I’m delighted that my Conservative colleagues have decided to “call in” the decision to massively increase spending on the Council’s glossy LIFE in Salford magazine. This is a bad decision and a huge waste of taxpayers money, and to top it all off done at a time when the Council can least afford it and when many local residents are really stuggling to pay thier Council Tax and other bills.
The “call in” process means that the decision will now be looked at by a special meeting of the relevent Scrutiny Committee (in this case, Strategy & Regeneration) within the next fortnight. This means that Councillor Merry will have to justify to Councillors (and any members of the press or public present, for that matter) why he has made this decision. The Scrutiny Committee can then refer the decision back to Cabinet for a rethink, although they do not have the power to actually reverse the decision.
You can read more about previous call-ins on the Council website here.
You beat me to the call iain, Sorry tom and john i agree with these comments 150%. It is one more disgracefull waste of tax payers money. What will we see for the next 12 months. How good your local labour party are? lets wait and see. Advertising will we get the same sort of figure we were to get on the ice rink? will that be one more thing to come back and bite them? look out for the return of the pink rink and more wasted cash
Joe
The pink rink is coming back – it was in the MEN today.
Joe,
You’re now endorsing Iain’s comments more enthusiastically than the man who wrote them; if this keeps up, I might even write to David Cameron myself to recommend a membership pack is sent to you forthwith!
Second out of the blocks again to the Tories though, tsk tsk. When are we going to get some leadership on local issues from the Lib Dems?
Tom.
Tom
When are we going to get some leadership on local issues from the Labour party? Why is the Salford Labour group blindly following Leese & co in Manchester in backing the Yes campaign on the congestion charge referendum, when they must know that Salford gets a spectacularly bad deal out of it…
Iain, do I remember rightly off the top of my head… It was £42,000 of taxpayers’ money that Salford Labour lost on the pink rink last year wasn’t it?
Tom
I sent out emails to both Norman and Karen to be fair. And guess what no reply to my concerns. My intention was to ask other group members to join with me and raise a call in. Last night at the jean murphy cancer appeal i was informed the conservatives beat me to it. Remember the fuss from labour at the last call in by the Liberals if i do anything i make sure i have all the facts. But tell me Tom do you agree with John to waste more money, our money. Please comment i would look foward to see what his agents views are. How about the fun fair.Any views, iraq war. youth crime, lack of housing. MRSA. post code lottery. Economic migration, the countries fiscal state.Sorry running out of space
you may yet be relieved that you not involved in this call in Joe. From a financial perspective which I assume is the sole objection you might be pleasently surprised . I think your new desire to get all the facts will serve you well in the future.
I thought i allways did get the facts john. I don’t remember sending you pdf documents accusing you of attending meeting you were not at.
I look forward to the call in. I hope the facts over how you intend to finance what i belive will be a propaganda exercise hold water. What gains do you wish to achieve with increasing the amount of times this rag it’s the floor of residents homes and burdens them with cost that i belive will be unexceptable. I am still curious over the facts relting to the true cost to this city of your funfair.
Prove me wrong tell me the cost in reply. And John i can assure you if i would have called this in i would have given you a better run for your money than Norman
“While it will cost more to do this, I have set the magazine a revenue target for advertising each month to help offset this increase,” continued Merry.
Your quote John…
Tell me something how do you hope to achieve advertising revenue,when half of the people in this country who depend on it for a living cannot?
I await your answer
Joe
That’s not a difficult one Joe. It will be almost exclusively public bodies – the PCT and GMPA were named in the report – so the taxpayer pays regardless.
Ah but is it not possible that if this is advertising that would have to be done anyway it might save the taxpayer money. Think it through Ian rather than being blinded by ideology.
Perhaps, and especially in these times of tight budgets, public bodies should be advertising less. Just a thought.
Joe,
The fact your primary contact regarding this matter was not only with the leader of your own party, but also the leader of the Tories, speaks volumes about the political direction of the Liberals in Salford these days.
I’ve said it before: I’m never happy to see tax payers money wasted. Your definition of ‘waste’ may, of course, differ from my own.
Other than that – I’m pleased to report I do have views on all the other matters on your somewhat eclectic list, one of which we may even agree on. Nevertheless, I’m certain that doesn’t make me a Lib Dem!
Tom.
Ah Tom, but does Joe have views on your dress sense, a subject discussed in my meeting last Wednesday?
Iain,
Unless you were at a seminar on avoiding clashing shirt and tie combos, which I’ve been known for, I’m not sure how my dress sense could have come up in any context – so please do enlighten me!
Tom.
Apparentely you were brought up so that you weren’t too bothered about brands, so I’ll be keeping a careful look out for designer labels next time I see you…
Just a quick one how will you push on advertising in your magazine effect for example the advertiser. If you have a editorial body on the magazine should it have input on your idea of the massive cost exercise.Or is this one less democratic principle the your party only brings out at election times?.Both the Conservatives and ourselves raised concerns on your marketing budget.Dont you think it’s time to pull in our belt’s
joe
Could be worse Iain… Tom could have been caught accepting designer clothes worth over $150,000 like Sarah Palin.
Incidentally someone got to this website the other day with a Google search for “Councillor Tom Murphy Salford”… wishful thinking?