Monday, 17 December 2012

Thanks to Local Conservative MP for Supporting Marriage

I have just received the following from Coalition for Marriage.  Please note that, unlike the LibDem MP for Eastleigh, the Conservative Spokesperson for Eastleigh, Maria Hutchings, is, like the Conservative MP for Winchester, Steve Brine, a supporter of Marriage:








C4M logo

Facebook
Twitter
YouTube
Donate button












Send your MP a
Christmas card
to say thanks













Dear marriage supporter,
You may be aware that your Member of Parliament Mr Steve Brine MP has publicly opposed the Government’s radical plan to alter the definition of marriage.
Taking such a stance is not an easy thing to do and we know the media is not always friendly. It is very important to encourage an MP when they have done the right thing. Why not send a Christmas card thanking them for the courageous stand they have taken in support of marriage?
If you don’t have time to send a card, simply email them instead steve.brine.mp@parliament.uk. Or you may see them at a local event in the run up to Christmas, in which case you can speak to them personally.
  • Thank Mr Steve Brine MP for supporting marriage
  • Say that they have your full support as they continue to stand for marriage in 2013
  • Say that protecting marriage as the union of a man and a woman is good for children
  • Say that redefining marriage would weaken marriage and harm our communities
  • Say that if marriage is redefined then schools would have to teach the new definition to children

Your MP’s Contact Details:

Mr Steve Brine MP, Member for Winchester.
Write to your MP at:
9 Stockbridge Road, Winchester, Hampshire, SO22 6RN
Or email: steve.brine.mp@parliament.uk
Yours sincerely,
Colin Hart
Colin Hart
Campaign Director
Coalition for Marriage






Coalition for Marriage
8 Marshalsea Road
London
SE1 1HL
You received this email because you chose to be 'kept informed' when you signed the Petition for Marriage at c4m.org.uk or on paper. If you no longer wish to receive information from Coalition for Marriage, click 'Unsubscribe' below, or for other enquiries, contact us here.
Tel 0207 403 7879


© 2012




Coalition for Marriage Ltd is a Not-for-Profit Company registered in England. Company No. 07880604.





Please let Steve Brine have your support.

He is on my Christmas card list.

Wednesday, 12 December 2012





Local Conservatives Save Greenfield Sites

Picture: Maria Hutchings, Conservative Party Spokesperson for Eastleigh, with Graham Hunter, a local campaigner, at Woodhouse Lane, which was earmarked for development by Eastleigh Borough Council.

Maria Hutchings, Conservative Parliamentary Spokesperson for Eastleigh, and the local Conservative team recognise the need for more affordable and sustainable housing to serve the Eastleigh constituency. However, for several years Eastleigh Conservatives have also been fighting to ensure that as much new housing as possible is built on brownfield sites, rather than in locations which would destroy our greenfield areas, villages, allotments, leisure spaces and strategic gaps.

Given this strong record of local campaigning, Maria and her team are delighted to announce that they have been advised by Conservative-led Hampshire County Council, that Lib Dem-controlled Eastleigh Borough Council is likely to be revising its Local Plan for 2011 – 2029. Eastleigh Borough Council officers were advised of the full extent of Hampshire County Council landholdings that would be made available for development during the Local Plan period. The Conservative leader of Hampshire County Council has decided that County owned land, west of Woodhouse Lane (currently being farmed) and identified for development in Eastleigh Borough Council’s Local Plan, will not be included in the land to be made available for one-thousand new houses. Furthermore, development on the County Council’s landholding located south of Chestnut Avenue, Eastleigh, would be limited to the building of just three-hundred housing units.

The County Council has also announced that it is willing to release land at Winchester Street, Botley, for up to two-hundred houses, along with room for allotments as well as open spaces. These plans are in line with what Botley residents say the area can sustain in terms of development, supported by the findings of an independent residents’ survey, the results of which were accepted by Botley Parish Council.

