Posted by: iangilbert | March 19, 2013

Back our children’s centres

In the council’s budget setting process, Labour and other opposition councillors put forward a budget amendment that would have meant no cuts to children’s centres this year, and massively reduced the need for savings in future years. The Conservatives rejected this plan, and instead committed the council to making savings that would total £224K a year within two years. In real terms, this equates to a cut of around 20% and comes on top of previous big cuts.

I think our children’s centres do vital work in the community. This is what I said in my budget speech:

My key concern is about children’s centres. The £55K saving in the budget is to be part of annual savings of £224K. This is a huge sum of money. It is 16% of the planned budget in cash terms. After inflationary pressures are taken into consideration this will probably amount to a real terms cut of around 20%.

Let us not forget that we have already seen a large sum of money taken out of the children’s centre budget with a management restructure and the downgrading of two smaller centres. I simply do not believe that you can cut a budget by a fifth in real terms without real services being affected.

 These centres are a lifeline to many families. They are not just about childcare, though affordable childcare is a key issue for our economy and our society. They are not just about advice and support, though these are vital. Advice and support can break a cycle of bad parenting that has continued through generations. They can offer practical support to get parents back to work. They can fulfil a vital health roles and contribute to better educational outcomes. Whenever I visit Summercourt in my ward or any of our children’s centres, you can feel a warm loving and supportive environment. I’m also struck by the fact that our staff are not only very committed to what they do, they are extremely knowledgeable about children’s health and educational well-being.

 It is an unpleasant fact that however much the government seek to manage the statistics, more children are growing up in poverty. We need more of these services not less.

Let’s not forget, going back to hard numbers – the cut to the children’s centres is about a 5th in real terms. If the administration believes our children’s centres are so inefficient that these savings can be made purely through efficiency gains, let them say so. And if the savings can be found, with our proposal at least some of them can be re-invested, because these services are going to be needed more not less in the coming year.

There is to be a consultation from Southend Council starting soon. Southend council consultations do not have the best reputation, and of course our children’s centres are spread through the borough, so I want to make sure that everyone knows what’s going on and how to respond, and that we can take action if any centre is threatened with closure.

That’s why I’ve set up a Facebook group here and will be looking to build up contacts over the coming months.

 

Posted by: iangilbert | March 8, 2013

Disappointed

I am really disappointed that the YMCA are continuing to cooperate with the government’s mandatory work programme.

http://www.ymca.org.uk/ymca-england-statement-on-mandatory-work-placements

The YMCA are a wonderful charity. They do great work with young people in Southend.

But whether you are a wonderful charity or a dodgy retail chain, compulsory unpaid work is wrong.

I don’t think it’s wrong because I believe people should be able to remain on benefits for ever without trying to find work, I don’t think that at all. What I do believe as an absolute principle is that if you’re doing work (unless it is completely voluntary in nature) you should be paid at least the minimum wage, and indeed hopefully a living wage.

Compulsory unpaid work, even with a recognised and respected charity, is wrong. It is the thin end of a very very dangerous wedge.

The YMCA’s programme may well have had some successes as they claim, but the government’s own figures have proved that their workfare scheme as a whole is worse than useless when it comes to helping people find work. The Public Accounts Committee has found that after fourteen months of operation just 3.6% of participants went on to find sustained regular work. Undoubtedly the continued involvement of the YMCA will be used to give respectability to this government’s reprehensible welfare policies.

I’m feeling too tired to write much coherent about the budget debate last night, full council finished at about half-past midnight.

One thing that I find absolutely, staggeringly disgraceful is when the council is cutting vital services and raising council tax, certain Independent and Conservative councillors decided to vote for a specific amendment to the budget to take money from reserves and use it reduce parking charges on Thorpe Bay Broadway.

They wouldn’t vote for reversing cuts to children’s centres, or our resources to tackle domestic violence, but they would vote to cut parking charges in Thorpe Bay.

If all fifty-one of us came forward with budget amendments that just benefited our own wards to the detriment of others, the result would be utter chaos.

When I get the minutes I will post a full list of councillors who voted for this absurdity, because they should be utterly ashamed of themselves.

