Following the recent local council council elections, we have received the following press release which we have reproduced in full:
CONSERVATIVE LEADER ANNOUNCES NEW LOOK FRONT BENCH
The Leader of the Council, Cllr. Graham Jones, has today (17th May) announced the detail of his new look front bench which he will propose at tonight’s meeting of West Berkshire Council.
In recognition of many years of service to the Community, Cllr. Peter Argyle will be nominated as Chairman of Council, with Cllr. Edwards serving as Vice Chairman. Cllr. Gordon Lundie, Lambourn Ward, takes on responsibility for the development of long term strategy and heads up the new Transformation Portfolio. Cllr. Irene Neill takes over his responsibilities for Youth and Children Services as well as being the Portfolio Holder for Education.
Cllr. Pamela Bale will remain as Deputy Leader and stand for election as Chair of the West Berkshire Partnership. She retains responsibility for Communities and the Visions.
Cllr. Hilary Cole will add the responsibilities of Culture and Leisure to her portfolio of environmental matters.
In addition to his role with the Thames Valley Police Authority, Cllr. Anthony Stansfeld will continue with his responsibilities for Emergency Planning and Community Safety.
Cllrs. Keith Chopping (Finance), David Betts (Highways & ICT), Joe Mooney (Community Care) and Alan Law (Planning, Housing & Transport Policy) all retain their existing responsibilities. Cllr. Betts takes on the additional responsibility of Customer Services.
Leader of the Council, Cllr. Graham Jones commented: “I am really fortunate to be supported by a very strong and experienced team. I am delighted to welcome Irene Neill to the Executive who has ably supported previous Portfolio Holders at Children & Young People. Freed from his responsibility as a Portfolio Holder with budgetary responsibility, I look now to Gordon. Lundie to bring his business skills and acumen in finding new ways that we can deliver better value for money for the people of West Berkshire. This is further evidence of our strength in depth.
Given the scale of the reduction in funds received from central government, we are simply going to have to find new ways of delivering the services that people need across West Berkshire. Difficult choices lie ahead but we are all looking forward to the challenges that we will undoubtedly have to surmount over the coming months.”
“As ever our priority will be to maintain high quality front line services, whilst keeping to a minimum the burden on the Council Tax Payer.”
If he's serious about giving priority to frontline services Mr Jones and his colleagues will, no doubt, be taking Eric Pickles' advice and merging West Berks with other local councils. Merging back office functions and senior management posts could save millions. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11603545
West Berkshire Council could continue to exist in name, of course, but all the non-front-line stuff would be provided by the remaining staff of merged councils or outsourced. Further savings could be made by holding council meetings in schools, parish halls and so on around the district enabling Market Street and other offices to be sold off for development and bringing the council much closer to the community it serves. This would also avoid the need for the environmentally unsound move to Greenham and would be an excellent way of demonstrating that Mr Jones means what he says.
Based on his protestations in the local press Mr Jones seems rather touchy on the topic of council mergers, but it's lovely to see that he's enjoying the 'challenges' so much.
In addition to his role with the Thames Valley Police Authority, Cllr. Anthony Stansfeld will continue with his responsibilities for Emergency Planning and Community Safety.
Doesn't matter if you table misleading statements to disguise alleged failure these days?
If he's serious about giving priority to frontline services Mr Jones and his colleagues will, no doubt, be taking Eric Pickles' advice and merging West Berks with other local councils. Merging back office functions and senior management posts could save millions. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11603545
Based on his protestations in the local press Mr Jones seems rather touchy on the topic of council mergers, but it's lovely to see that he's enjoying the 'challenges' so much.
I think you'll find that's exactly what they're doing. In fact, they're in advanced talks with Wokingham to merge Environmental Health (following on from Trading Standards). They've got rid of 15% of staff in the last year too - but you're right, there's much further they can go. I don't want "low council tax rises", I want them to cut cut cut so I can have a cut in what I pay them.
I think you'll find that's exactly what they're doing. In fact, they're in advanced talks with Wokingham to merge Environmental Health (following on from Trading Standards). They've got rid of 15% of staff in the last year too - but you're right, there's much further they can go. I don't want "low council tax rises", I want them to cut cut cut so I can have a cut in what I pay them.
But tax just goes up to pay for the 'out of work'. I think it is quite disgusting that people wish to see people out of work, just to knock £5.00-£10.00 off of the council tax bill.
If he's serious about giving priority to frontline services Mr Jones and his colleagues will, no doubt, be taking Eric Pickles' advice and merging West Berks with other local councils. Merging back office functions and senior management posts could save millions. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11603545
West Berkshire Council could continue to exist in name, of course, but all the non-front-line stuff would be provided by the remaining staff of merged councils or outsourced.