Maria and local Conservatives continue to campaign alongside BPAG (Botley Parish Action Group), HEBAG (Hedge End and Bursledon Action Group) and Save Stoneham Park campaigners to fight for a more sustainable local housing policy. Responding to these developments, Maria commented:


“Most of us would agree that we need some housing locally. I have four children and hope that they will settle here. However I believe that Lib. Dem.-controlled Eastleigh Borough Council's Local Plan is ill-thought out and denied residents a full and proper consultation. Evidence of this is provided not least by the voices of local people but also by responses from The Highways Agency and other public bodies to recent premature planning applications at Boorley Green and Pylands Lane. Indeed, The NHS alone projects that the proposed development at Boorley Green (where we would see an 800% increase in houses), would require an extra initial NHS expenditure of £1.3 million.

Now that Conservative-led Hampshire County Council has refused the sale of prime agricultural land at Woodhouse Lane, and allocated only a minimum release of land at Chestnut Avenue, I have been advised that Eastleigh Borough Council will have to go back to the drawing board.

What concerns me most is that Eastleigh Borough Council knew that this land would not be made available for housing in January 2012, so why has the Council put local residents through such concern and desperation?

Not only have we saved these greenfield sites but we have also preserved our strategic gaps. Now I ask Eastleigh Borough Council not to cave in to premature applications for house building from developers and also to make full use of every brownfield site in the constituency. Most importantly, the Council should revisit the figures and ask: are some ten-thousand new houses really necessary for the Eastleigh Constituency?”

The fight goes on to save Stoneham Park.





Chris Huhne in favour of Gay Marriage


As I suggested in my last post:

Huhne: 'in favour' of gay marriages

By Channel 4 News
Updated on 21 April 2010
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Huhne tells Krishnan Guru-Murthy via the power ofTwitter that he favoured gay marriages, and thought Nick Clegg was a "brilliant" and "regular guy".
Shadow Home Secretary Chris Huhne interviews on Twitter by Krishnan Guru-Murthy
In the third of our "Twinterviews" following two previous sessions with Douglas Alexander andGrant Shapps, it was the turn of Chris Huhne to be grilled by Krishnan Guru-Murthy, all in 140 characters or less.
The interview began with Krishnan(@krishgm) asking Huhne(@chrishuhne), if he would have done any better in the leaders' debates had he been leader of the Liberal Democrats and not Nick Clegg?
Replying swiftly and with aplomb Chris Huhne said he doubted it as Nick Clegg had been "brilliant".
The questions / answer session slowed slightly after that but whether that was down to more Twitter users engaging in the debate by using the #twinterview hash tag or technical Twitter gremlins at either end is not clear.
Still, the next few questions had a clear theme - how the Liberal Democrats perceived their future relationship with the Tory or Labour party?
Chris Huhne offered three answers - first that people should "Vote Lib Dem, Get Lib Dem" and that other two parties had a tendency to say appalling things in public but then "chummy up in the tearoom afterwards."
As to whether Gordon Brown should stay on as prime minister if he doesn't win the election? Chris Huhne turned to the people and said we'll just have to respect the people's judgement.
One of the most re-tweeted of Huhne's answers was to the question on whether the Liberal Democrats would allow gay couples to marry and end the discrimination of only allowing civil partnerships?
Shying away from replying on the behalf of the entire party, the potential home secretary said he was "personally in favour of civil marriages for everyone, and faith weddings depend on the faith".
That raised a few Yays! in the retweets.
The interview ended with a response to a question that appeared to have gone hitherto unanswered:
"Why does Nick Clegg present himself as an ordinary bloke from Sheffield, when he went to Westminster and Cambridge?"
The reply was short and to the point:
"Nick is an MP for Sheffield for heaven’s sake! And he is a regular guy whatever his background"
Read the full Twinterview below:
krishgm:
@chrishuhne Hi Chris are you there and ready? #twinterview
ChrisHuhne: Yes I am. #twinterview
krishgm:
@ChrisHuhne Great - first question : do you think you’d have done as well as Nick Clegg in the debate had you been leader? #twinterview
ChrisHuhne:
@krishgm I doubt it. I think Nick did brilliantly. #twinterview
krishgm:
@ChrisHuhne He can’t possibly win this week and live up to expectations can he? #twinterview
ChrisHuhne:
I think he will do even better, because Nick is really good on international matters.
krishgm:
@ChrisHuhne Lots of people want to know :if you want to keep Labour out shouldn’t you vote Tory? #twinterview
ChrisHuhne:
In 40 per cent of the country, Lib Dems are in first or second place so that’s just the old Tory-Labour trick. Vote Lib Dem get Lib Dems!
ChrisHuhne:
@krishgm It would be an appalling indictment of our election system, and set up a revolution for change!#twinterview
ChrisHuhne:
@krishgm Tories and Labour always say appalling things, and then chummy up in the tearoom afterwards. Old politics.#twinterview
krishgm:
@ChrisHuhne so just to be clear - you rule out GB staying PM if he doesn’t get the most votes #twinterview
ChrisHuhne: @krishgm We’ll know who has the mandate after the election. We have to respect the people’s judgement.#twinterview
krishgm: @chrishuhne one from Toby Young now : will you ban faith schools selecting by faith? manifesto is vague on this #twinterview
ChrisHuhne: @krishgm new ones should not ban, old ones have to show they are inclusive by having some from other faiths and none.#twinterview
krishgm: @ChrisHuhne they already do that mostly - what percentage would have to be from other faiths or none? #twinterview
ChrisHuhne:
@krishgm bit daft to say that given system is a fruit machine. This is an election, and the result will count.
krishgm:
@ChrisHuhne why does Nick Clegg present himself as an ordinary bloke from sheffield, when he went to westminster and cambridge #twinterview
krishgm: @ChrisHuhne Would you allow gay couples to get married and end the discrimination of only allowing civil partnerships? #twinterview
ChrisHuhne:
@krishgm Personally, I am in favour of civil marriages for everyone, and faith weddings depend on the faith.#twinterview
krishgm: @ChrisHuhne many thanks - if u could just answer the q about clegg and sheffield then we are all done #twinterview
ChrisHuhne: @krishgm Nick is an MP for Sheffield for heaven’s sake! And he is a regular guy whatever his background.#twinterview
krishgm: @ChrisHuhne And on that note - Chris Huhne, many thanks! our time is up. speak again soon no doubt #twinterview
krishgm: thanks for all your questions - got thru as many as i could. will try to keep the conversations going over time #twinterview

