Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 15, 2019

It’s Sod Off Time

Priti Patel MP says May needs to tell Brussels to ‘sod off’ to get a better Brexit deal.

Theresa May should have told Brussels to “sod off” and threaten to walk away to get a better deal on Brexit, a former Cabinet minister has said. Priti Patel  who quit as International Development Secretary in November 2017, said she wanted to see a more “muscular” approach to the talks.

The Conservative MP told Chopper’s Brexit Podcast “We have had tetchy moments. We should have actually said ‘enough is enough’ we are not going to take this over the transition, money… We should have told them to sod off. We are not going to be bullied by the EU. Our country looks very weak right now. I feel a sense of national humiliation, why have we succumbed to giving, giving, giving?”

Ms Patel also said the Prime Minister must publish any legal advice which underlies the UK’s Withdrawal deal when it comes back to Parliament. “Trust is a really big issue right now” she said. Mrs May said earlier this week in an answer to Tory MP Anne Main that she recognised MPs’ concerns regarding the legally binding nature of any changes that are achieved.

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 15, 2019

From Independent LCC Cllr Greenall

Lancashire County Council Meeting – 14/02/19

How many residents of Lancashire receive a report from their councillor? Just comparing the two elected members for Aughton area gives us a contrast in caring about what is happening to the taxes we pay. Cllr Paul Greenall  makes it known, elsewhere it is the mushroom method of communication, in the dark and full of crap!

Cllr Greenall writes “The meeting started at 1pm and the agenda was small as this was a budget setting meeting and another Full Council meeting is scheduled for two weeks time. The first item related to corporate priorities. One fact reported was that 42% of household waste is recycled or composted in Lancashire. Although quite an impressive figure, residents will I’m sure, recognise that more can be done, so I put this question forward. In response I was advised that options to improve recycling in Lancashire are being considered, so watch this space.

“When the main issue of the budget was being discussed, some members of the public objected to what was said and started shouting from the public gallery. Refusing to be quiet, the meeting was adjourned. During the reconvened budget debate, all three Parties put forward their proposals and found fault with each other’s too.

Infant school

Sadly, for too much of the afternoon, it was just like being in a infant school, as the political parties kept on blaming each other for past failures, trading insults and calling each other liars; all rather embarrassing.

Not so low taxation, double the rate of inflation!

“Some of the ideas put forward by the three main Parties were good, but Labour, Conservatives and the LibDems all proposed council tax rises of more than twice the rate of inflation. Believe it or not, I was the only Councillor who objected to this, which was strange as I can remember the days when Conservatives prided themselves on low taxation. Apparently, not any more, but I could not support such a tax hike and so I voted against it. I also objected to Conservative plans to reduce the hours and days that household refuse tips are open in Skelmersdale and Burscough, as that appeared to contradict the earlier statement to improve recycling!

“What was especially ironic was Conservative proposals to make saving by stopping Councillors from claiming meal allowances. I have suggested this on 2-3 occasions since being elected to County Hall in 2017, but my proposals have always been voted down. It was good to see that common sense was finally prevailing as Councillors who receive over £10k a year in allowances should not be able to claim free meals from the taxpayer. Presently, Councillors can still claim travelling expenses and are due to receive new iPhones, but I’ll deal with those issues at a later date”.

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 15, 2019

Brexit Votes Rosie Cooper MP

Business of the House – UK’s Withdrawal from the EU (14 Feb 2019)

Voted (aye) to require by 27 February 2019 a Minister of the Crown either (a) to move another motion under Section 13(1)(b) of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 or (b) to make a written statement declaring that there is no longer an agreement in principle in the negotiations with the European Union and to move no later than that date an amendable motion on how the Government proposes to proceed. (division #331; result was 306 aye, 322 no)

Voted (no) against saying “that this House welcomes the Prime Minister’s statement of 12 February 2019; reiterates support for the approach to leaving the EU expressed by this House on 29 January 2019 and notes that discussions between the UK and the EU on the Northern Ireland backstop are ongoing.” (division #333; result was 259 aye, 303 no)

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 14, 2019

Supply Chains For Brexit? Nothing New

You probably haven’t heard about LLamasoft?

That’s probably because establishment EU Remainers prefer that you don’t. 

