On May 5, 1:06*am, James Farrar wrote:
On Sun, 4 May 2008 14:02:46 -0700 (PDT), MIG





wrote:
On May 4, 9:32*pm, Boltar wrote:
On 3 May, 23:43, MIG wrote:

They should have a council where representatives of several
constituencies could actually vote on stuff, avoiding whimsical (and
expensive) swings of policy. *They could call it, I dunno, the GLC?

Except that the GLC seemed to waste most of its time and money on
crackpot right-on causes that benefitted a tiny number of people and
the majority could go hang. Its very easy for a committee to be
anonymous and unaccountable and do what they please , less so if its
one person.

Tiny grants to mythical black lesbians of less than the Mayor's lunch
expenses may make headlines for the Mail and the Standard, but they
don't really compare with how much of our money goes at ludicrous
rates of interest to even smaller numbers of directors and
shareholders of private companies under PPP and the like, out of the
budget that should have been used to maintain and run services.

The (LU) PPP having been, to his great credit, fought against by Ken
(having been imposed by the man who is now Our Glorious Leader).

There are many black marks against Ken from his 8 years as Mayor, but
the LU PPP is not one of them.-

I didn't mean to imply that it was. Just putting scales of "crackpot"
money-wastage and small numbers of beneficiaries in perspective.