Budget Day Exasperation
01 Mar 2010
I am sitting at my computer finally having calmed down after Thursday’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.
Thursday's 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 Thursday 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.
Who are the patsies? Those
Who are the patsies?
Those councillors that rely on their family income from a meddling MP?
Cllr Mike Barnes - Longton South
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing"
http://www.potteye.co.uk
Is this the same Labour Party
Is this the same Labour Party which consistently set below inflation Council Tax rises (i.e. promoting cuts) while in power presumably to buy votes? Members refused to back Mayor Wolfe when he rightly stated that the city needed to raise funds to provide good services.
Cllr Reynolds, highlights the
Cllr Reynolds, highlights the 2008 consultation as they way consultations should be run.
Is this the consultation that informed Labour Cllr to close City Farm to Close Dimensions, is that the Budget you still support Cllr Reynolds?
Labours 2008 budget introduced enhanced waste programme which is now 191% OVER budget, did you calculations miss something in 2008 Cllr Reynolds?
The 2008 budget that under estimated this years Adult spend by £10m and the Childrens services by £4m.
Is the Labour budget we should be learning from?
¨°o.O O.o°¨°o.O O.o°¨°o.O O.o°¨°o.O O.o°¨°o.O O.o°¨°o.O
¨°o. Keeping an eye on Labours past pledges http://labourstodo.tk/
¨°o. Non-Party Candidates 2011 don't split your vote reserve a ward now
¨°o. http://nonpartycandidates.tk/
From an outside perspective I
From an outside perspective I can only see the amendment for what it was; Political grand standing, introducing populist measures at the midnight hour.
If your suggestions were genuine then why not bring them to the table in a more timely fashion?
How have you come up with the numbers? Are they costed and targetted, or just plucked from the air as they appear?
We all want to see increased investment in these areas, but they need to be part of an overall balanced budget. Its too easy to randomly select £500k for tackling antisocial behaviour but where specifically would it be spent? It just smacks of Labours failed philosophy of throwing money at a problem hoping it will go away.
Just because the majority disagreed with your amendments does't neccessarily mean it's political, maybe it was just too little detail and too late for legitimate scrutiny.
To an outsider the whole circus smacked of bad politics in a city that deserves better.
Tom, As most of the NSRP
Tom,
As most of the NSRP budget is from outside sources had we agreed to the £150,000 reduction in the NSRP budget if that was not our money but someone elses how could we then have spent that money on our budget.
If I am correct then there would have been a £150,000 shortfall and the 151 officer could not have agreed to it.
With no consultation you proposed an extra £100,000 spend on dementia. A laudable proposal but if the Adult Social Care Dept had an extra £100,000 would dementia have been the top priority to spend it on? In the words of your deputy leader " I dunno". It may have been but without discussions with Tony Oakman (Director) we were not in a position to judge.
Saving £150,000 from the communications dept. Pity Labour members were not present when this could have been discussed. Again worthy of discussion but with no evidence to support how the savings could be made how could we agree that the figures had substance and were achievable?
Could not disagree with the sentiments of your amendment but instead of discussing them through the scrutiny process you decided to bring them to the meeting with no substance to back up the argument.
Its not surprising that no one other than Labour voted for it.
You pandered to the press to get a headline and to that end you were successful but thats all you got - a headline.
Had your group been serious you could have achieved something but there is no doubt that it was the headline you were after.
But Tom, the question which
But Tom, the question which everyone (literally and politically) left, right and centre were asking when I observed the budget full council:
http://pitsnpots.co.uk/blog/2010/02/budget-full-council-25th-february-2010
was why you in Labour did not input your ideas during the consultation process and the at least 5 meetings during which you are reported to have been given this opportunity prior to full council? Maybe you can answer this question for us all? Why did you only come up with this sheet of A4 amendment at the very last minute?
I could understand better what you did with your amendment if you had previously brought your ideas to the consultation meetings and process and been contemptuously and persistently ignored. If that had happened I would see it as only fitting that you should raise this at full council as an objection to the budget. You say
“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.”
Well that would be the point of having a budget council, so that you could formally state that you had input your ideas, been ignored and were dissatisfied enough to want to defeat the budget proposal so it would have to be reconsidered.
But what everyone is saying is you didn’t bring forward your ideas or play enough of a role in the process.
You also say “Nobody on the other benches actually gave a passing mention during the amendment ‘debate’ to the actual content of our proposals.” If you look at the link I give I’ll think you’ll find they did and although all you political lot, not just Labour others too, do like playing your games at times, I got the impression that if you had brought your ideas in earlier to consultation they may well have been looked at seriously. And if they hadn't been I think you would have much stronger grounds for bringing an amendment.
So please, if you could explain to us all why you did things the way you did, it would be interesting.
Nicky Davis - non-party political activist - a firm believer in grass roots democracy and strong local communities.
Post new comment