National News Conservative Party

So, looking into the possibility of making e-cigarettes available on the NHS.

What do we think?
 
So, looking into the possibility of making e-cigarettes available on the NHS.

What do we think?
No is my knee-jerk reaction without looking at any details. My knee-jerk continues with "what next, slim fast shakes on the NHS"

But what I'd need to consider I guess is 'how much money does smoking-related illness cost the NHS, and how much could this prevent in the future?'
 
No is my knee-jerk reaction without looking at any details. My knee-jerk continues with "what next, slim fast shakes on the NHS"

But what I'd need to consider I guess is 'how much money does smoking-related illness cost the NHS, and how much could this prevent in the future?'

Pretty much my own thoughts.

Think this is a slippery slope. As you say, where does it stop? free fruit and veg for our 5 (or is it 7 a day), alcohol free beer tokens etc.
 
I can understand why people might stick up for the government because they believe in traditional Conservative values.

But not how they can possibly defend the complete disaster they are making of virtually decision they make - and surely them covering the country in sh!t is the perfect illustration of that.
 
I can understand why people might stick up for the government because they believe in traditional Conservative values.

But not how they can possibly defend the complete disaster they are making of virtually decision they make - and surely them covering the country in sh!t is the perfect illustration of that.
It's the metaphor for the age.
 
Coming to a council near you, the selling off of 'publicly-owned assets, including town halls, public toilets, leisure centres and libraries, and push ahead with further cuts to services'.

Peterborough City Council is conservative run and is described by CIPFA (accountancy body of the public sector) as 'low cost'.

 
Coming to a council near you, the selling off of 'publicly-owned assets, including town halls, public toilets, leisure centres and libraries, and push ahead with further cuts to services'.

Peterborough City Council is conservative run and is described by CIPFA (accountancy body of the public sector) as 'low cost'.


Do you still have public toilets? Long gone in Leicester which has been Labour for decades.

On the positive side, after a one-man campaign, the same Labour City Council provided a local main road with 2 litter bins.

I was most pleased. :)
 
Do you still have public toilets? Long gone in Leicester which has been Labour for decades.

On the positive side, after a one-man campaign, the same Labour City Council provided a local main road with 2 litter bins.

I was most pleased. :)

And who significantly cut their budgets from the central funding pot?
 
And who significantly cut their budgets from the central funding pot?

The City council has an income of £288.1 million, the ability to raise council tax (5% in 21/22), and circa £50 million in reserves.
They also scoop up a lot of Government funding for major projects, think it was around £18 million in the Budget to mess around with the train station (again!).
St Margarets bus station (built 1986, refurbished 2006, partially demolished in 2020) is being rebuilt (again) with external funding and marketed as "carbon neutral".
We are even getting 100 electric buses £19 million funding from HMG, £26 million from the bus companies, £2.2 million from the council

Not so sure keeping public toilets open makes a huge dent in those figures when it is perfectly feasible to charge a nominal fee (20p/50p) for such facilities.
However, it does have a hugely detrimental impact on the public.

Almost getting back to Maslow again - its the little things people miss but they are often the first things Councils get rid of. 🤷‍♀️
 
The City council has an income of £288.1 million, the ability to raise council tax (5% in 21/22), and circa £50 million in reserves.
They also scoop up a lot of Government funding for major projects, think it was around £18 million in the Budget to mess around with the train station (again!).
St Margarets bus station (built 1986, refurbished 2006, partially demolished in 2020) is being rebuilt (again) with external funding and marketed as "carbon neutral".
We are even getting 100 electric buses £19 million funding from HMG, £26 million from the bus companies, £2.2 million from the council

Not so sure keeping public toilets open makes a huge dent in those figures when it is perfectly feasible to charge a nominal fee (20p/50p) for such facilities.
However, it does have a hugely detrimental impact on the public.

Almost getting back to Maslow again - its the little things people miss but they are often the first things Councils get rid of. 🤷‍♀️

They will have had lost many £ms from central funding, however you dress that up they have lost many £ms. Providing toilets or providing social care or providing child protection or public health etc etc etc. You might think it doesn't make much of a dent but you'd be surprised especially when there are many such things along those lines.

Plenty of Councils are struggling to do their statutory responsibilities with the finances they have so public conveniences are an obvious place to save money. Far better than saving where a vulnerable child or somebody needing social care not being able to get help.
 
No is my knee-jerk reaction without looking at any details. My knee-jerk continues with "what next, slim fast shakes on the NHS"

But what I'd need to consider I guess is 'how much money does smoking-related illness cost the NHS, and how much could this prevent in the future?'
Smoking related illness = early death = less need for the NHS in the (no longer viable) later life + paying an awful lot of tax on the thing that killed you.

I'm trying to stop smoking after 35+ years, and the vape does help, but I agree it was my choice to smoke so the cost of that shouldn't fall on others who don't.
 
They will have had lost many £ms from central funding, however you dress that up they have lost many £ms. Providing toilets or providing social care or providing child protection or public health etc etc etc. You might think it doesn't make much of a dent but you'd be surprised especially when there are many such things along those lines.

Plenty of Councils are struggling to do their statutory responsibilities with the finances they have so public conveniences are an obvious place to save money. Far better than saving where a vulnerable child or somebody needing social care not being able to get help.

I don`t doubt they have lost direct central funding, circa £10 million a year is a figure they mention or "£100 million of cuts in 10 years" for the headlines.
However, they are pretty successful in obtaining a lot of funding from "other" government avenues and grants.
I would suggest they haven`t "lost" the money they just need to apply for it and be accountable for it.
Bit like the NHS. :)
 
I don`t doubt they have lost direct central funding, circa £10 million a year is a figure they mention or "£100 million of cuts in 10 years" for the headlines.
However, they are pretty successful in obtaining a lot of funding from "other" government avenues and grants.
I would suggest they haven`t "lost" the money they just need to apply for it and be accountable for it.
Bit like the NHS. :)

I'd suggest they have lost significant money as their services have reduced. You are equating the one off grants etc as being able to do the same job as central grant which was annual recurring money when they can't. The Council can't rely on one off short term grants to run core services as they can't plan. If a LA is doing that then it isn't being accountable, that is introducing a moronic level of financial planning. For one off projects such grants are fine, not for funding child protection etc.

That doesn't even take into account whether the Grants are for capital expenditure or revenue expenditure either.
 
I'd suggest they have lost significant money as their services have reduced. You are equating the one off grants etc as being able to do the same job as central grant which was annual recurring money when they can't. The Council can't rely on one off short term grants to run core services as they can't plan. If a LA is doing that then it isn't being accountable, that is introducing a moronic level of financial planning. For one off projects such grants are fine, not for funding child protection etc.

That doesn't even take into account whether the Grants are for capital expenditure or revenue expenditure either.

It's why I`ve always thought "core" public sector budgets should be set for far longer periods and taken away from being a political football, but that`ll never happen.

Maybe I`m a socio-conservative. :)
 
Back
Top Bottom