TEN Questions for starters for the Leader of Wrexham
-
Posts
-
@thewayneinspain 4622 wrote:
why the need for a dig?
sorry time+beer = poor reading, took dig to mean ‘dig’ for info.
Not a dig really, just one of those off the cuff comments we all make – bit of authority bashing. To be fair to the council, when I, and several others, raised concerns about the local development plan that would have affected our street they did listen and the site was removed from the proposal. I know that some of the others were not as lucky, and that some things the council do without the support of the community (city status bid number 2)-I think its just in our (British) nature to “have a dig” every now and again.
Having decided to retain housing in 2004, how does that affect the levels of rents that tenants have to pay today? Could a trust or mutual spent less money, because Wrexham’s spend per capita is high compared to some . . . in spending £430m as a town, we must be able to spend less in places, and more in other places to make us more attractive to grow jobs?
@wxm 4633 wrote:
Having decided to retain housing in 2004, how does that affect the levels of rents that tenants have to pay today? Could a trust or mutual spent less money, because Wrexham’s spend per capita is high compared to some . . . in spending £430m as a town, we must be able to spend less in places, and more in other places to make us more attractive to grow jobs?
Rent money is ring fenced anyway. If you take office sharing into account the loss of housing might increase costs initially. The reason for stock transfer was to catch up with capital spending. As that didn’t happen the capital spend on housing remains high as they catch up with that. So the housing costs have no bearing on the general spending you can disregard that in effect in terms of where money could be saved. Rents would have probably increased but more capital investment souls have been made quicker.
If housing is so problomatic, could we look at education and care? But we need to spend more or do better there, not less. Looking at the Office of National Statistics, the Gross Value Added is listed for East Wales, or Wrexham & Flintshire together. The last report seems to be 2011, with a value of £5,071m. It was £4,928m for 2010, and about £4,700m for the 3 or 4 preceding years, and around £4,000m before that. The Welsh Assembly says that Wrexham is going down, and Flintshire is going up. So how do we measure how Wrexham is performing, and make it go up?
If we have 60,000 homes in Wrexham, and we could earn and extra £1000 on average for each home, or £2000 for half of those homes, that would be an extra £30m into the local economy. If we spend £430m as a community, why is £30m so difficult to raise between us. And this is a fraction of the money in the economy at £2,500m if you split Wrexham and Flintshire in half.
wxm;4641 wrote:If housing is so problomatic, could we look at education and care? But we need to spend more or do better there, not less. Looking at the Office of National Statistics, the Gross Value Added is listed for East Wales, or Wrexham & Flintshire together. The last report seems to be 2011, with a value of £5,071m. It was £4,928m for 2010, and about £4,700m for the 3 or 4 preceding years, and around £4,000m before that. The Welsh Assembly says that Wrexham is going down, and Flintshire is going up. So how do we measure how Wrexham is performing, and make it go up?If we have 60,000 homes in Wrexham, and we could earn and extra £1000 on average for each home, or £2000 for half of those homes, that would be an extra £30m into the local economy. If we spend £430m as a community, why is £30m so difficult to raise between us. And this is a fraction of the money in the economy at £2,500m if you split Wrexham and Flintshire in half.
I think the problem is where people would spend that extra 1,000.
One of the problems for the town is that there are less independents across all the sectors meaning the town is less sustainable. This is because less money is being recycled within the town reducing the gross value as too much money is leaving.
The council doesn’t seem to have a plan for local businesses.
Not really it was all about speeding up capital spending. Things are not quite so bad now. And the Welsh Government doesn’t seem that bothered.
Starting this blog was all about jobs, and enough employers to provide good earnings. But with education coming out so poorly at present, and people writing up the nature of systemic problems, is it not time for Wrexham to look at all its issues, and explain to us as a community what we need to do to overcome these …
@wxm 4829 wrote:
Starting this blog was all about jobs, and enough employers to provide good earnings. But with education coming out so poorly at present, and people writing up the nature of systemic problems, is it not time for Wrexham to look at all its issues, and explain to us as a community what we need to do to overcome these …
Not all education is that bad. Some is excellent. Need to learn from those.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
