smellmycheese posted:

MUST ACT LIKE HUMAN

https://x.com/adambienkov/status/1765045757696975234?s=46

kingturnip posted:

Well, it's at least 95% of the reason that governments agree to give up control over these things in the first place.

killerwhat posted:

Knife chat: thanks for the cleaver suggestions! I got the one with the little hole in the blade. Cleavers should have those imo.



It already arrived and made short work of this. Unfortunately I ate so much delicious roasted squash that I still feel sick hours later.

killerwhat posted:

Knife chat: thanks for the cleaver suggestions! I got the one with the little hole in the blade. Cleavers should have those imo.



It already arrived and made short work of this. Unfortunately I ate so much delicious roasted squash that I still feel sick hours later.

NotJustANumber99 posted:

hows the 75k salary waitrose shopper?

Just Another Lurker posted:

edit: Just how thick is that blade?

crispix posted:

if that useless oval office tried to stack a dishwasher you'd hear a crash and he'd come crawling using just his arms out of the room, breathlessly, with a pyrex dish lodged up his hole

Bobstar posted:

That reminded me of a John Harris headline from the other day

"For years, the Tories said austerity was over. But look around: it’s getting worse, and there’s more to come"

Now obviously austerity was never over, but when did the Tories claim it was? I feel like I would have remembered that.

Rarity posted:

Like 5 different times

OwlFancier posted:

My "flood defence and social care cuts are responsible and legal" t shirt is raising a lot of questions already answered by the shirt.

Cowards rely on the speakers, the courageous belt it out at maximum volume unaccompanied.

My car doesn't have anything except an aux jack and I don't use my phone while driving so if I want to hear something I don't have playing already I just turn the music off and scream it myself.

quote:

The politics of setting the Budget
...

Legal requirements
The provisions of the Local Government Finance Act 1992 (LGFA 1992) set out what the council has to base its budget calculations upon, and require the council to set a balance budget with regard to the advice of its Chief Finance Officer (section 151). The setting of the budget is a function reserved to full Council, who will consider the draft budget which has been prepared by the Executive (in a Leader and Cabinet or Elected Mayor model). Once the budget has been agreed by full Council the Executive cannot make any decisions which conflict with it, although virements and year-in-year changes can be made in accordance with the council's financial regulations.

Section 30(6) LGFA 1992 provides that the council has got to set its budget before 11 March in the financial year preceding the one in respect of which the budget is set, although failure to set a budget within the deadline does not in itself invalidate that budget. Such delay, however, may have significant financial administrative and legal implications, including potentially an individual liability for those members who contributed to the failure to set the budget. If a budget is not set, s.66 LGFA 1992 provides that the failure or delay to or in setting the council tax can only be challenged by an application for judicial review, with either the Secretary of State or any other person with sufficient interest (which potentially could include a council taxpayer) able to apply.

Duty to provide services
However, budget set or not, the council has a legal duty to provide a range of statutory services and these duties are not absolved if the budget is set late. Most councils must also consider the impact on precepting authorities such as the Fire Service and the Police, to whom the council will have to pay the monies due whether or not it has collected them through council tax. Furthermore, a delay in setting the budget may well affect the council's ability to enter into any new agreements unless the budget is agreed as otherwise these would be potentially unlawful as unfunded commitments. Councils also have increasingly important financial and corporate governance reputations to keep strong and the failure to set a council tax, or even informal references to a potential failure to set a council tax, would be likely to have a significant adverse impact on the council's reputation locally and nationally in terms of investor confidence.

If members decide that they will not set the council tax, there are likely to be some liability issues. Members have to abide by their council's Code of Conduct and, as members have an active duty to ensure that the council sets a lawful budget, voting against those proposals repeatedly knowing that the result will be no lawful budget is almost certainly incompatible with their obligations under the Code as it is bound to bring the council into disrepute. Furthermore, although surcharge has long since been abolished, if a councillor's wilful misconduct in refusing to set the budget is found to have caused a financial loss to the council they may, be liable to make good such loss. To get such a finding, it would have to be proved that the members were acting deliberately or recklessly and in a way which involved persistent failure to facilitate the setting of a lawful budget.

... (lots more info)

domhal posted:

Its cool how insulated central government are from these issues at a glance. Just irresponsible councils who don't know how to balance their budgets, overspend on diversity initiatives and invested poorly. They should have been more sensible. Nothing to do the Westminster or the chancellor.

LOL at living in a country where it is even possible for local authorities to go bankrupt.

Jedit posted:

Croydon deserved it after burning £500m on dodgy property investments, Labour council or not.

OwlFancier posted:

I drove past a waitrose in jesmond a while back, meant to go in as it's the first time I've ever seen one.

Turns out there's like a 50 mile exclusion zone around middlesbrough where there aren't any lol. I like to imagine that they're held at bay by the presence of boyes.

smellmycheese posted:

His Divine Shadow posted:

But apparently there are ways to get lots more money and they're just giving money to the banks right now, around 23:30 britain talk starts.

Guavanaut posted:

non sequitur

Convex posted:

Paul.Power posted:

There's like eight Waitroses in the entirety of Wales, and the only one west of Cowbridge is on Anglesey.

domhal posted:

nonce equiner

Mega Comrade posted:

How did Cowbridge become so posh?

grobbo posted:

*sees a photo of two early-middle-aged men in uniform roughly resembling Rory Kinnear and Homelander*

Cor, what a pair of smoking babes. Phwoar. Whew. Hoo-wee. Hubba hubba hubba

Tesseraction posted:

Being fair Homelander's actor is very attractive, and extremely Kiwi.

Failed Imagineer posted:

Thank you for reading this edition of Handsome Men

smellmycheese posted:

domhal posted:

Whoever put through that investment can get in the bin, but why are councils investing? It's entirely deranged.

Gonzo McFee posted:

https://twitter.com/miqdaad/status/1765305064883736819?t=VcfUOxhwcNMMXpIWkkviVg&s=19

Working yourself into a shoot news

Mega Comrade posted:

How did Cowbridge become so posh? It was dirt poor when my mum grew up there.

Her whole family still live there, my cousins are going to get a windfall when they can finally sell the houses of my uncles and Aunts.