Contributor Leaderboard

A mate of mine went to the job centre (Bedlington) for a Back To Work Interview. During the interview the adviser said 'Don't take this wrong way, but, we have a pot of jobs that are not advertised on our website or in the papers that are for dis-advantaged people'. Mate says 'so what do you mean by that?' Adviser 'Well there are only four streets in Bedlington that are not classed as dis-advantaged, so if you give me your postcode I'll see if you can apply' Needless to say he could apply! Question 1 : Where are these four streets? Question 2 : Why are these people keeping jobs back? Question 3 : Is it now official that the government class Bedlington as dis-advantaged? My personal opinion is that I am absolutely GOBSMACKED, in all of Bedlington ONLY FOUR streets are NOT classed as dis-advantaged well, I bet that's a kick in the teeth for the private housing estates in Bedlington such as Hazelmere. Are we a slum town? Have we slipped so far that there is no redemption in the eyes of the government, is the only way forward to have street riots, burn the place to a cinder (as in Meadow-well) for the government to invest in our future? I sincerely hope not! Come on, we are not that bad! Are we?

SNRG update. As I mentioned in a previous post we sent out numerous letters to try & attract funding for a test broadcast. Started well with Pegswood & Newbiggin councils giving/pledging support. Rejections from Blyth & Seaton Valley councils on the grounds of the radio project was not based in, or primarily for, their respective areas. Other council funding applications, including Bedlington TCs, pending. As the station will be based in Bedlington I hope this might help when we are considered by them. 41 letters sent to County Councillors: 3 replies. Our NCC Community Chest Scheme application, for £10k has been rejected this time but will be reconsidered in the next round. Apologies for not being able to give a very positive report back.

Lot to be said about that Mr Monsta mainly crap mind I have on two occassions been on an aeroplane as it desended and landed in a sandstorm they wer,nt severe one,s mind, however it was sand and I would have thought as sand makes glass it would be no different to the stuff thats apparently up in our atmosphere

WHOLEHEARTEDLY agree far to tame and so not genuine... I was frankly dissapointed but I think Slick Nick came over better than Cameron and that scottish guy with a breathing problem

Well we have had the first of the political 'events' with more sound bites and spin applied than is really necessary. We do have the manifestos now to look though so let's look at the economics behind them and leave the hype to the leaders! There is the very real problem of UK fiscal debt which Vince Cable has described as the elephant in the room. With each of the main parties having about a £30B hole in their manifesto budgeting it would seem none are willing to be honest and willing to explain their spending pledges. At best they seem to be willing to discuss about £10b worth of savings but that isn't telling the whole tale by any means and will inevitably lead to a change in policy AFTER the election WHOEVER gets in. If we extrapolate the figures further we can clearly see the need for about £37B of real cuts to achieve even the present government's deficit targets by 2013/14. It would therefore seem that we are not being told the whole truth about public finances and will lead to a further loss of confidence, an already fragile confidence, in our elected leaders. Even the much lauded Vince Cable is complicit as he wrote the Lib Dem figures! One further small comment I would have is why are all the main parties committed to raising the foreign aid budget by £4B a year until 2013, surly it is now a case of charity begins at home? If we look over the last 13 years of a Labour Government, and remember this is just a fiscal overview, we can see they have raised the tax take by around £31B per annum but also raised public spending by a greater amount, even before the recent crisis, which now leaves us with a figure of 48% of GDP being devoted to public spending. Had this been applied judiciously we might have had other options now other than to 'pension off' a large part of that workforce, which by the very act adds to the economic burden the country must carry. In other words they have put money into public sector backroom jobs and salary increases instead of modernisations and front line services which now produces an economic imbalance. Adding to this tale of woe is the fact that the Institute of Fiscal studies has estimated that in its view there has been falls in efficiency of £42.5 billion over the period of Labour's tenure. Labours record of actually keeping its manifesto pledges is somewhat lacking in credibility shall we say and it's recent promise not to raise the higher rate of income tax then actually doing so would seem par for the course! The Conservatives have given rather patchy information about how they will 'eliminate the bulk of the deficit over the term of the next parliament'. They have said they will apply an 80%/20% formula with 80% being cuts and 20% increased taxes to reduce the structural deficit and give the same result as Labour about 1 year earlier. Anyone old enough to have gone through the last Conservative government might be interested to know that Ken used a 50%/50% formula. As with other promises by the other parties we have to ask how can taxes be cut when revenue into the treasury is needed, i.e., the promised scrapped of the NI rise. The Lib Dems would seem to have said they will be the highest raising tax party as a way of demonstrating their transparency. All well and good but looking closer we see the same flaws and holes in their proposals as the other two parties have! Some of their proposals look at first glance to be worthy of consideration as with the £10 grand starter rate for income tax. However looking to see how that will be paid for and applied would seem to be driving us into the realms of wishful thinking with phrases like, less tax avoidance and evasion? In conclusion it would seem we are being cajoled into thinking we are in a better fiscal position than we really are and cuts in services and tax rises will be modest. I hope no one is thinking that and we all realise very tough times lie ahead whichever party gets in. What is happening now is actually a disservice to our democracy not empowering it!

Looked far too contrived with all three offering platitudes which doubtless they will break as soon as the election is over. And I don't think Alistair had to be so OTT! Nick did pull something off, I think he looked and sounded smarmier than even Dave achieved! If these guys are the pinnacle of the political elite in our country, God help us, I wouldn't let any of them run a raffle. When any of them says, 'The British People' you know what you are about to hear is a condescending lie! I lost count of the number of times 'brave' was used when describing our troops, which just cheapened the content after the first one. Do we really need to be told that I would have thought that was a given. Take the prompts away, take the scripts away and let 'normal' people question them about stuff they know nothing about, like how much is a loaf of bread, how much does a pair of school shoes cost, how much is the bus fare for a 3 mile trip?

As I`ve pointed out licencing is a major cost factor for any test broadcast. We want the station to become a permanent feature for our area. So basing it at the college is not an option. In fact that would increase costs. Remember this: http://www.bedlington.co.uk/2009/08/bedlington-base-for-county-radio/ The kind offer of a long term Bedlington studio area, by a local businessman, was an offer that could not be refused. I think our town deserves to have this service based in it. I believe it would greatly benefit the local community & businesses alike, putting Bedlington at the centre of something positive for a change!