 

Posted by: iangilbert | March 1, 2013

Budget speech

My budget speech – give or take a few last minute additions:

We meet at a gloomy time for our economy and for public finances in particular. We are faced with a budget that raises tax and cuts services. The airshow, the delivery of black sacks. Our children’s centres. Envirnomental Health. Customer Services. The pier. Social Services. Support for the disabled. Parks maintainence. Toilet cleaning. Resources to tackle domestic violence. Resources to tackle drug and alcohol addiction. The administration has already forced through the imposition of council tax on the unemployed and the disabled for the first time. And with the current news, the cut in the food safety budget looks a little disturbing.

It is a sign of the times that we can reduce the size of our planning team owing to lack of work for them to do. We lost over a hundred businesses more than were created in Southend last year.

7.4% of 16-24 year olds are out of work and claiming benefits, as of last month. That’s not quite the worst figure in Essex but it’s close. In fact madam mayor I can only find six districts in the whole of the South and the whole of the East of the country that have worse figures.

Madam Mayor, it a sobering statistic that a young person is more likely to be on the dole in Southend than they are in Liverpool or Salford, or Yorkshire. I hope members opposite realise that in the light of such statistics members of my group will react with justified anger to anything that smacks of complacency or bragging from the administration.

Madam mayor, against this backdrop even the prospect of a Wembley final may not lift members’ spirits that much. Actually, we’d probably better not touch the subject of football stadiums.

I am well aware that we are in the midst of huge spending cuts set by Whitehall, that massively reduce our freedom to act. How then do we judge this budget and the performance of the administration at this moment?

Well these are tough times, and I don’t want to be unfair to the Leader. It certainly wouldn’t be fair to compare his performance to what we might like to do in a more benign climate. I thought I’d pick a somewhat easier benchmark, and I’d compare their performance to what their own government says they should be doing.

I know that Eric Pickles gets invited down by local Conservatives to be applauded at black tie dinners. I know that their loyal to their MPs and their government’s programme, so surely they won’t object to being judged by their yardstick.

So what does Eric Pickles and the coalition government say that we should have done? Well, he says that “All councils have a moral duty to freeze council tax,” yes, he said that in the commons when he announced the funding settlement – a moral duty to freeze council tax. Well that’s not a good start is it? We may be arguing about 0.2% later, but nobody here thinks that council tax can be frozen this year.

What does Eric Pickles think of making the poor and disabled pay a share of council tax? Well commenting on Cornwall’s plans which are rather similar to the ones that the leader forced though he said That struck me as being obscene.” Councils could instead focus on helping people find work, he said. “I thought it was a singularly unambitious scheme, just taxing people who are in receipt of council tax benefit rather than helping them get into work, dealing with mistakes and fraud.”

Perhaps Councillor Holdcroft could tell us in his summing up how it feels to see his policies be labelled obscene by his own government.
Eric Pickles says that councils should share services. “By sharing back-office services, they’ll be able to protect the front line – and even improve the choice and services that’s on offer to local residents.” He says. So how have we done? Well there are friendly Conservative held councils all around fully behind Eric Pickles surely? Well I know there have been a few things, but certainly no really big savings have been achieved by joint working, or if they have, they’ve not been enough.
Eric Pickles say we should share senior staff. Only one of our management team is shared at the moment I believe.

I’ll avoid dwelling on Eric Pickles’ suggestion that we should doing without a chief executive altogether, tempted as I am to ask the Town Clerk’s advice on this one.

I did consider going through the secretary of state’s fifty proposals but we’d probably all lose the will to live. We do have a coffee shop in at least one library. I suppose I might give the administration a tick for that.

No Madam Mayor, it seems that the administration has failed pretty much all of Eric Pickles’ tests for saving money, safeguarding services and not increasing tax. This budget contains many cuts to front line services and we’re not freezing council tax. And we’re supposed to be the council of year.

Madam mayor, this may seem like political knockabout, but I think there is an extremely serious issue here. It seems that Conservatives in Westminster are inhabiting a completely different world to the Conservatives in local government, and this has major consequences for us here today. To be blunt at least one side must be living in cloud cuckoo land, and whilst I certainly know that it’s possible to disagree with what your government is doing nationally, I think it’s perfectly reasonable to ask Councillor Holdcroft to explain this disconnect.