So we know exactly where we stand.  Here in Eastleigh the Conservatives are totally opposed to same sex marriage and will do everything possible to make sure that they don't happen.

No to Same Sex Marriage!

As a lifelong Conservative, I should like to make it absolutely clear that I am totally opposed to same sex marriage and am extremely angry with David Cameron for going back on his word to protect marriage in churches.  He announced on Friday that he is now pushing for same-sex marriage in churches. The news of this u-turn has been reverberating around Britain ever since.


Like the majority of Christians, this is what I believe:
We solemnly proclaim that marriage between a man and a woman is ordained of God and that the family is central to the Creator’s plan for the eternal destiny of His children.
ALL HUMAN BEINGS—male and female—are created in the image of God. Each is a beloved spirit son or daughter of heavenly parents, and, as such, each has a divine nature and destiny. Gender is an essential characteristic of individual premortal, mortal, and eternal identity and purpose.

The Government had always promised that same-sex weddings would not be allowed in churches and other religious premises. This was said all over its consultation document. As you may know, the Member of Parliament for Winchester Mr Steve Brine MP has specifically relied on this promise to try to reassure voters in his constituency.


Now the Prime Minister has broken this vital promise.
Many people are shocked that even before the consultation results are released, the Prime Minister has so dramatically shifted the goal posts. If marriage is redefined, religious believers will be exposed to litigation and the European courts – just for marrying people as they have done for centuries.
Of course many people who believe in traditional marriage don’t go to church. But everyone is asking: who can trust David Cameron on his gay marriage plans?  And if they can't trust him on this, what else can they trust him on?
And everyone can now see that redefining marriage will be a massive cultural change.
Please email Mr Steve Brine MP (steve.brine.mp@parliament.uk) urgently and tell him that the Government must drop its deeply unpopular plans to redefine marriage.