LLamasoft claims “We shine where your current systems fall short. Your current systems see only isolated parts of the supply chain, so you miss critical shared insights. They focus on executing yesterday’s policies, and don’t give you the ability to compare and test tomorrow’s new ideas. We break down functional silos and disrupt outdated approaches to supply chain decision-making by putting the power of understanding at everyone’s fingertips, enabling your organization to quickly make smarter decisions risk-free in a parallel digital world”.

Conversation on twitter

“Hi Stephen, Will you be covering the vote this evening? If so, I have Don Bletchley, Director of Industrial Strategy at Llamasoft available for interview or to provide written comments on how a no-deal Brexit would affect supply chains in the UK.

“Don and the team at Llamasoft, the company responsible for the supply chain design of companies such as IKEA, Unilever, and Michael Kors, believe that the disruption that will ensue should be nothing new to the supply chain and that any responsible company will be fully equipped to handle the changes coming their way. Rather than it be a case of “how do we prepare” for those who have been proactive it should be a case of “when do we press the button on any changes”.

Customers

https://www.llamasoft.com/our-customers/

Virtually every company that trades between the UK and the EU uses LLamasoft. Brexit no-deal makes no difference whatsoever to any supply chains for the major trading companies. To claim any difference is untrue.

These companies are the proof of many successful supply chains regardless of politics.



 
 

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 14, 2019

LCC Protest, Shouting From Public Gallery

Breaking news 

LCC Cllr Paul Greenall   reports on a disturbance at LCC towers a few minutes ago.”County Council meeting in Preston adjourned due to protestors shouting in the public gallery”.

 

It may relate to a report that Lancashire County Council is today set to debate and decide upon proposals to reduce its budget by £77m. The authority is also planning to increase its share of council tax by almost four per cent from April, adding £52 to the annual bill of a Band D property.

Read more at: https://www.lep.co.uk/news/politics/all-you-need-to-know-about-lancashire-county-council-s-plans-to-save-77m-from-its-budget-1-9594276

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 14, 2019

More Rosie Parliamentary Votes

 

Deferred Division – Exiting The European Union (Intellectual Property) (13 Feb 2019) Rosie Cooper Voted no (division #329; result was 308 aye, 267 no) That the draft Intellectual Property (Copyright and Related Rights) (Amendment) (EU Exit) Regulations 2018, which were laid before this House on 19 December 2018, be approved. 

Securitisation Regulations 2018 (13 Feb 2019) Rosie Cooper Voted aye (division #330; result was 263 aye, 306 no)That the Securitisation Regulations 2018 (S.I., 2018, No. 1288), dated 3 December 2018, a copy of which was laid before this House on 4 December 2018, be revoked.
These regulations are not labelled as no-deal preparatory regulations, but they are being pushed through via a statutory instrument in the middle of a series of about 70 Brexit-related statutory instruments relating to financial services, including one relating specifically to the operation of the securitisation regime. The matters raised by this instrument require more debate and scrutiny than they have been afforded. It is for that reason that we asked for this debate on the Floor of the House”.

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 14, 2019

I Know What I Voted For

I Know What I Voted For


Says Mick Freeman In Champion Letters, when he takes Rosie Cooper MP to task about her “West Lancashire voted to leave, but they did not vote to be worse off” comment, as though she knows what she cannot know. That is what Mr Freeman refers to “How does she know?”.

It’s a strange phenomenon that we face. When Edward Heath lied to us, his claim was that “There are some in this country who fear that in going into Europe we shall in some way sacrifice independence and sovereignty. These fears, I need hardly say, are completely unjustified” and that was barely challenged. Prime Minsters didn’t lie, did they?

Mr Freeman also mentions that we did not vote for leave with a deal, we voted, as West Lancashire did and as a country to “leave”. Reverting back to Heath, he did deals we didn’t vote for to get us into the Common Market. We didn’t know the full truth until the Heath 30 year rule, activated in 2001, for government document release showed it.

Concealment of the truth

Having recalled a comment that “Scarcely a day now goes by when British politicians and civil servants do not make statements relating to the European Union which can be shown to be based at best on concealment of the truth or even on direct falsehood” how does Rosie Cooper MP, a remainer, relate that to her electorate?

Mr Freeman states that he did consider the likely detrimental impacts of withdrawal, as well as the benefits, and for the record would do so again, worse off or not. There was much about Edward Heath that was despicable. Ruining the UK fishing industry as part of his deal cost thousands of jobs. Does Rosie Cooper want the UK to have its own fishing industry, its jobs, restored to us?

