Fiscal Impact Options

[Simon Kirby]

Being discussed at tomorrow night's Town Council Policy and Resources Committee:

17. Fiscal Impact
Given the potential removal of the Local Council Tax Support scheme grant of £89,679 to have an initial discussion on potential mitigation options, including: passing on the cost to the precept payers; freezing recruitment; removing funding for third parties; direct cutting of existing projects/functions/services and any other options that are put forward.

I have argued for some time that the town's allotmenteers should be given responsibility for the management and maintenance of the allotment service. It costs £41k for the Town Council to administer the service and it's reasonable to expect the whole of that to be saved through self-management, along with a fair proportion of the Council's £300k back-office and administration costs, so maybe a total saving of £80k through self-management.

The cost saving isn't particularly my concern, it's more because self-management makes for a better allotment site, but saving the tax-payer money is a good end in itself, and if it comes down to a choice between the Council increasing the tax bill by 10% to cover this Local Council Tax Support shortfall, cutting some other useful service, or the self-management of the allotment service, I know what I'd vote for.

I've written to one of the councillors with this proposal so I hope now that it will get some serious consideration. If you have some ideas of your own then I suggest that you write to your councillors too.

[On the edge]

Being discussed at tomorrow night's Town Council Policy and Resources Committee:



I have argued for some time that the town's allotmenteers should be given responsibility for the management and maintenance of the allotment service. It costs £41k for the Town Council to administer the service and it's reasonable to expect the whole of that to be saved through self-management, along with a fair proportion of the Council's £300k back-office and administration costs, so maybe a total saving of £80k through self-management.

The cost saving isn't particularly my concern, it's more because self-management makes for a better allotment site, but saving the tax-payer money is a good end in itself, and if it comes down to a choice between the Council increasing the tax bill by 10% to cover this Local Council Tax Support shortfall, cutting some other useful service, or the self-management of the allotment service, I know what I'd vote for.

I've written to one of the councillors with this proposal so I hope now that it will get some serious consideration. If you have some ideas of your own then I suggest that you write to your councillors too.

I suspect if I did right now, because it's just before the meeting, they would assume I'd have been got at. I'll try and follow up outcome of meeting with my suggestion which would be to eliminate all the administration, which is just a duplicate of what happens in WBC, who should be able to absorb the NTC operating workload without any significant increase in resource.

[The Hatter]

They are really going to take some notice because they already know whats for the chop.

[Simon Kirby]

As a member of Newbury Town Council I am further interested in hearing what the precept payers of Newbury desire their Town Council to do/not do with regard to these, and the 10% cut to its own budget which will have an impact on the services provided by NTC.

Allotment self-management - £41k to be saved: it could potentially save around 5% of the council budget, though it would take a couple of years to get there and it would take a little investment in the process too. Other councils have done it faster with a sink-or-swim approach but it's liable to be chaotic if the transition is not well-managed. The best evidence is that in general people like managing their own sites, even if they take some persuading to start with, and that the sites become better managed, better provisioned with facilities, and cheaper to rent. Self-management is just an umbrella term that describes a continuum of devolved responsibility so sites can take on as much responsibility as they are able and comfortable to cope with, and the greater the level of devolved responsibility the greater the saving on the precept. It really is a win-win.

Town Hall - £88k to be saved: The council doesn't need to rattle round in a Gothic mansion with a great priapic bell tower, all it really needs is some office accommodation and the hire of a modest meeting room every couple of weeks. The Town Hall accounts for more staff costs than any other service head apart from the Administration head - that's utterly bizarre. A little office on the New Greenham Estate would serve the parish council admirably.

Administration - £194k to be saved: The Council has an outrageous level of overheads considering the services it provides - 20% of the budget on an amorphous bucket of back-office "administration" is simply too much. With a little trimming of the services I think it would be reasonable to cut "administration" pretty savagely and let the Council cut their coat according to the cloth.

Market: £25k to be saved: I would like the town to have a thriving charter market, but the Council has struggled on with no success. The financial position improved with the loss of the pointless WBC cleansing contract, but it is just so characteristic of NTC's inept management that the contract remained in place for as long as it did. I can't agree that it can be right to the precept payer to subsidise the charter marketeers, and while I think a successful profitable market is a possibility, I can't see that happening under NTC, so it's time to ditch it. Let the BID take it on if they want it, or just let it lapse like space hoppers and Morris Marinas and everything else that wasn't fit to make it out of the seventies.

Grants - £40k to be saved: I can see that there are some causes worthy of parish money, and I guess I'd single out the carnival as one because it's a community event that brings some colour to the town and is very well organised, but most of this money seems to go to special-interest groups with only the most tangential connection to the parish, though at times a more tangible connection to parish councillors. It's my money, and I would like to choose where to spend it thanks, not be taxed for NTC to divvy it up like Lady Bountiful.

Civic Duties - £56k to be saved: I like the idea of a ceremonial mayor, but it has nothing to do with local government in my view. If the Newbury Society want to provide some pomp and pageant at no cost to the tax-payer then great, they can dress up with robes and medallions, but I don't want to be taxed for this when it does no more than serves the egos of a handful of Newbury's great-and-good and is actually a barrier to the public engagement with local politics.