I reproduce here the latest communication from Coalition for Marriage.


The Government is in growing trouble over its plans to redefine marriage.
Today MPs and the media exposed the sham consultation process for everyone to see. The Government claimed this was the ‘biggest listening exercise’ ever carried out – but ignored 500,000 signatories of the C4M national petition!
The House of Commons has heard that the Government plans to push on with its highly controversial plans, relying on a slight majority of consultation responses (if the C4M petition is completely excluded).
But the Government’s online consultation response form, upon which it depends, was wide open to abuse – it was anonymous and could be completed by anyone in the world, as many times as they liked!
We raised these concerns at the time with senior officials, but our warnings were ignored. It looks like the Government is ‘cooking the books’.
Other aspects of the plans are coming under fire. As you know, David Cameron revealed on Friday that he wants to introduce same-sex marriages in churches. This would be a huge social change and has provoked amazement and opposition across the PM’s Conservative Party.
Equalities Minister, Maria Miller, was under such pressure she had to bring forward the announcement about the consultation responses. Mrs Miller addressed the Commons at lunchtime today. She repeatedly promised a ‘quadruple lock’ to protect churches and other religious premises. But this ignores the millions of people whose civil liberties at work will be under threat if marriage is redefined. And most people realise that in time the European Court of Human Rights will back gay marriage, whatever Government Ministers may say today.
Please do email your MP about David Cameron’s big policy change to introduce same-sex marriage in churches.

What’s ahead?

According to media reports, the Government will introduce its Bill to redefine marriage in January.
We know that MPs who were previously undecided are moving our way. The C4M national petition continues to grow every day – it’s now over 620,000! The more people sign the petition, the bigger the network of marriage campaigners will become. C4M is focused on building that momentum, and ensuring the arguments against redefining marriage are heard far and wide.
Thank you to all those who have been financially supporting us so far. It is making a real difference. Together with you we are winning the argument.
Be assured that the Government faces an almighty battle ahead in Parliament.
Yours sincerely,
Colin Hart
Colin Hart
Campaign Director
Coalition for Marriage



I am a lifelong Conservative and join with many other members of the Party in condemning the Prime Minister for this u-turn and I ask for your support in helping us to prevent this bill from being presented to parliament.
The Government has no mandate for redefining marriage because it was not a manifesto pledgeand  the latest news on church weddings shows that the plans will change the meaning of marriage for everyone.No-one will believe David Cameron’s promises on his gay marriage plans because, as mentioned above, the ECHR will inevitably legislate in favour of homosexuals.The Government should be concentrating on reviving the economy, not meddling with marriage.Civil partnerships already give same-sex couples full legal equality, so there’s no need to redefine marriage.The latest polls show 62 per cent of the public want to keep marriage as it is.People shouldn't be treated as outcasts just because they believe in traditional marriage,
which would have a big impact on what children learn about marriage in schools.

This will decimate the party, paeticularly as UKIP are against same sex marriage!

In order to protect marriage please would you write to your MP and make the points above and also sign the petition on http://c4m.org.uk/ if you haven't already done so.
chris@chrishuhne.org.uk   As a LibDem he is probably very much in favour of same sex marriage but he needs to know his constituents' feelings.
steve.brine.mp@parliament.uk   Steve Brine is opposed to same sex marriage, particularly in churches, and is a good Conservative MP, so he would appreciate your support.

Proper Conservative Government Can and Will Work

I should like to make it clear that I am a traditional Tory and have no time for so-called modernisation.  The government inherited a terrible economic situation from the awful Labour government, which had done so much to wreck the country, and it should be concentrating on the economy, not wasting its time on the irrelevance of same sex marriage, for just 5% of the population, who already have civil partnerships.

David Cameron has the right stance on Europe and performed robustly in Prime Minister's Questions today, BUT HE MUST BE DEFEATED OVER THESE PROPOSALS.  I am speaking for virtually everyone I meet on the doorstep and for virtually all the party members I know.