A few honourable MPs aside, the Labour Party has now dumped its manifesto commitment on Brexit to respect the referendum result. It is now calling for Britain to stay in the EU’s customs union forever – which would effectively mean being locked into the EU forever while having no say at all over how it works. Say what you like about Theresa May’s negotiating skills, her task would anyway have been nigh on impossible given the continual attempts at sabotage from politicians and others in Britain.

One example? When May went to Brussels last week, she was told by Tusk that Jeremy Corbyn’s proposals for a permanent customs union represented “a promising way out” of the current impasse on Brexit. Another form of sabotage is the constant exhortations from the establishment calling for the EU to give no ground to the Government.

Brexit is in danger.

A clean Brexit is still the default position, leaving on 29th March to trade on WTO terms. Yet despite the defeat in parliament on 29th January of every binding amendment to block or delay Brexit, including Labour’s permanent customs union, Theresa May’s so-called Withdrawal Agreement is still on the table.

Even though MPs voted against it on 24th January, May still wants MPs to vote again on it, once again using No Deal as a threat not as an opportunity. Her current deal with the EU is not a Withdrawal Agreement. It is a Remainer Agreement, in every clause on every one of its 585 pages. It is No Brexit. It would bind us forever into a United States of Europe. It is meant to be permanent, inescapable. The Attorney General told the Cabinet that there was no legal escape route from the backstop Protocol and that it would “endure indefinitely”.

Her deal would give the EU tariff-free access to our market and control of our trade policy, force us to fund the EU’s defence programme, give EU fishing vessels free access to our waters, give the EU control of our farms, and allow free movement of labour through clauses about “mobility”. In sum, it would bind us into the EU in perpetuity.

The EU got almost everything it wanted

No surprise, then, that Jean-Claude Juncker, the President of the European Commission, boasted that the EU got “almost everything” it wanted with the deal. MPs rejected May’s deal – almost the only thing they can agree on – then voted to tell her to go yet again to Brussels with her faithful lieutenant Oliver Robbins, to beg the EU to drop the Irish backstop. But the EU will not give up the huge advantages they gain under the backstop. As Robbins observed, renegotiating the backstop with the EU is “for the birds”.

We do not need to beg the EU to change its position, that would be fruitless, as all experience from Harold Macmillan 50 years ago to David Cameron has proven. We do not need to beg the EU for a new deal, as Boris Johnson has suggested. We do not need to pay the EU £39 billion for the privilege of leaving, nor even the £20 billion that Johnson proposed.

We can and should just declare our policies on trade, fishing, the Irish border, immigration and everything else. We do not need to ask the EU’s permission. We declare our independence and then, if we wish, we can negotiate with the EU. 

As for Rosie Cooper MP, she welcomed her own majority elections to Parliament, every one of them, by accepting the honour bestowed on her by West Lancashire. She did not challenge her own victories. Why should she treat a referendum result any differently? Perhaps she might pay us the respect of accepting this majority vote too? 

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 13, 2019

Question To The Prime Minister

Rosie Cooper (West Lancashire) (Lab)

“Despite the Prime Minister’s party’s manifesto promise, nearly 7,000 pensioner households in my West Lancashire constituency could lose their free TV licences. Often the television is their only source of company. Are the Government going to keep their manifesto promise by taking back the responsibility they have outsourced to the BBC, to ensure that older people keep their TV licences?” 

The Prime Minister

“I recognise the value that people across the country place on having a television, and for many elderly people the connection that brings with the world. That is why the free licences for the over-75s are so important. We have been clear that we want and expect the BBC to continue free licences when it takes over responsibility for the concession in 2020. May I just say that taxpayers rightly want to see the BBC using its substantial licence fee income in an appropriate way to ensure that it delivers fully for UK audiences?”

Was the question answered?

Of course not. “manifesto promise” wasn’t answered. To say “want and expect” is pretty much a cop-out. Who in their right mind believes the BBC will abide by the Tory manifesto promise? The appropriate use by the BBC of licence income is to pay huge life-enriching salaries to so called stars. Sell the BBC!

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 13, 2019

Clinical Commissioning Group’s Not So Clinical Agenda

NHS CCG Governing Body Meeting 

The NHS West Lancashire Clinical Commissioning Group Governing Body Meeting is held with absolute regimented precision “9.30-11.30pm!” That’s what it says.

On Agenda Items, as each item is timed. 5 minutes for Welcome, 5 minutes for Declarations of interest, 5 minutes for Minutes of previous meeting, 5 minutes for Matters arising.

