Originally Posted by prasnee

Well done, for once, Username2016.

That's the issue: the Labour Party are speculating with our money. And we are barred from knowing the details.

What exact details do you want to know? They bought it for £32.5m using loans with a property company advising them that the rental income would exceed the costs.

Do you expect them to say the rental income and profits? Do you not think it would be a bit odd if a business and landlord would publish to the world how much profit they make from you....can you not see the problem there? Are you a councillor and an accountant or something, are you Sure you don't want to finally tell us if you are a local councillor or not? If you're an accountant I sure hope you know the difference between loans (the strand) and capital expenditure (red tarmac).

Also, I believe the party "leaders" were advised before the restricted meeting, sadly some of your party don't like the leader as potentially gets in the way of their own ambitions.

If the meeting was meant to be secret, you'd hardly invite the Libs, they can't even keep a private meeting to the local park off social media so something with large monetary value would be probably too much to let them know about.

Should we have been consulted when John Pugh rented his office using our taxpayer money off another Lib Dem and in return the Southport Lib Dems received a donation as to whether the rate used and the deal was fair?

https://order-order.com/2013/11/14/c...re-re-renting/

Originally Posted by said

So is The Strand in Bootle going to be more profitable than that created by tourists in Southport? Surely the priority should be Southport. If a loan was granted to purchase such a white elephant as The Strand, then it will have to be paid back by money partly generated by Southport, whereas - had the money been loaned to Southport, it would have been used to attract more tourists in the area and would have been paid back far quicker and to a greater benefit for all concerned.

Can we not have profits from Tourists in Southport AND profits from a shopping centre in Bootle?
Does it matter where profits are generated as long as those profits are fairly distributed on services throughout the borough?
Why should Southport be the priority? Isn't that just as unfair as what you perceive as favouritism towards Bootle?

Originally Posted by Mr. Brightside

Another aim mentioned in the aforementioned press release was to help regeneration of the area. In that case I'd say it would be irresponsible of Sefton to purchase a shopping centre outside of Sefton and at the time of purchase I'm not aware there were any other shopping centres in Sefton that would generate a similar income.

Hence why I said it was a political decision. It clearly wasn't the commercial decision that you claim.

Originally Posted by Username2016

What exact details do you want to know? They bought it for £32.5m using loans with a property company advising them that the rental income would exceed the costs.

How about:

• Who was the property company you refer to?
• If the rental income failed to meet the costs, would the property company indemnify the council?
• What additional sums (if any) is the council liable for over the next three years in its (new) capacity as landlord?
• What is the current level of occupancy (or its inverse, vacancy), and how many leases come up for renewal in the next three years?
• What is the financial "quality" of the existing tenants, i.e. how many leases are to secure national companies and how many are to less financially secure tenants?

If you could let me know the answers to those via your close contacts in the Bootle Labour Party then that would be great for starters.

Originally Posted by prasnee

How about:

• Who was the property company you refer to?
• If the rental income failed to meet the costs, would the property company indemnify the council?
• What additional sums (if any) is the council liable for over the next three years in its (new) capacity as landlord?
• What is the current level of occupancy (or its inverse, vacancy), and how many leases come up for renewal in the next three years?
• What is the financial "quality" of the existing tenants, i.e. how many leases are to secure national companies and how many are to less financially secure tenants?

If you could let me know the answers to those via your close contacts in the Bootle Labour Party then that would be great for starters.

Why do you sound like an accountant? Are you an accountant and a councillor?

It'd be sure useful to know if you are an accountant so I can pitch the response at the right level

Originally Posted by Username2016

Why do you sound like an accountant? Are you an accountant and a councillor?

It'd be sure useful to know if you are an accountant so I can pitch the response at the right level

Prasnee? You there? Didn't think I'd asked a hard question but if it's that hard I better not answer yours as that may be too much for you!

Originally Posted by Username2016

Prasnee? You there? Didn't think I'd asked a hard question but if it's that hard I better not answer yours as that may be too much for you!