As I say to waverers, don't judge the Conservative party by the Coalition.  Judge it by us, the grass-roots workers.  The LibDems want integration with Europe, the countryside scarred with windfarms - and of course the inevitable power cuts as the supply is inconsistent - and the legalisation of cannabis and prostitution.  We want small government and the reduction of the national debt without scaring wealth creators away from our country.

Today's publication of immigration figures shows just how disastrous Labour's immigration policy was and we are already reeling from their disastrous economic policies, so we can't afford  another Labour government, so let's return to a proper Conservative party.


Friday, 12 October 2012

Don't miss the truth about the County Council

Please scroll down to the blog after the next one to learn the truth about what is really happening in Hampshire.  DON'T BELIEVE what the LibDems are putting out in their pseudo newspaper.


Banner ads across blog control panel pages

I'm seriously thinking of relocating this blog wiht Wordpress because of the annoying banner ads I get across half the screen on the stats/control panel pages.  I copied the ad and this is how it came out:



I don't know whether it's permitted by Google or whether my computer's picked up a bug, but they're ordinary advertisements and are really annoying and just found on those pages.

The Truth About the County Council


With a County Council election looming and their popularity plummeting Lib Dems have launched their usual negative campaign to scare people into voting for them and to paint an ugly  picture of the Conservative run County Council that they would like electors to believe.

They want people to think that, because the Council has to cope with funding cuts in a time of rising inflation, it is going to cut the services needed by local people - but nothing could be further from the truth.

Their claim that we are cutting back on Children's Centres is completely untrue. All 81 centres are open and are now delivering the additional service of speech and language therapy for children with special needs.

 With a County Council election looming and their popularity plummeting Lib Dems have launched their usual negative campaign to scare people into voting for them and to paint an ugly  picture of the Conservative run County Council that they would like electors to believe.

They want people to think that, because the Council has to cope with funding cuts in a time of rising inflation, it is going to cut the services needed by local people - but nothing could be further from the truth.

Their claim that we are cutting back on Children's Centres is completely untrue. All 81 centres are open and are now delivering the additional service of speech and language therapy for children with special needs.

So is their claim that there will not be enough school places for Hampshire’s children. No child in Hampshire will be without a place in any one of Hampshire’s excellent schools that are acclaimed for achieving above average results. Not only that, but we are also providing funding for more apprenticeships to improve the life chances of our unemployed young people.

Because of the efficiencies we have made in reducing our running costs, we have been able to increase service budgets to care for vulnerable adults and children by an extra £14 million this year to cope with the rising numbers needing our care. Also we are setting aside £45 million to fund the building of over 500 extra care units to cater for our ageing population.

We are spending more money on bus services than the districts and Boroughs had to spend and having repaired the 30,000 potholes caused by severe weather conditions we are now rolling out a multi- million programme over 5 years to make them resistant to further such damage.

Unlike other Counties, all our Museums and Libraries are not only open but improving the range of services they provide.

Their claim that we are reducing the number of Police Officers is also wrong. Not only do we have no control of the police or its staffing but we also understand that the Police have no plans to cut the number of officers.

Lib Dems deplore our new initiative to use unspent funding from Councillors’ own budgets to broadcast, on our website, our Cabinet and Council debates that allows the Public to see how their taxes are being used.

Perhaps Lib Dems fear it will show to the public their ineptitude in debate and reveal how wrong is their description of the County Council they portray in the leaflets they push through people’s letter-boxes.


Friday, 5 October 2012

Hampshire County Council Web Streaming

Yet again the Liberal Democrats have been very economical with the truth.


This time it concerns live streaming of Hampshire County Council meetings.  They accuse the Council of  wasting £220,000 on streaming council meetings, but the facts are very different, as explained by Conservative County Councillor Colin Davidovitz:


"Liberal Democrats have consistently fought against the County Council’s initiative in broadcasting its Cabinet and Full Council decision making processes that allow local residents to actually see and hear what, how and why decisions are being made on their behalf.

"Conservatives are not afraid of people watching them discussing and debating the policies they are making to cope with demanding situations, support and improve services and to protect the wellbeing of the people they have been elected to serve.

