Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#1
Landmark High Court ruling on a Local Government`s plan to reduce it`s Social Care Budget was ruled unlawful and quashed.
The Councils plan was to restrict access to Social care by making it harder for people to meet eligibility critera.
The Judgement makes it unlawful for Councils to make the Cuts that would have an impact on a person`s quality of life.
Other High Court cases, involving the Coalition Cuts, pending are;
1.Tuition Fees.
2.Libraries.
3 Education.
The rulings so far and those pending threaten to disrupt the Governments attempts to slash Local Government spending.
Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#2
Yeah great news
All this means is that other things will get cut more, pensions wont rise with inflation and taxes might go up
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#3
if the justice system says it is unlawful for councils to make cuts that impact on quality of life then there will be a rash of cases.
the next question would be "if councils cannot make such cuts, can goverments do the same"?
the legal people will do very well out of this.
Jan Higgins
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 5 Jul 2010
- Posts: 13,931
#4
The money has to come from somewhere so cuts have to be made.
Sorry to those that use them but the libraries would be at the top of my list, education and tuition are far more important as is health and care.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I try to be neutral and polite but it is hard and getting even more difficult at times.
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Guest 655- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,247
#5
The law is a total ass, or perhaps it was a particular judge. Time for some primary legislation to make sure that judges wings get clipped.
Keith Sansum1
- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#6
its a strange one
although this will do a lot to cause misery to barryw's dave and these arguments go on and on and more to come.
its fair to say if councils can't cut services then where will the dosh come from
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#7
From reading what Reg has written above and knowing the 'law' is not made by judges. I conclude that it is, as usual, the politicians who are to blame.
If the cuts are sold as necessary BUT will not be made so as to impact upon 'quality of life'. The people so impacted have a case to make and they have made it.
Again, funny thing, 'folk'.
No sooner do we hear that cuts are necessary than we decide ourselves where the cuts should be made and more often than not that decision means that cuts should be made where ever they do not impact upon 'us'.
A frightfully neat trick in the first place, when central government leaves it up to local government to set just where and how the cuts demanded should be implemented. To this a nicety is added by an attempt to redefine disability. Obviously in this case what was proposed was a step too far.
Can there be any doubt that the 'primary legislation' spoken about will be to the effect..."We are all in this together...except those who do not vote Conservative."?
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#8
# 5. If you were one of the vulnerable what would be your posting?
When you are one of the vulnerable and the tiers of government are not preventing your life from being made intolerable the only place to go is the law.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#9
tom has it on this one, basically we all have our own ideas as to what is vital and what i not.
central government played the best trick of all on this one, cut funding then leave councils to decide what is cut.
councils take all the flak and dave wrings his hands saying that it was not his idea.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#10
no dave and whos to blame everyone knows.
its a typical trick of all govts.
im with barryw a little, more power to the people, less govt interference
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 698- Registered: 28 May 2010
- Posts: 8,664
#11
Actually Tom, the judges do make the law to some extent. Interpretation of statutes is a function of the courts and a decision of a judge on a point of law binds lower courts to interpret the law the same way in similar cases. It's called case law and is one of the main sources of English law.
I'm an optimist. But I'm an optimist who takes my raincoat - Harold Wilson
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#12
Thanks again Peter. I am sure you have helped us all along there, to some extent.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#13
but doesnt move us away from where we are at
if councils don't cut services
where will the dosh come from
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#14
"The judge said the Conservative-run council had not complied with its own internal guidance in drawing up the new policy, and a consultation document did not contain sufficient information for people "to give intelligent consideration and an intelligent response"."
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/nov/11/social-care-cuts-unlawful?INTCMP=SRCHIgnorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Keith Sansum1- Location: london
- Registered: 25 Aug 2010
- Posts: 23,948
#15
interesting but still doesnt help, if the council doesnt cut services
where instead will the dosh come from
ALL POSTS ARE MY OWN PERSONAL VIEWS
#16
While we continue to use emotive terms like "cuts" we will never either progress or agree. It is no secret that public services are inefficient and need to be more creative and wise with their budgets and targeting of resources. That does not imply that vital services will be cut, rather it implies that we need to take a long, hard look realistically at what we have to offer and the best way to meet needs. Some areas might have reduced funding, but that might - should - be the result of better governance and budgeting. Throwing money at services will not necessarily improve them, but re-evaluating how the resources are used might.
Guest 710- Registered: 28 Feb 2011
- Posts: 6,950
#17
So true Bern.
In searching their souls to discover what a Local Authority does they could consider that they Pay themselves too much.
They could then band their wage structure as they band Properties and levy reductions across the board:
-50%
-30%
-!0%
They could also ensure that nobody in receipt of public money in the form of wages does so in any other way but PAYE.
Ignorance is bliss, bliss is happiness, I am happy...to draw your attention to the possible connectivity in the foregoing.
Guest 716- Registered: 9 Jun 2011
- Posts: 4,010
#18
``Where is the dosh coming from``................Economies of Scale....................an East Kent Council.
Guest 672- Registered: 3 Jun 2008
- Posts: 2,119
#19
This thread along with a few others are all doom and gloom.
what you have to remember is. there are ALWAYS one or two dipsticks that are making millions out of it.
Greed some how nearly always goes unnoticed.
grass grows by the inches but dies by the feet.