So that’s the context, let’s turn to what is before us in this budget.

I’ll start with our airshow. Members of my group have been saying for a number of years that the airshow cannot be a priority for public money in these austere times. This does not mean we agree with the way the administration has handled the issue.

When we have previously questioned the level of public subsidy given to the airshow, Councillors sitting opposite have said that it is absolutely crucial to the prestige of the town and vital to our economy. Conservative Councillors have stood up and said that the airshow literally brings in millions to the town and we can’t put that at risk. To change their position almost overnight on publication of this budget does little for the credibility of the administration or the council.

If when passing the last budget, Conservatives had been clear that would be the last airshow delivered in that way with that amount of public money, we would have given an opportunity for others to step in, or for some alternative to be found. It may have been a long shot, but it would have been a more honest and practical approach than this last minute knifing.

I had the privilege of chairing an economic & environmental project team talking to businesses in town. One medium sized company based just over the road told me that they have never ever been approached by the council with a view to contributing to the airshow.

As an aside, a very large cost pressure for the airshow – more than the cost of the planes I believe – is the charge levied by Essex Police for policing the event. I’d be interested to know whether the Conservative leader of the council has sought to negotiate with the Conservative Police & Crime Commissioner about this.

Madam Mayor I will listen to any proposal that would save the airshow in some form that would not further sacrifice public services in the town, but at this late hour I cannot honestly see how this could be delivered.

Whatever the Leader of the Council might say, the opposition does not exercise the same day to day influence on the running of council and the oversight of officers drawing up the budget in the way that he and his Executive Councillors can. It is simply ridiculous to assume that we could fundamentally re-write the budget.

Nevertheless, opposition groups have worked constructively to put forward proposals which significantly improve the budget as presented to us by the administration.

My key concern is about children’s centres. The £55thousand saving in the budget is to be part of annual savings of £224thousand. This is a huge sum of money. It is 16% of the planned budget in cash terms. After inflationary pressures are taken into consideration this will probably amount to a real terms cut of around 20%.

Let us not forget that we have already seen a large sum of money taken out of the children’s centre budget with a management restructure and the downgrading of two smaller centres. I simply do not believe that you can cut a budget by a fifth in real terms without real services being affected.

These centres are a lifeline to many families. They are not just about childcare, though affordable childcare is a key issue for our economy and our society. They are not just about advice and support, though these are vital. Advice and support can break a cycle of bad parenting that has continued through generations. They can offer practical support to get parents back to work. They can fulfil a vital health roles and contribute to better educational outcomes. Whenever I visit Summercourt in my ward or any of our children’s centres, you can feel a warm loving and supportive environment. I’m also struck by the fact that our staff are not only very committed to what they do, they are extremely knowledgeable about children’s health and educational well-being.

It is an unpleasant fact that however much the government seek to manage the statistics more children are growing up in poverty. We need more of these services not less.

Let’s not forget, going back to hard numbers – the cut to the children’s centres is about a 5th in real terms. If the administration believes our children’s centres are so inefficient that these savings can be made purely through efficiency gains, let them say so. And if the savings can be found, with our proposal at least some of them can be re-invested, because these services are going to be needed more not less in the coming year.

Turning to other specific items in our budget proposal, we believe that it is a travesty that the administration is proposing to reduce the resources available for tackling domestic violence. This is huge problem that blights lives and which has been insufficiently resourced for a long time. It seems that whenever there is a serious incident, and some failings on behalf of the authorities, a lack of communication between agencies always seems to be a major factor. Yet we are cutting the post who’s job it is to ensure that communication happens.

In this as with many staff reductions the administration’s argument is completely illogical. On the one hand they say they are the Council of the Year, supremely efficient. On the other hand they try to tell us that there are posts that we can get rid of and we’ll hardly notice them going. I don’t believe we have staff sitting around drinking coffee all day who contribute nothing to the town, and I believe that each and every post reduction will reduce the service we provide. I only wish we could present a proposal that would safeguard more of their jobs.

