“I don't like people losing their jobs but these people are being asked to volunteer. I find it strange that people are not expecting this, the council are anticipating cuts of around £100,000,000 over 3 years now that wouldn't be so bad except it education and housing are ring fenced which means the cuts can only from the rest of its budget.”

“The fact is Scott that if the councillors alowances had gone up at all, and the other posts had not been written out the cost would have been over £2,000,000 and the expenses would have been around £200,000. Councillors have been sensible on the whole on cutting their renumeration and getting on with their job.You have got to understand that and that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys. Take the Leaders Allowance I was earning as much as that in 1992 and my last wage was £45,000 in 2000. I have a son in law working in the city getting that at 26 I am earning around £30,000 at the moment and I must admit if you are on around £240 per week then you might think its over paid but I suspect we don't really add our wages up as my neighbour said last night complaining in the same manner as you and I pointed out he as a joiner was earning more than Carl Minns, Then he said bet he doesn't work as hard and I replied I bet he does more hours.I don't like paying coucil tax but did a quick calculation on the alowances and expenses against turnover the councilos annual turnover and it is 0.1% I bet the executives of Smith & Nephew do better than that don't you.”

“Mike, I do not appreciate being called a "numpty". Is this how you debate in your world. Very democratic.

I am entitled to an opinion and I think that we are paying councillors too much money when we as a council are asking all council workers (apart from schools) to consider voluntary redundancies.

I did not say I was a Labour voter, again presumptions from yourself and indeed quoted in my original post S Chaytor's expenses. If you check, he is a Labour councillor.

Just because you do not agree with my views gives you no right to give silly childish comments.

I believe that councillors should receive some allowance and expenses, but not to the tune of over £1 million pounds per year when services and lobs will be cut, especially front line jobs often when these are not high paid employment.

Also, I appreciate some councillors do not claim T&S. That was my point. How come some calim £1700 and £800 omn top of their £11700 (approx) basic allowance?

The rest of you who do not seem to care or mock the council workers, shame on you.

These people are your neighbours etc, who need to pay bills and now have the worry that they may lose their jobs.”

“Funny isn't it when I was a councillor Labour refused to be deputy chairs because they weren't paid yet you lot are expecting people to do it for nothing perhaps just expenses. It is a brave new world but both Labour and Lib/Dems are whipped to vote in one direction and it will nearly always be opposites. If you want to change that we would have to be a one party state you know like it was the communists in the USSR.”

“Donald d another fool the reason people are in parties is for the block of the vote and I suppose Labour always vote against what the LIb/Dems vote for and the only ones who are unpredictable will be the Tories and the Independents. I don't need to watch a webcast to know that that is the Yah boo of British Politics. If you don't like it you should be happy with the coalition then.”

“Scott Turner wha a numpty,

1. Where councillors expenses aren't shown it is because none have been claimed you fool. I admit the top two are a bit high but it is a Tory and a member of the Labour Party to be expected. You should look at the expensers for 2001 -2002 when Labour had control.

2. Allowances were far higher in that period what with people being paid as liason officers speakers, deputy speakers and deputy chairpersons it wasn't until the Lib Dems got control that the expenses and over proliferated posts were terminated. the end result with this being a the 5th year without a rise Hull's allowances are well down the list and soon no doubt the council will go back to the norm retired white anglo saxon male with a smattering of white retired aglo saxon female..”

“Well, Walter the Strong, the reason these cuts are required in the first place is because of PRIVATE banks overstretching themselves, and then they went crying to the government to get help. The government were then forced to help to the tune of several billion pounds, because if they didn't then many people would have lost all of their savings.

Public companies are here to provide a service to the public, and private ones are to here to make money for the guy who owns it. If private jobs go, then it means the guy isn't getting as rich as he was. If public jobs go, then front-line services are very likely to suffer.”

“What is wrong with the people who post on here shame on you! These people are from Hull, your neighbours, friends and family; people in your community. What sort of state is this city in with this bitter, sniping mindset any job losses affect Hull as a whole, footfall in our s hops spending with our small businesses, even more people chasing ever scarcer jobs, more people losing their homes, more children living in poverty. Grow up, support your place, your people and pull together for good with all this latent energy you direct towards sniping.”

“this post just gets worse. the only persons in the council who make anywhere near that is being quoted are senior officers.the unemployed over the last number of years have had a bigger pay increase than what youre average council worker has.public services are what it said serving the public not the share holders of some company.look at conaught.if you have a complaint it is dealt with by the council and passed on.i wonder how many would be happy if 300300 was outsourced to india.yes there is alot of waste but savings can be made by using common sense.house all service admin in one place saving rental on other buildings.the awards this town has won were the result of hard work by the workers not the pencil pushers.wait till you cant get youre bin emptied and you have to pay for entrance to museums.street cleaning goes to the wall and you have community payback manning youre local play areas.the city is still employing consultants on over a grand a day and youre lib dem councillors are being told by mr minns how to vote just look at the council meeting webcasts.its you the constituants they are supposed to represent not what mr minns tells them how to vote on youre services.people voted lib dem for a change but ended up voting tory.they want everything privatised so the fat cats get richer and the poor get poorer.you can rubbish hcc all you want but the private sector cannot give jobs were there are non.lots of companys are supported by hcc i wonder how many of these ranters would be doing so if there companies were laying off due to these cuts.i know one service dept of the council that is available 365 days of the year.the parks and used by everyone. oh ididnt see any councillors getting redundancy notices three a ward nice little earner.remember you will still be paying for the service that you wont get.suppose you can write a letter of complaint to the company directors”

“People seem to forget that the private sector in the North isn't strong enough to mop up these jobs, so I'm sure the next thing you will be moaning about is paying them benefits...well tough!
The sort of number that will be cut WILL effect front line services. That means you won't be able to dump your responsibilities on the Council, whether its your kids or parents, you will prob be wading through trash (though I guess some of you live like pigs already) and when the City floods again then don't even think of calling 300300, because there won't be anyone to anything. So, start getting used to these words, 'Sorry, we don't do that anymore, have a look in Yellow Pages and pay for it yourself!'”