|
|
 richard.garvie |
| February 19, 2011, 10:21pm |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
If all elligible peole take up the option - and use their bus passes - then WBC would overspend on this element of the budget - but budgetting is about anticipating costs, not making huge contigencies and not using them. It seems more reasonable to budget for a similar take up to last year than for a massive increase - though I suspect there will be a slighly higher take up (the number of over 60s is going up).
Will EMA make any difference to the elligibility for a free bus pass? I doubt it.
The Parkway parking is far more likely to lead to overspend - but I do accept that it is not as emotive and old peoples' day centres - how on earth did they get involved in a reply to my post?
Because many people suggest that closing day centres is about efficiency. I support efficiency in principle, but axing five day centres without a proper consultation and excluding some of the users from using that service is wrong. |
|
|
|
|
|
| Greenham Common |
| February 19, 2011, 10:54pm |
|
Posts: 1,974
Gender:  Male
Posts Per Day: 1.79
Location: Equine way
|
I wonder if a part of the reason is that it 'only' directly affects ~30/40 people? |
|
|
|
|
|
| richard.garvie |
| February 20, 2011, 11:39am |
|
Posts: 1,074
Posts Per Day: 1.72
|
I wonder if a part of the reason is that it 'only' directly affects ~30/40 people?
Even if it was only 40 withvery specialist needs, would it be acceptable? I don't think so, but there may be ways with a little support from the council that can result in nobody being excluded. WBC just don't appear to be interested at all. It's their way, or the highway. |
|
|
|
|
|
| MoonPhoenix |
| February 20, 2011, 5:56pm |
|
Posts: 213
Gender:  Female
Posts Per Day: 0.19
Location: Travelling
|
I wonder if a part of the reason is that it 'only' directly affects ~30/40 people?
As one of the '~30/40 people'. I have to express that this is yet another kick in the teeth from a council that has repeatedly demonstrated that it has no interest in such people provided their keeping quiet and out of sight. |
|
 Logged |
|
|
|
|
| Cognosco |
| February 20, 2011, 6:24pm |
|
Posts: 465
Posts Per Day: 0.82
|
As one of the '~30/40 people'. I have to express that this is yet another kick in the teeth from a council that has repeatedly demonstrated that it has no interest in such people provided their keeping quiet and out of sight.
Or to state the councillor? "you capital deplete-rs" keeping quiet?  |
|
|
|
|
|
|
