Wednesday, March 01, 2006

LABOUR'S CONSIDERED RESPONSE TO COUNCIL BUDGET

Press Release:

After having a week to consider it in more detail, the IW Council Labour Group are still none the wiser over the detail of the Conservative Council's tax budget delivered to Full Council last week.

The Labour Group recognises that many of the re-direction of priorities are very welcome and things that Labour in power would try to do itself, in particular:

* The £2m net extra spending for adult social services;
* The £500k for addressing homelessness and the funding of an Empty Properties Officer;
* The £50k for cross-Solent patient travel;
* The £22k for additional CCTV monitoring resources;
* The £169k to match fund 40 Police Community Support Officers - a Labour Government community policy;
* The £140k for new library books;
* The 50p travel charge for under 19s.

These are the sort of things that lead to the Labour Group deciding last week not to oppose the Tory budget with its own alternative, but instead to abstain whilst holding a watching brief on how this budget is delivered.

However, there were some other good announcements made last week which are purely down to Labour Government funding:

* The claimed £5 million for schools merely matches what the Labour Government expects and demands the Council to pass on to our schools, though the 'Direct Schools Grant' element of the Government's revenue support settlement;

* Much of the free bus travel for pensioners is funded by an extra grant from the Labour Government.

Labour is amused that the Conservatives feel they need to claim the credit for these Government requirements.

Nonetheless, it is how the Budget will be funded that is causing Labour Councillors most concern, especially as they are no further forward in getting more detailed information, despite their efforts to do so.

The Conservatives last week claimed they would fund much of their spending on new priorities through £6.6 million of 'efficiency savings', claiming there is 'waste, duplication and bureaucracy' throughout parts of the Council. Labour would not doubt that there will be elements of this, but considers it is stretching credibility to claim there is £6.6m worth. Especially when £2.4 million of this is apparently located in the Adult Services Directorate; a department where much vital public service is undertaken.

Labour is also concerned that savings of £557k are to me made in what is called enigmatically 'Other Education', and a further £1.7 million in 'central and corporate services'.

Labour's greatest fear is that these 'efficiency savings' will ultimately mean significant job losses, though this is not admitted by the Conservatives. As the largest employer on the Island, Labour believes the Council has a responsibility not to throw its staff into unemployment, with the consequent effect on their families and the Island economy. Labour believes that Island jobs are just as important as populist policies.

The two Labour councillors, Deborah Gardiner & Geoff Lumley, are committed to their early pledge of last week - to watch the unfolding of this budget like hawks, and take appropriate steps if their fears prove true.

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Yes, exactly - where is this money coming from? Well done Geoff and Deborah for asking this very pertinant question. Frankly, if losing jobs is going to make the council more effective and efficient, then I suppose we can hardly complain. But surely, even if nobody loses their job, cuts of this magnitude must mean serious cuts in service to the public? This has got to be wrong. How can they announce a budget with such huge implications without actually having done the homework? I've heard that even senior officers have no idea where this money is coming from. Nobody does. They've just picked a figure and they're going to screw it out of the council at any cost.