I fully understand the logic of holding posts vacant so as to avoid redundancy wherever possible, but this just means we experience the loss of service before we’ve discussed it here in council. I defy anyone to say that they haven’t noticed services become more stretched, taking longer

Other items of savings we propose are smaller, but I believe these small items will have an effect in promoting and maintaining tourism and the economic health of the town more widely, as Councillor Longley has said.

This list of measures are a compromise, the are not what me, or Councillor Longley or Councillor Terry would have written down by ourselves, but I have always thought it strange that in politics people never seem to be able to admit the value of an honourable compromise. The overall affect is a better budget providing a better services than the one we were originally presented with.

These measures have to be paid for. I am pleased that we have been able to put forward a budget proposal that includes a modest draw-down on reserves. This is the worst possible time to cut services. Were I planning a budget from scratch I would have proposed a larger managed reduction. We have to keep reserves, but we are towards top end of what our chief finance officer believes is reasonable and keeping any services going when people need them most is of value in and of itself.

The singling out of the behavioural support service is not, I must stress in any way because we do not value the work done or do not appreciate the importance of the services. But it something which I believed there was wide agreement that it should not be funded by the council indefinitely when money for it has been diverted to schools, therefore it was the most appropriate item to replace with money from reserves. In schools policy like everything else, this government shows contempt for the role of local government, it is clear that this government does not want us involved in schooling. As in anything else our room to oppose the will of central government is limited.

Nobody wants to increase council tax if there were other ways to pay for vital services. The additional cost to the average tax-payer of our measure is 4 or 5 pence. I would remind the Conservatives that when they voted to make the disabled and unemployed pay council tax for the first time, resulting in bills of an extra 4 or 5 pounds a week the portfolio holder pointed out it was equivalent to an extra couple of pints or packet of fags. I wonder if I’ll hear arguments today as to why forcing the disabled to pay 4 or 5 pounds a week is fine but 4 or 5 pence for everybody is dreadful.

I considered coming up with a budget proposal that addressed our group’s two biggest objections, children’s centres and the domestic violence coordinator, without any council tax increase at all beyond what was planned by the administration. The £75thousand from reserves and a few other savings we were considering would have done it. It would have made good headlines in the short term, but I think that would have been less than honest, because only with the extra £120,000 in the base budget can we make a credible case for protecting these things from cuts not just this year but in future years as well.

Madam Mayor, let me return to the theme of public services in general. They are things which tie us together. Councillor Terry is absolutely right to lambast the government’s attitude to public services, their actions exhibit a mixture of contempt and neglect for local government.

The proposals we make today will not change the world, or even the town in a vast way. They will however be a small marker placed down that we care about public services and will fight to keep them.

Posted by: iangilbert | February 12, 2013

Work un-fair

I see that the courts have ruled that the government’s work-fare programme is illegal. I think this is excellent news, but let’s just head off a few right-wing myths.

I am not against work-fare because I think people should have the option of remaining on benefits indefinitely when there is work available. I don’t think that, the Labour leadership do not think that and the vast majority of people in the Labour Party do not think that.

What I do think as an absolute principle is that work should pay. To force the unemployed to work in shops like Poundland unpaid is nothing more than a government subsidy to big business. There is not a shred of evidence to suggest that it helps people’s chances of finding proper employment, quite the reverse in fact.

I also think that far and away the biggest reason that people don’t work is the simple fact that there aren’t enough jobs available. Perhaps Tories like James Duddridge who seem to think that unemployment is a moral failing on the part of the individual (there is no other explanation for their policies) should explain why he thinks that people in his constituency are more lazy than those nearby.

The unemployment problem in Southend is significant. But checking and commenting the unemployment figures is a staple of economists and politicians. I believe an even bigger problem in Southend is underemployment, which passes with little attention from policy-makers. It’s where people are able to find a few hours work here and there, maybe on zero hours contracts, but can’t actually find enough work to earn enough to live. Again the Tories think that tinkering with the incentives in the benefits system can change this. Unfortunately we’re about to see this detached and remote Westminster thinking run up against cold hard economic reality.