"In fact, this was only made possible because Conservative Councillors voted to allow the unspent sums in their personal budgets to be diverted to fund this initiative that allows local taxpayers to witness the decision making process that has a direct effect on their lives, with out any call on funds from the Council Tax payer.

"Up to now if they wanted to see what went on at these meetings, residents had to travel miles to do so and probably  take time off work. Now if they are not able to see the live broadcast of a meeting they want to see or have read about in a newspaper or pamphlet, they have the opportunity to replay it from the internet at any time to suit  themselves in their own homes.

"One can only assume that Liberal Democrats are scared of what residents’ reactions might be when they are actually able to see their own pathetic performances and the weakness of their contributions in the Council’s debating chambers. They obviously would prefer that residents were kept in the dark, without access to evidence that would enable them to question the allegations and misrepresentations about the County Council that always dominates the propaganda leaflets Lib Dems continually thrust through residents’ letter boxes."

Residents can watch council proceedings at any time

The Liberal Democrats have manipulated the figures to make it look as if only 57 people, the ones who watched  live on their computers, have seen the July Council Meeting, but as Cllr Davidovitz has explained, we can watch the meetings at any time.  Figures for the January meeting show that in fact over 800 people watched it.  That is a far higher figure than would ever have gone to see the meeting at the council offices.

To watch Hampshire County Council Webcasts visit www.hants.gov.uk/watch

Protect Our Countryside - Hypocrisy

 Threatened land:

Liberal Democrat Mayor Rupert Kyrle is demanding that the council should protect our countryside. And this after presiding over a Council meeting on 1st August when it was agreed to build 9,400 houses on green spaces including strategic gap.  What hypocrisy!

I

20 is Plenty??



Eastleigh’s Liberal Democrat council has passed a motion to impose a permanent 20 mph speed limit “in priority roads around our schools,” and wonders why it hasn’t been rubber-stamped by Conservative-run Hampshire County Council.

The reason is that there are very stiff criteria for imposing 20 mph zones.  They need to be self-enforcing, thus requiring minimal police attention, so traffic calming measures have to be applied.  And these will normally consist of speed humps and pinch points, as speed limit repeater signs aren’t used within a zone.
For this reason, they aren’t usually suitable for main roads with high traffic volumes or strategic routes.  Vehicles travelling at 20 mph can significantly increase vehicle emissions and add to traffic congestion. 

The HCC website says that under current legislation any speed limit has to apply at all times, so it’s “usually unsuitable beyond the school arrival or departure times, when traffic is not delayed by the school activities, therefore not forced to slow down.”   Due to congestion around most school gates, however, it is very unusual for traffic to be able to do much more than 20mph, so any measures to reduce the speed limit would be completely redundant.

But the Conservatives have a better way.  In respect of schools situated on main roads, a 20 mph speed limit could be imposed when school patrol warning lights are flashing, thus avoiding the need for costly and disruptive traffic calming measures. 

However, neither council can impose the limit demanded by the Borough councillors, so it would require national legislation and it would only apply to schools where a demonstrable need could be shown.

20 mph zones with the requisite traffic calming would cost between £7,000 and £12,500 each, whereas flashing amber warning lights and signs would cost a mere £2,700.  A school crossing patrol zone would cost about an additional £1,800 per annum for salary and £260 for uniform and sign.

But there is yet another cheaper and more effective solution.  Hampshire County Council already has three portable flashing speed limit signs, which are placed for a limited time outside places like schools.  These are much more effective than permanent signs, which tend to be ignored, as they are unexpected, and cost £3,000. 

So our LibDem councillors once again haven't thought the policy through but fortunately we have a Conservative County Council.

Thursday, 4 October 2012

Lib Dems at it again


Conservative County Councillor Colin Davidovitz has put out the following announcement following the shameful accusations in the LibDem Voice newspaper:

Lib Dems are at it again. First they tried to scare the life out of young Mums by telling them that their valued Children Centres were closing down, when every one of the 81 centres across the County is open for business and delivering even more services for young parents and their children.

