Budget Day Exasperation

I am sitting at my computer finally having calmed down after today’s budget setting council. My incandescent rage that has slowly extinguished throughout the evening was sparked by the absolutely diabolical proceedings in the chamber this afternoon. To be honest my anger with the performance of many of my colleagues from the other council groups is unlikely to go away for a good while.

Today was always going to be an incredibly important meeting. The 2010/11 budget has been set not only economically difficult times, it comes at the end of a year of financial turmoil for Stoke-on-Trent City Council. The Tory/LibDem/Indy’s budget proposals fell way short of the mark in terms of offering answers to the city’s needs. In fact the proposals contained no investment in any area of the council at all. The only thing put on the table when the budget setting process started was cuts, cuts and more cuts.

In yet the Tories and their patsies around the chamber, including the BNP claimed it was the most inclusive budget setting process ever. Rubbish. Labour’s budget consultation two years ago included a communication with every household in the city requesting participation. No, this year’s ‘consultation’ documents and events were merely an attempt to massage the egos of the more gullible in the council chamber. How is being asked to pick between this cut or that cut a genuine consultation? It’s like being asked to choose between the devil and the deep blue sea. Nor did the exercise ask members to identify priority areas to improve service or if they had alternatives for savings.

So that is exactly what we on the Labour Group did do in our amendment proposals. Keeping the figures balanced we laid out in a positive way priority areas we believe the council should invest in and improve – in tune with people in our communities. Further, we identified where the money for our investments were coming from. Our proposals included:
· Maintaining the Stoke-Speaks-Out Budget in order to preserve a gold standard service for many children in the city
· Investing an extra £100k in improving Dementia services
· Investing an extra £500k to tackle antisocial behaviour
· Using £1 million from the unnecessarily large dedicated reserve for insurance to fund 100 new apprenticeships across the City Council. Using taxpayers money to create jobs and valuable training experiences for local young people
· Saving £400k from the £7.7 million per year spent on outside consultants
· Saving £150k from the corporate communications budget by creating a more efficient and joined up operation
· Saving £150k from the management costs in NSRP, a service which has underperformed despite generous funding.

Despite the fact that several councillors from the other parties conceded that we had good ideas they shouted us down for ‘political grandstanding’- we should have brought up our proposals outside the chamber according to them. I query whether there is any point in having a budget council if it is just to nod through the executive’s proposals with no alternatives or proper debate.

Nobody on the other benches actually gave a passing mention during the amendment ‘debate’ to the actual content of our proposals. They chortled away when we talked about saving Stoke-speaks-out, chatted amongst them selves when we argued for investment to tackle the ASB that makes people’s lives a misery, they jeered when we put forward plans to employee young people and were belligerent when we said how we would pay for it all. I can only put this despicable behaviour down to the fact it was a Labour putting forward these ideas.

I put it to Messrs Clarke, Ward, and Irving, not forgetting Messrs Salih, Coleman and Ibbs, that it was they and not us who were playing petit politics on budget day. It was them voting against an amendment because of who proposed it over and above any ideological or practical consideration. Because of them and their cronies the city will be a poorer place as long as the 2010/11 budget is in place.

There was only one non-labour Councillor I retained full respect for today and that was Gavin Webb. We never agree, he is a libertarian and I am a socialist. But he had the decency to give libertarian arguments for his position today and for that full respect.

Apologies for this stream of consciousness, I’m just very angry. I promised @bankyfields a blog on regeneration soon - I will get round to it in the near future.

Park Progress and Refreshment Rage

Just a quick blog by way of update…

Happily, there is some great news from the CHAD Park Partnership. The builders have now moved on site to start the new Multi Use Games Area (MUGA) at the side of Gladstone Primary and it should be completed in a couple of months. The MUGA will include 5 a side and basketball equipment, and will also be marked out for other sports. It’ll have two gates, one attached to the school and one accessible for the public. During school hours the court will be exclusively for the use of Gladstone, but out of hours it will be accessible for the whole of the community to use.

The project has been made possible thanks to pro bono work by Mansell (the Gladstone School building contractors) with match funding raised from grants and ward budget bids by Partnership Chair, Sue Rammell and the school’s Youth Forum. The really great thing about the scheme is that it has been made possible by the whole community coming together to drive it forward: young people, parents, grandparents and councillors. However special credit needs to be given to Sue Rammell and Dave Eaglestone (Gladstone School Build Manager) whose tireless efforts and negotiations with the Sport England, City Planners and Funding Bodies are finally paying off.

And things get better – thanks to resources that have been made available the MUGA will now also feature a lighting system that will make it useable all year round. Also, work is beginning for a new under 10s play area at Anchor Road Rec. People who know the area will know the shocking state of the play equipment there – now a new naturalised play park is being installed using play-builder finance.

Also I think its worth mentioning a leading story in the Sentinel this week, regarding proposed savings from cutting the refreshments at meetings at the civic. http://www.thisisstaffordshire.co.uk/news/TEA-BISCUITS-FACING-163-20k-CUT/article-1701221-detail/article.html Cllr Kieran Clarke thinks that £20k can be saved by introducing a ‘refreshments policy’. That got me thinking about a couple of things.

Firstly, which meetings have refreshments to that value in the first place? I’ve never even seen coffee and tea at O&S meetings!

Secondly, and more to the point, why is a ‘policy’ being considered? When cutting valued services across the city and cherished facilities are being put forward by the Cabinet, it should go without saying that drinks and butties at the Civic be cut back completely. I was also a little bemused by the outraged responses of the Councillors that commented in the Sentinel’s coverage. Difficult budgetary decisions will have to be made in the coming months, but before I’m asked to vote on a closure for Tunstall or Shelton Pool I want to know that everything has been done to trim the fat in the authority. Perks for Members and Officers like snacks at meetings should be first on the chopping block, so let’s not shilly-shally around with a ‘refreshments policy’.

Question Time

I’ve submitted the following questions to the Leader for the next ordinary Full Council. It will be interesting what Cllr Irving has to say on each of the issues.

1. Council Tax Relief
Will the Executive consider establishing a discretionary framework to re-introduce the 50% council tax discount on vacant properties where it can be proved that individuals are facing financial hardship, and are not in the possession of dwellings on a commercial basis?

2. Blacklisting
The council will note the investigation by the Information Commissioner into blacklisting by unscrupulous "business consultants". The council may also further note the subsequent report by UCATT trade union which revealed several large local authority contractors had been invoiced by the consultants. What is the Executive doing to ensure the trade union rights of former council workers and contractor workers are not eroded, either in current or future strategic partnerships?

3. Local Procurement
The full council recently passed a procurement strategy, which featured a policy on local procurement. What work are NSRP and procurement officers of this authority doing to ensure that local businesses are in a position where they are capable to entering successful tenders to provide council services?

4. Children and Young People’s Services
What checks and balances have the executive put in place to ensure that Children and Young People's Services Directorate is in satisfactory condition to be managed in house by the City Council? What is the Department for Children, Schools and Families' view as to whether continued intervention is required vis-a-vis management of the Directorate?