Waste of taxpayers' money

www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/the-history-of-the-lord-mayor%E2%80%99s-show

ninny thank you for that what I really meant was - do you know how I can look at the original document this report is based on?

Interesting to see the Gay Parade pictures - the Police and a number of other organizations always get involved in Brighton too. Nice to see don't you think?, and the marches are always such fun

ninny no I don't.

If you are into Gay Pride I expect it would be nice to see, like it would be good to go to see anything that interests you.

ninny Thanks for that I will try to see if I can source the original documents myself and get back to you on that.

No I am not into Gay Pride as such but I do have gay friends, and the annual march here is extremely popular with a huge attendance both as participants and audience !!

www.insidetheenvironmentagency.co.uk

_________________________________________

Thanks for all the blue notes. I have just been skimming through their end of year accounts for 2012/3 and unfortunately none of what the Mail has reported is evidenced there. I did note that for the year ending 2011/2 the flood grant was 544.6 and for 2012/3 is was 524.5 so down year on year

With regard to the note from "insiders"

£395m staff costs -the largest cost in any company is always the cost of staff.
However whilst the insiders are correct in the capital costs they omitted to include other costs which will be the flood maintenance so the total £645m quite a lot omitted from their argument there.
With regard to Directors emoluments it would seem that they are muddling directors and managers so not sure what figures they are using.

Staff levels

permanent staff 11177
temp staff 576 (by their nature - temporary)
Contractors 539 (also temporary staff)

total 12252

The comment that this is more than 6 countries combined is so ridiculous as not to be worth a consideration
In the forward there is a paragraph relating to the dredging issue which states that the EA is aware of the "considerable concern raised by farmers and land managers about channel maintenance" it goes on to explain that £22m was allowed for this work during the year covered by the report and that this was in partnership with the NFU and DEFRA. So the EA NFU and DEFRA partnered the work that was carried out.
Vehicles - I haven't looked at this (beginning to lose the will to live) but of course there will be a high number of vehicles employed because of the nature of the Agency.

I won't go on any more as it is probably boring but there is sufficient doubt in the figures to question both the DM and insiders report

My OP asked if I was being unreasonable. Obviously the consensus is that yes I am.
So I have the answer to my OP and will leave you to it.
____________________________________________________________________________________

You weren't being unreasonable to expect that taxpayers' money should be used for the purpose we expect, margaret.

Blimey, no wonder people are discouraged from posting when there's such cross-examining and nit-picking going on!

ana

There is nothing personal - nit picking or otherwise in my comparison of the DM plus insiders figures with the year end accounts - just trying to get to the truth of the matter.

I have no opinion regarding to whether people are being unreasonable they are entitled to their argument on the subject as am I.

I normally abstain from politics- but
It would be nice if taxes and expenditure were spent on what they appear to be for.
NI just goes into the general budget as does VAT road tax and all the rest!
Perhaps there should be just one income tax that then gets divided into all the outgoings.
I'm being naive I know! But!

Yes then we could have a referendum for each type of expenditure! Wonder what that would turn out like?

It would put a lot of civil servants out of jobs!

Having been out since mid day I have just logged on to find my comment has been deleted. I apologise unreservedly for any offence I caused

Seriously. If all taxes, except vat on goods, were amalgamated into income tax,
What would the effect be?

It would probably put a lot of new civil servants in jobs, Galen!

Everyone would complain about having to pay it, Galen.
The government can promise to put income tax down whilst knowing it is going to raise more money from NI. Can you imagine the furore if people knew how much tax they really paid? I wonder why they do not call all taxes National Insurance.

The Danish section of Scandimania showed people being happy to pay high taxes because they knew they would benefit from it in the long run.
I had to ask my son's partner if she was sure her parents were Danish, as they are always complaining.

Hello margaretm74 answering your OP, no you are not being unreasonable.

If I try hard, I can almost understand why the OP believes she isn't being unreasonable in expecting all EA money to be spent on flood defences etc. But then I reflect on the oppression and prejudice experienced by gay friends before legal and societal changes made it a bit easier to be out and gay. I can't find it in my heart, or even in my sensible bits, to get wound up about the EA using some money to educate/inform and challenge people about bigotry.

How about local income tax instead of council tax based on the value of your property? It would be a lot fairer way of getting revenue.

What a lot of nit-picking. Of course government departments should spend their money on what they are set up for. What has gay rights got to do with it?

If anyone wants to celebrate their minority, single parents, ethnic groups, political parties, religious groups, people who play bowls, those who drink red wine, those who like to jump off mountains, pensioners etc. surely they should pay for their own celebrations. Unless it is a group which is really discriminated against at this time I don't think the rest of us should pay for it.

What's the difference, Nellie, between local income tax and council tax? Surely it's just semantics. The government could still do what they do now. The council collects the tax, sends it to the government, and the government gives some back to the council, but not enough.
They can change the rules without changing the name.

Oh dear, should have made the OP clearer.

Money designated for the protection and preservation of the environment should be used for just that. Workplace bullying due to race, creed, sexual orientation should be stamped on.

Money to rallies whether promoting gay rights, christian rights, promoting islamic rights, English rights, immigrants' rights ( I could go endlessly, please do not pick me up because i have missed your pet project) are not the domain of the EA using taxpayers' money. Or money spent on junkets for staff.

I have no objection to taxpayers' money being spent on anyone's rights by the appropriate department.
Even badgers.

Well said M

Yes! Well said.