Thereafter Communications receive 10 minutes, Governance 15 minutes, Operational Management 15 minutes, Consent items 5 minutes, Any other business 15 minutes to be allocated from members of the public based on agenda items.

Members of the governing body will be available after the close of the meeting for informal discussion, time permitting.

But, all of this depends on an interpretation of published times being only a “guide” and the Chairman might end the meeting. It might also depend on the CCG knowing its arse from its elbow, or pm from am?

Ormskirk resident Barrie French wrote to the Champion having attended the meeting, but his interpretation of “Any other business” does not concur with that of the CCG who state “Our aim is to provide inclusive and accessible health services for everyone in West Lancashire”. Pity it doesn’t include just one pensioner in West Lancashire who only wanted to ask a question?

Attending one of our Governing Body meetings

West Lancashire CCG website states it “values the views of the public, partners, service users and carers. To improve services we need your views on what’s worked well and what could be improved. There are a number of ways you can tell us your views, by Attending one of our Governing Body meetings”.

If the Chair of the CCG finds it tiresome to allow an invited member of the public to ask his question, he might perhaps consider if he is the right man for the highly paid annual £105.110 seat he occupies? The logo might be changed, in the case of Mr French, to “Not with you, not for you”?

Posted by: westlancashirerecord | February 13, 2019

Down At The Old Cock And Bull

The anger in Aughton over dangerous Long Lane is almost palpable.

Some of the huge cash pile held by Aughton Parish Council is committed to spending on SPIDs, via a legal agreement with WLBC.

WLBC wrote in July 2018 “I can confirm that a decision was made to award grant funding to Aughton Parish Council for their SPID parish capital application on 23/5/18 and they were informed of this decision on the 25/5/18. The Borough Council will provide 50% match funding for this scheme with a maximum contribution of £3,000.

“Other terms and conditions for this scheme include: – The grant can only be used for the scheme specified and changes to the scheme need to be agreed in writing. – Payments will be made exclusive of VAT following submission of copy invoices. – The Parish Council shall be responsible for all operational matters during and following completion of the scheme and shall make adequate revenue provision to ensure that the scheme can continue in future years. – The scheme should be completed within 2 years. – The Borough Council may seek to recover part or its entire grant funding if the scheme is not delivered in line with the agreed terms and conditions”.

In December 2018 things got very uppity at the APC Meeting.

Minutes show that “A resident from Long Lane raised the outstanding issue of the provision of SpIDs. The Chairman gave an update on the project which was being undertaken by the Working Group and Lancashire County Council (LCC). As previously reported, the item would be raised on a future Agenda once all matters had been finalised with LCC Highways.

But a second resident from Long Lane spoke about speeding traffic on the Lane and circulated papers from the Road Safety Observatory on ‘Effectiveness of Speed Indicator Devices (SpIDs) v Traffic Calming Measures (TCM) on reducing vehicle speeds’. After further ‘discussion’ and some ‘unruly behaviour’ the Chairman closed Public Question Time at 7.45pm and all Parish Council Members left the room for an adjournment.

The Chairman reopened Public Question Time at 7.50pm.

He apologised for the problems Long Lane residents were having with ‘speeding vehicles’ – the County Council, the police and the speed tasking group had been made aware previously – and advised the local resident that the Parish Council was able to fund SpIDs and under working partnerships with WLBC & LCC, it was doing all it could to install several around the Parish, including Long Lane, according to the specific criteria laid down. The Parish Council did not have the power to install TCMs but the SpID Working Group would discuss ‘how best to proceed with Long Lane’ at its next meeting in January. [Pass the buck time! Jobsworths to blame?]

The January APC Minutes haven’t been published, but SPIDs weren’t included on the agenda. Nor were they included for the February agenda. Shows how urgent SPIDs are with the APC?

We did note though that the December 2018 Minutes included “TRO – consultation – February/April Parking Order (2018) various roads including West Lancashire LSG4/894.8702/AFR (to remove unnecessary and inconsiderate parking and improve the general movement of traffic along the road also to improve drivers forward visibility and improve overall road safety) – members noted the proposals but there was a need for proper enforcement of such measures”. Why include that if nothing is ever done about Long Lane?

Residents of Aughton might conclude the saga of Long Lane/Road Safety/SPIDs is simply a cock and bull story of obfuscation by the APC, as it protects its considerable cash piles from being used for the benefit of those who pay it, Aughton’s parishioners.

Older Posts »

Categories