Posted by: iangilbert | February 12, 2013

Rattled Tories

I’m glad to see that the Conservatives are so rattled by my colleague Julian’s efforts in Milton. Conservative Leader Nigel Holdcroft doesn’t usually stoop to misrepresentation but these blog posts clearly show that he has deliberately taken Julian’s general comments in favour of organised cruises out of context and twisted them to start a synthetic argument.

No doubt with a Conservative Mayor wanting to plonk one of the world’s biggest airports outside their front windows and a Conservative council ignoring their wishes on the cliffs museum, the normally strongly Conservative areas of Milton along the cliffs will be wondering just why on earth they should reward the Conservatives with their vote. I’m sure Nigel and Tony will be calculating that a nice little row about cruisers could be just the distraction they need.

Who controls the council could well be determined by who wins Milton. I’m not sure this rather transparent tactic will be enough to save Nigel’s administration.

Posted by: iangilbert | January 30, 2013

Surreal Scrutiny

Last night saw a particularly lively meeting of the Community Services & Culture Scrutiny Committee.

The high point, or rather low point, was when Councillor Velmurugan labeled Echo readers complaining about the cost of senior management as scroungers. Interestingly Conservative leader Nigel Holdcroft who had the task of responding to Councillor Velmurugan’s point did not pull him up on his offensive choice of language. But then we all know that Councillor Velmurugan’s vote is crucial in propping up the Conservative administration.

Councillor Velmurugan went on to call for the council to sack housing inspectors and keep senior managers. I wonder how many people in Westborough share this priority.

My colleague Judy McMahon raised a number of good points with the pre-scrutiny item on homelessness, and whether we should compel homeless people to take offers of housing in the private sector rather than offering them social housing. Homeless people are by definition vulnerable, and there’s a heck of a lot that can go wrong in the private sector. The risk is that if something goes wrong the council may not be required to find alternative accommodation and the homeless person will be destitute and forgotten.

Evidently a detailed discussion of homelessness bored other members of the committee, particularly on the Conservative side of the table, because when the chair brought the matter to a conclusion they couldn’t wait to shout ‘agreed’. Judy pointed out the report gave three options and nobody has indicated which one they had actually agreed to. That’s right, Conservative members of the committee were so keen to get through this item which was no doubt distasteful to them that they didn’t even know what they were agreeing to.

The evening got even stranger when Councillor Ron Woodley, the ‘conservatively minded independent’ from Thorpe Bay, suggested that the entire private sector rented sector should be nationalised. I may have been tempted to give him a Labour Party membership form, but as my colleague David Norman pointed out, the Labour manifesto of 1919 called for such a nationalisation but we’d decided it was impractical by 1945. Some of my colleagues around the country have called for statutory rent controls however, so maybe we are moving to the same point of view! Councillor Velmurugan countered that private landlords should be able to make money and perhaps we should build social housing on Thorpe Bay golf course.

Posted by: iangilbert | January 22, 2013

Quick response to Nigel Holdcroft

Councillor Holdcroft bemoans the fact that parties are picking younger candidates for parliamentary seats, and wryly notes that “this apparent trend in selection approach has not as yet improved the public view as to the merit of our elected representatives.”

http://nigel-holdcroft.blogspot.co.uk/2013/01/the-age-of-inexperience.html

Councillor Holdcroft is not alone in finding the quality of our elected representatives to be lacking of course.

However, it’s very hard to take seriously an enthusiastic supporter of David Amess when complaining about the reputation of Members of Parliament…

Posted by: iangilbert | October 31, 2012

Another Week

Last week wasn’t quite as busy as the previous one, but there’s still a lot going on. Hopefully I’m helping to give a sense of the sorts of things that I’m working on.

On Monday I left work a little early to attend a meeting with the council’s Chief Executive. One of the advantages of being a Group Leader is you get time most months to speak one-to-one the person who is in overall charge of the council’s operations on a day-to-day basis. After meeting the Chief Exec I went to the budget briefing for corporate support services, which is the directorate which does financial management, IT services, legal services, customer services and the like.