But if you're serious about it why stop there? Merge, merge and merge again... Shrink all functions so that they can be conducted from a rented back room in some call centre in Mumbai. It's all very well demanding greater cuts, but at some stage someone's got to realise that there may be no more fat to trim and you're just slashing at a carcass... And then you'll start whining that you're bins aren't being emptied....
I'm sure some of you already know this, but it's worth pointing out again, one council (Suffolk) had decided to outsource nearly everything it does. Almost everything it is responsible for, it will be letting others run.
To quote dircetly. "Under the New Strategic Direction almost all council services will be offloaded to social enterprises or companies over the next few years".
To put it another way, they intend to off load all council services to, well, just about anyone else.
So, a council do nothing.. nowt, zip, ziltch, nada....how much does that save?
30%
Yep, that's right...30%, in other words 70% of the costs that that particular council charges go to running itself. That would seem to be not so very different from many other councils. A child of five could work out where the greatest savings could be made if a council has to start cutting it's bills.
Yep, that's right...30%, in other words 70% of the costs that that particular council charges go to running itself.
Eh? I think you need to run your numbers past a child of 5.
Anyway, the devil is in the detail. If they can make outsourcing of everything work, fine. But my guess is that private sector providers will bid low to win the work and then 'discover' they can't actually deliver services and fight to vary the terms of their contracts. I'd also like to see how much of the work is being handed to non profits.
The idea that the private sector is always best or more efficient is, of course, nonsense. Have you tried dealing with a bank, mobile phone company or solicitors recently. And as various surveys have shown, and logic suggests, private sector delivery almost always works out more expensive than efficiently run public services for the obvious reason that if you contract-out you have to pay for the profits, tax and huge remuneration packages of the directors and senior staff.
No doubt WBC can buy in more services and make some savings there, but I'd like to know whether they're also looking at mergers?
If 30% goes on it's services...where does the other 70% go?
I presume the money goes the social enterprises or companies now doing the work the council used to. You didn't seriously think they'd fix the roads or power the street lights for free, did you? Presumably they say they can do it for a 70% of the cost of the council doing it.
Some people seem to have short memories. WBC entered into partnership with a private company around 10 years ago to provide a large chunk of their services for 25 years. From what I understand the private company wanted out after 5 years because one might guess there were no savings to be made and they were actually making a loss.
From what I understand the private company wanted out after 5 years because one might guess there were no savings to be made and they were actually making a loss.
Aye, I was at the wake farewell do at the parting of the Amey / West Berks ways.
The idea here is that eventually people will have to make payment for the services they want, directly to the suppliers.....e.g.
The problem with that is eventually poorer areas will go without whllst richer areas would get the bulk of the services. Hang on, that would never happen under a Tory government though would it? Outsourcing to private companies that either have councillors wives on the board or who make the right sort of 'donations'. Perish the thought.
The idea here is that eventually people will have to make payment for the services they want, directly to the suppliers.....e.g.
.
So, if I have to pay for services which up till now have been paid for by the council, bearing in mind that I pay my rates for that purpose, would I get a refund or reduction in the payment I now make.
Would the council want to have their meetings in my and others (on a rota) front room.
It made good reading yesterday in the NWN of the problems in the planning department. 3,000 applications in the year and at a guess 7or 8 people in the team, that works out to less than a couple of applications a day per person. Now most of the applications are Mr Smith wanting to stick up a garage or do a loft conversion. Stressful work no doubt. But why it takes six months of training to be able to run that through I can't imagine. I can understand that the biguns like the Parkway might take a bit longer but how much effort needs to go into someone wanting to open a hair and beauty salon.
So, if I have to pay for services which up till now have been paid for by the council, bearing in mind that I pay my rates for that purpose, would I get a refund or reduction in the payment I now make.
Would the council want to have their meetings in my and others (on a rota) front room.
It made good reading yesterday in the NWN of the problems in the planning department. 3,000 applications in the year and at a guess 7or 8 people in the team, that works out to less than a couple of applications a day per person. Now most of the applications are Mr Smith wanting to stick up a garage or do a loft conversion. Stressful work no doubt. But why it takes six months of training to be able to run that through I can't imagine. I can understand that the biguns like the Parkway might take a bit longer but how much effort needs to go into someone wanting to open a hair and beauty salon.
Haven't they only recently employed "7 or 8 people in the team" to deal with the backlog?
If this is the case then it's far more applications per person that you've guessed at.
Logged
Male
