. I will look at it in more detail before commenting fully. However, like many a few things did leap out and raise concerns – in particular:
1 – Approx £336,750 on flowers and flower pots.
2 – £100,000 on victim support.
I’m sorry but I disagree with that priority. It is nothing more than ‘I’m simply watching flowers in the rain’ while the pain of the victims and their families deluges and goes on. More pretty than practical it does nothing to address the major issue we face as a Borough – how to truly put right the wrongs of the CSE scandal.
Caven – you say you have spoken to victims – I don’t doubt that for one minute; however what I do doubt is that they placed precedence on providing more chrysanthemums, iris, petunia and jasmine rather than the provision of more counselling, intervention and protection and justice.
LikeLike
Why not offer to help UKIP, you sound like you have had lots of experience (unfortunately)
LikeLike
And labour are better …..Pool green roundabout The scheme is costing approximately £5.1 million, of which £3.438 million is being paid by the Department of Transport’s pinch point fund, which is geared to removing bottlenecks on local highway networks that are preventing growth. Rotherham Council is contributing £1.6 million to the scheme….. Eastwood school http://www.rothbiz.co.uk/2014/04/news-4067-rotherhams-5m-school-on-stilts.html at a cost £5m … £3m secured from government and £2m to be borrowed over a payback period of 60 years.. 60 YEARS .. how much interest will be paid back and who to ? Riverside house £3m a year rent ….http://www.rotherhamadvertiser.co.uk/news/90072/-9-9m-bill-to-equip-rotherham-council-s-new-offices.aspx Also £3 million refurbishment of the Town Hall and what about .. the £5 million purchase of Doncaster Gate hospital … and then knocked it down .. Some big big ££££££££s being thrown about … How much did Paul Lakin say the council were putting in the cse fund …..Rotherham MBC has donated £20,000 specifically for the provision of counselling services to survivors of CSE and their families in Rotherham. Unsuccessful applications may also be considered as part of SYCF’s Small Grants Fund (if eligible) and may be awarded a grant from an alternative fund. Source. http://www.sycf.org.uk/apply_for_a_grant/the_child_sexual_exploitation_fund/ Ah well at least we will have a new crossroads where there was once a fully functioning roundabout .
LikeLike
Why not only have one ward councillor per ward. 12K x 63 councillors = 756K 12K x 21 councillors = 256K. That’s a massive saving and we keep democracy. The best way to help the victims is to convict the 100’s of abusers and establishment workers who protected the abusers. From my own experiences counselling won’t actually help people, it will just make people into victims, too many organisations profit out of this with poor results. “My biggest concern is social decay exported into Rotherham borough, creating a better environment would benefit all”. Ultimately I would like to see Borough broken back up to pre 1975, were costs were lower, services better and people weren’t living off the backs of us.
LikeLike
“Why not only have one ward councillor per ward.” Might be a good idea.
This explains the procedure:
https://www.whatdotheyknow.com/request/changing_the_number_of_councillo
LikeLike
All I wanted to do brighten up the town a bit not start world war three
I better go out to consultation so I don’t put wrong type and colour of flowers in
LikeLike
Caven,
It may be worth talking to the relevant council officers – if you haven’t already done so. I know a couple who know the subject well. (but wont name them on a public forum, obviously. )
RR
LikeLike
Great plans caven but you could save more money by looking at pepper corn rented buildings to labour supporters I believe you can make 4 million pound put all of them on full rent.
LikeLike
I would prefer it Caven if you answered the questions on the thread.
SKT xxxx
LikeLike
SKT has hit on one of the things that concerns me about UKIP. They don’t like criticism and seem to think they can pick and choose which constituents to represent. I’m still waiting for a reply to my email of 1 September to my UKIP MEP. She blocked me on twitter (before she closed her account) so I feel a bit disenfranchised.
LikeLike
Robin, I’m sure you know that Ms Collins MEP only closed the account because it was “hacked”.
LikeLike
Keep on whipping up support for UKIP. Following your demo when Nigel tried to open the new office, I went down to offer my assistance and will be going back this week. It is about time you taught your supporters to spell the word “bigot”. As for UKIP privatising the NHS it is a pack of lies with no evidence, UKIP will actually wind back things like PFI and contracts for the boys. Unions and the Liblabcon take equal responsibility for crippling this country the last 40 years. I class myself as a social capitalist and see the Unions as big an enemy to decent hard working British folk as the bosses. I have never joined a Union and never will due to the stewardship of people like yourself.
LikeLike
Do you mean Labour pick and choose which constituents to represent
LikeLike
Seeing as your username is ukipactivist I doubt you were moved to offer assistance by a few breastfeeding women!
LikeLike
I believe in a fairer society for all and not welfare dependency. I believe a fairer hourly rate for anybody 21 and above is £10 a hour. I believe that men and woman have as much right to walk around topless, but there is a time and place for everything. Same for breast feeding, woman should do it in a dignified manner, not in everybody else’s face. This is evidence your supporters can’t spell the work bigotry https://twitter.com/canofwormstwo/status/563684815070044160/photo/1 There is nothing more bigoted than lefties, who bully to get their own way, with no consideration for the feelings of others.
LikeLike
and so what, Caven also has problems with his spelling – get over it, it isn’t important.
Love yer new blog.
https://southyorkshirestrictlynotpolitics.wordpress.com but why is it still titled “Rothervalleystrictlynotpolitics” . \Don’t you find all your name changes confusing?
LikeLike
Sounds reasonable to me (especially the bit about bigoted lefties)……………
LikeLike
Hi Regular reader. I have updated the title, because it wasn’t done automatically. Hopefully that will be it for name changes. I am about to sign for a new house in Dinnington and am going mortgage free, so my mind has been in state of flux for last 12 months.
LikeLike
Good about the house, it takes away a lot of financial pressures.
How is the photography business going?
Looking at your Flickr stream, I couldn’t help feeling that you needed a better camera, even an entry level DSLR with a half-decent lens would help enormously. If you want to discuss it on one of your blogs, I’m more than happy to.
(sorry Rothpol, I know this is off-topic, but… )
LikeLike
Hi Regular. You are welcome to comment on my photography blog. I shall keep the topic on here political.
LikeLike
Hi Regular. You are welcome to comment on my photography blog. I shall keep the topic on here political.
LikeLike