Tuesday was another packed evening. A meeting of the group leaders was cancelled as one group leader was left stranded by the foggy conditions, instead I was able to go to the shadow support services portfolio briefing. There were a number of controversial issues including the council tax benefit reform (cut), changes to council tax exemptions and whether or not to webcast council meetings. Without divulging any of our confidential discussions, I can say that I remain a strong supporter of allowing people to see what goes on in council, and having councillors speak ‘on the record’ so that the public can hold us to account.

Following that there was a special meeting of Economic & Environmental Scrutiny. Both items on the agenda were confidential as they involve items that could possibly be commercially sensitive. One was in relation to the future of Queensway house and was regarding sites to be developed by the Limited Liability Partnership (LLP) which the council has formed to with private sector partners to develop assets in the town. Unfortunately attending that meant that I missed the Victoria Ward Neighbourhood meeting, however my colleagues David and Margaret were there and able to raise some ward issues on my behalf.

Following the conclusion of that meeting, I went to Labour Party meeting at 268 Sutton Road. It was packed and there were a number of new faces which is always great to see. Membership of the local party seems to have got a bit of a bounce from our really successful conference season.

Wednesday evening was another budget discussion. Thursday was a quieter day, just one short meeting which was regarding the Economic & Environmental Scrutiny Committee project for the year, which is to be on investigating how the council can help to bring jobs and investment to Southend. I was being nominated for chair of the project group and wanted to give the officers supporting the project a steer on how I would want it to progress. I’m very keen that we start with an evaluation of the job market in Southend and how we can help not just encourage business, but encourage business that provides jobs that benefit local people.

Friday was a day off (from council, not from work), though Saturday I was back to it with my council surgery and delivering PCC election leaflets in parts of Victoria and Milton wards.

Posted by: iangilbert | October 22, 2012

A week in the life

Being a councillor is not meant to be a full time job. You get a fairly generous allowance, but it isn’t, and isn’t meant to be, the equivalent of a paid job. Some weeks are busier than others. Last week was one of the busier weeks, and covered an interesting variety of issues, so I’d thought I’d write it up.

Monday

9:00 Full day at work.

17:45 Markets task and finish group

Markets or lack of them have been a hot issue in Southend ever since the council closed York Road market. The administration has not always sounded very sympathetic to the idea of a traditional market in Southend, but a number of members feel passionately about it, and it is an issue that a number of Victoria residents have asked me about. When I was a teenager my dad did a brief spell as a market trader, so it’s something I know a bit about.

19:30 Political meeting

Having been elected as a Labour councillor, I want to continue to do all I can to make the party stronger and break the Conservative stranglehold in this part of Essex. After meetings in the civic centre I went to give some advice and support to colleagues hoping to be elected over the border in Rochford. (Checking before I left the civic centre that there was indeed Labour representation on the culture and tourism budget briefing)

Tuesday

9:00 Full day at work.

18:00 Primary School Places – Pre-cabinet Scrutiny

A depressing meeting really. We need to provide considerably more primary school places in the centre of town, as our group has been arguing for a long time. None of the options presented sounded ideal because of lack of funds and the government’s ridiculous free school legislation, which means we cannot just open a new school ourselves. If the Conservatives had listened to my Kursaal ward colleagues and used the Maybrook site for a school we would be in a much better position. We pointed out some pitfalls in the preferred solution, but there’s not a lot of flexibility at this stage.

19:00 Balmoral Residents’ meeting

It was actually 19:25 by the time I got here after the schools meeting. I was keen to make it as the stuff in the press about South Essex Homes is causing uncertainty and I wanted to know what residents thought. Also got a plug in for the Community First Panel. Some residents were clearly worried about the government’s cuts to housing benefit. I had to pester South Essex Homes for many months to get these meetings set up (there used to be a community circle for this area run by the police, but eventually the police said – quite correctly – that the issues being raise were more SEH matters than police matters) but they are clearly a useful exercise and it was well attended.

Wednesday

9:00 – Morning in work

13:00 – took a half day off, intending to have a bit of a break and watch the re-arranged England game. I ended up dealing with a bit of administrative disaster in the office. Saw about fifteen minutes of the England v Poland game. David and Margaret were of course at the very controversial Development Control Committee meeting.