I think I might feel differently about some of those things if I didn't so despise the council for how it has treated me, but there you go.

[On the edge]

I'd wholly support everything Simon has come up with, he's actually come up with the maths ad well. One further point, it ill behoves the Council to continue what amounts to be a vendetta against a Joe Average charge payer; simply because he dared to question their actions and had the strength of conviction not to give up. That NTC have consistently failed to arbitrate says rather a lot about their professionalism and does then Council's image absolutely no favours. Robes and wigs, mice peering through oakum indeed!

[Simon Kirby]

I'd wholly support everything Simon has come up with, he's actually come up with the maths ad well. One further point, it ill behoves the Council to continue what amounts to be a vendetta against a Joe Average charge payer; simply because he dared to question their actions and had the strength of conviction not to give up. That NTC have consistently failed to arbitrate says rather a lot about their professionalism and does then Council's image absolutely no favours. Robes and wigs, mice peering through oakum indeed!

Thanks for that OtE, kindly said.

It's obliviously nice that one town councillor is now engaging seriously with my criticism of the council's management of its services and finances, but the fact remains that I am still officially designated a Vexatious Complainant by the Town Council for making just this criticism, a designation the Council has subsequently used to smear and discredit me. It is still my complaint that the Town Council used the designation to stifle and suppress reasonable and legitimate criticism in breach of my Article 10 right to freedom of expression, and that my question to the Council was not vexatious, being neither directly aggressive nor harassing of any individual council officer or councillor, not being repetitious, not reviving an old settled complaint, and being a complaint in which I had an obvious sincere and honest interest and not being brought simply to disrupt and cause trouble. Neither was it a complaint as such, I was exercising my right to engage in political discourse, and I feel very strongly that the Council were grossly offensive to attack me as they did - and as they continue to do until they apologise and revoke the designation. Obviously the attack went further than that and lost me my allotment and I am now banned for life from ever having a Town Council allotment again. Clearly for someone who was so dedicated to his allotment this is very harsh, and the fact that the Council knew they were in the wrong and yet persisted with the victimisation anyway still leaves me snarling. At some point the council's misdeeds will have to come out and I do look forward to the time when I will get back everything that I've lost and will be able to move on.

[Simon Kirby]

From today's NWN:

But funding for tourism will be completely cut from the budget, meaning the Tourist Information Centre in Newbury faces closure unless the town council foots the bill.

WTF? Is that actually on the agenda, that the Town Council will just ramp up the precept to mop up all those lovely little services that are going for the asking? The Council giveth with one hand and the other council taketh away with both hands.

[user23]

From today's NWN:


WTF? Is that actually on the agenda, that the Town Council will just ramp up the precept to mop up all those lovely little services that are going for the asking? The Council giveth with one hand and the taketh with both hands.

Why not? Isn't that what localism is about, towns and parishes deciding more of what is provided to their residents?

[Simon Kirby]

Why not? Isn't that what localism is about, towns and parishes deciding more of what is provided to their residents?

Probably, yes. If parishoners want to be taxed for these services then that is their democratic right - and it's my democratic duty to pay that tax and poke up with it. Don't ask me to like it though.

[On the edge]

Why not? Isn't that what localism is about, towns and parishes deciding more of what is provided to their residents?

It's also about people having the choice. Arguably NTC have no mandate to take over tourist information until an election. I didn't see on any of the candidates manifestos last time that they intended to take on more activity.

Tourist information is wholly unnecessary for most of our residents; only accommodation and attraction providers who should be doing this themselves anyway.

[Simon Kirby]

*d'oh*

[On the edge]

To be honest, it was just a personal view and I was trying to out Bright John, so to speak. If the elected Councillors agreed to take these extras on, in the right way, then I'd wholly support their right to do so...even though Impersonally disagreed with the spend. It would actually make a nice change to see them doing something!

In fact, I'd like to see a whole raft of things given to parish councils, even though the present antics of NTC suggest they aren't the most able of bodies. However if that was done, there should be no agreement making it impossible to do anything but replicate WBCs methods of delivery. Similarly, I wouldn't want to see a repeat of the Victoria Park debacle, where the transfer was tangled in unnecessary legal debate for a long time.

The biggest worry we have is that NTC just use this budget round to empire build. So I think it's wholly necessary for them to know that many of us will want to justify every penny.

[Simon Kirby]

*d'oh*

Sorry, it wasn't a comment on your post - I just hit the wrong button and posted a quote by mistake.

[Simon Kirby]

The biggest worry we have is that NTC just use this budget round to empire build.

Exactly. NTC are currently inept and inefficient, and letting them fill their boots is not going to help them improve. In addition to that I feel that the WBC cuts are necessary because for too long we have been spending beyond our means and I don't want to see our domestic economy go the way of the Greeks. Allowing NTC to increase their un-capped precept simply circumvents the cap on the council tax.

[On the edge]

Sorry, it wasn't a comment on your post - I just hit the wrong button and posted a quote by mistake.

Don't worry! I needed to explain where I was coming from anyway.