You invited me to tell you "What exact details do you want to know?"

I did that and then you fail to provide any answers. Perhaps because they are secret to the Labour Party. That's where I thought you were able to help.

Originally Posted by prasnee

You invited me to tell you "What exact details do you want to know?"

I did that and then you fail to provide any answers. Perhaps because they are secret to the Labour Party. That's where I thought you were able to help.

Are you sure we haven't found another question you'll avoid?

Originally Posted by Username2016

Are you sure we haven't found another question you'll avoid?

Eh? It's you who is declining to answer any of the questions that YOU invited me to ask you (when you said "What exact details do you want to know?") . Please would you do so.

Originally Posted by prasnee

Eh? It's you who is declining to answer any of the questions that YOU invited me to ask you. Please would you do so.

I've not declined, I merely have asked for information to pitch my response and you can't answer yes or no to whether you're a councillor or accountant.

However, once again you're scurrying away from the question so key thing to remember:

1) it's not acceptable for councillors to post anonymously on political items....if it was maybe the question wouldn't be so hard for you and maybe cllr Dawson would have answered too in "that" incident
2) you've come on to influence views on this thread of a political nature which you really should be more transparent to the electorate

Originally Posted by Username2016

I've not declined, I merely have asked for information to pitch my response and you can't answer yes or no to whether you're a councillor or accountant.

Why don't you just assume I am a normal person (an alien concept to you, I appreciate).

As far as I can make out the answers to my five (initial) questions would be the same whoever was asking them.

For example how many different ways can you answer the question:
"Who was the property company you refer to?"

I don't think you can actually answer my question (which you asked me to put to you) so stop prevaricating.

Originally Posted by Username2016

Why do you sound like an accountant? Are you an accountant and a councillor?

It'd be sure useful to know if you are an accountant so I can pitch the response at the right level

Think you might have hit the nail on the head there, username.

Originally Posted by prasnee

Why don't you just assume I am a normal person (an alien concept to you, I appreciate).
.

In discussing council matters its key to know if you're a councillor or not, that's been the basis of this all along. It's unacceptable if we have councillors posting against other councillors and the council anonymously completely undermining working together for southport which means "cross party, cross town" if it's what's needed for the right outcome. You and your fellow libs/exiled libs think it's perfectly ok to behave like this.

If you answered "no" to being a councillor then it'd be valid to say you're a normal person in this debate, if you are a councillor and regardless of party views or not you should declare them.....it's really that simple.

*IF* Cherie Brandie was a councillor and you are also a councillor but not the same councillor as CB....do the libs have a problem.... maybe the council should do something about this as it undermines the credibility of the council.

So do you want to revise your position on whether you're a councillor or not?. It feels like I'm a resident being shouted at by a councillor.

You also seem to think I have to be a member of the Labour Party as I disagree with you but I'm not, I just don't agree with you, think the libs have delivered nothing for the town and probably held the town back.

Dear me; political question after question circumvented and monotonous allegations that are never met with logical answers. This is getting extremely tedious and must be a real turn off for numerous posters. I for one care very little if prasnee is a senior Libdem Birkdale accountant/councillor, or not. If he wishes to conceal his ID then so what – everyone else does on this site so kindly stop complaining. The main point is that sadly the LibDems have clearly shot themselves in the foot, since Dr Pugh left. Internal rows and heated back-stabbing (regarding the cat fights to fill his boots) has left that party in tatters. Their candidate rapidly flopped, indicating that her ward popularity was certainly not shared by the rest of the town. Whoever will they choose come the next election, the mind boggles? Now the poor voters have a rather feeble and lacklustre MP who is being hotly pursued by a crafty little political engineer from out of town. These are sorry days for Southport and it’s all quite tragic.

When Prasnee has you on the ropes I think you should breath in and stop.
Prasnee's questions (none to difficult) remain unanswered.