5:30pm – Triangle Residents’ Association Committee meeting

A few years ago I found myself voted on to the committee of the Triangle Residents Association that covers the ‘Poets’ estate area of the ward. I really enjoy working with the residents in the association and also the very active community group that covers the area. The residents are very involved with the workings of South Essex Homes and again I felt it particularly important to stay in touch with them over the review.

18:30 – Special Community Services & Culture Scrutiny Committee – Review of South Essex Homes

A packed meeting, councillors, tenants of South Essex Homes, employees of South Essex Homes, council officers. A number of people said that this was their first and only council meeting that they’d attended. We spent about three hours discussing the issues raise, which is a heck of a lot for a single item. I shall post a full review of what I said and my opinions on the issues because there’s too much to go into here.

Thursday

9:00 – Full day in work

Found a few minutes to speak to BBC Essex about the discussion on South Essex Homes the night before.

13:00 – spent lunch hour delivering letters to residents

17:30 – break

Looking forward to a less stressful night, went for a pint and ended up chatting to a new member of the Labour Party. Fortunately I only had one pint because…

18:30 -

…Realised there was no Labour representation at a budget briefing taking place that night and decided that I ought to go along. Glad I did because there was an interesting and good natured discussion of the councils budget for public protection, transport and waste.

Budget briefings are always tricky for the opposition because at the end of the day the Conservative cabinet are the ones who will direct officers’ work and shape their thinking day-in day-out. Conservative Leaders like to taunt us that we don’t come up with any alternatives, but at the end of the day the council’s senior management team can only draw up a fully-costed robust budget based on the priorities that are set them. If Councillor Holdcroft thinks that the six Labour councillors can do this by ourselves, I’d question why he needs a cabinet of eight and all that expensive officer time!

I believe that opposition councillors can and should engage and offer constructive suggestions about the council budget. However, I don’t think there’s not much point in pretending that it won’t, when all is said and done, be a Conservative budget.

Still, I do hope that my Labour colleagues and I will be in a position to craft a budget that better reflects the needs of the town sooner rather than later. I was able to offer a few (I hope) constructive suggestions about how we could provide services more efficiently. Attending the budget briefing greatly clarified my thinking about how I would cope with the awful budget cuts inflicted on the council were I to find myself as Leader of the Council.

Unfortunately the budget meeting meant that I didn’t get along to watch the YMCA Question Time event that sounded very interesting.

Friday

9:00 – Full day of work

Echo rang to get my reaction to David Amess’s latest expenses scandal. I don’t much care for personality based campaigning, but it’s difficult to avoid it in the case of David Amess. How you can support austerity politics whilst being so extravagant with taxpayers’ money is really beyond me.

13:00 – Queensway

Visited the Queensway flats where we’ve succeeded in getting South Essex Homes to put CCTV in the lifts. All three ward councillors have been calling for this for some time. A year after a spate of serious crimes, I called for a public meeting to bring together agencies to work together urgently to improve things in these flats. Since then I’ve had meetings with officers at the civic centre to monitor progress. There have been a lot of suggestions put forward as to how we could improve safety in the area, but CCTV was one that was clearly affordable and proportionate. This will not be a magic bullet of course. I continue to think that tower blocks are fundamentally unsuitable places for young families, but hopefully this will go some way to making people feel safer in the short term.

Saturday

10:00 – Surgery

Labour councillors take it in turns to do a weekly surgery on a Saturday morning at 268 Sutton Road. It’s very handy for residents to know they can see a councillor on any given week. I often visit the office even when it’s not my turn because it’s a good way of keeping on top of things.

12:00 – Marching…

After the surgery, I set out to take part in the TUC march against the government’s austerity policies. Having seen and spoke to people during the course of the week who are affected by this government’s cruel cuts, not to mention the cuts in services that Southend Council will be more I’m more determined than ever to pursue all legal and democratic means to get rid of this of this awful government.

Sunday

Meant to be a day of rest. However I ended up delivering some newsletters for several hours. Got a message on Facebook to say my quote about David Amess has made it into the Sunday Mirror.

Older Posts »

Categories

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.