Now with the County Council elections looming, they are trying to scare people  again into worrying about there not being enough  places for their children in the Borough’s Schools  - when the facts are that Hampshire’s Conservatives are well ahead of the game and have  been planning to meet the increased demand for school places in Eastleigh that will be caused if the additional 9,700  extra houses Eastleigh Lib Dems plan to build over the next few years go ahead and attract more people and traffic from afar into our overcrowded Borough.

Even now, under their direction, County Council officers are increasing the capacity of the schools in the Borough to ensure that no child in Eastleigh will ever be without a place in our award winning schools which are acknowledged to be amongst the finest in the Country.

Perhaps when the  County Council elections are over next year and the truth is there for all to see, we will be treated to the  Eastleigh Lib Dem Leader  singing his apology on the Telly!

Don't Believe Everything the LibDems tell you!

In response to Liberal Democrat accusations, it is necessary to put the record straight.

Schools

Councillor Roy Perry says "Every child in Hampshire was offered a school place at the beginning of this term - well over 95% in a school of one of their 3 choices and almost 90% in their first preference.

 "There is no crisis, no shambles but there is a marked increase in the birth rate, and people moving into the area which is certainly increasing the pressure on school places.  Measures are in hand to increase school building over the next fifteen years so that there will continue to be no shortfall."

Police


Hampshire Police Authority state that there will be no reduction in front-line police officers.  Savings will be made by cutting bureaucracy.

Libraries


Regarding libraries, out of the 54 in the county, there will be no change in 17 of them and only an average reduction of 2.5 hours in the rest.  Two libraries will be run by the community because of a drastic decline in their usage over the last 5 years, North Baddesley by 33% and Stanmore by 50%.  The latter is used by only 3% of the population.

Buses


Bus services have been hit due to a 33% cut in the subsidy from central government, but council chiefs say they have made journeys to work, the shops and hospitals a priority. Council bosses have promised that no village or housing estate with a current bus service will be left without a public transport link.”
Despite LibDem claims to the contrary bus passes for the over sixties will NOT be affected.

Child Centres

4Children vision:
“for every child, in every community, to have the opportunities to realise their  potential – to learn, develop and be with friends – and for every parent to access the support they need to build a better future for their family”
This is what Hampshire County Council says:
We want to make sure that the funding cuts have as little effect as possible on the work children’s centres do with families, particularly those who need the services the most. The changes we are thinking of making would keep centres open and available for families everywhere to use.
To achieve this, we are proposing an approach that would:
·               Keep children’s centres open and accessible across the whole of Hampshire.
·               Take half of the savings out of the County Council’s central costs of running the children’s centre service.
·               As far as possible, protect staff who deliver children’s centre services directly to families - so that people who use the centres are affected as little as possible.
·               Keep enough managers across the centres to understand the needs of local families and to organise and supervise activities.
·               Reduce the costs of running the centres, for example allocating less money for travel and equipment. 

This is what Councillor Roy Perry said:

Commenting on the range of bids Councillor Roy Perry, Hampshire County Council's Deputy Leader and Executive Lead Member for Children's Services, said:
"I am delighted at the levels of response to the tendering process. We have had 17 bids involving at least 32 organisations with all clusters attracting more than one bidder.
"We have had significant interest from a range of local and national voluntary organisations and schools following the invitation to tender for the management contracts of up to 15 clusters of children centres. The centres will continue to deliver services through over 81 local centres and a variety of community-based venues."
In May the County Council approved the transfer of all its Children's Centres to third party management in a bid to secure the long-term future of Children's Centre services across the county and achieve savings in the wake of cuts in Government funding.

So don't believe the scaremongers!  The children's centres are safe.

A Better Town Centre??

That remains to be seen.  Fortunately, Sainsbury's have withdrawn their plans for extending their store so at least the Rec and market are safe. 
But are the LibDems still intending to go ahead with their disastrous plans to move the civic offices into the town centre?  To this, with virtually no parking space and thus inaccessible not only to staff but also to those who need to visit the council offices
 From here
at a cost of £12 million.  They say they'll recover £4 million by the redevelopment of the existing site.
Now that Sainsbury's have decided not to go ahead with their development, there is going to be a serious shortfall in parking for the proposed new council offices.