QUOTE (Chelsea Greg @ Apr 30 2010, 01:08 PM)
I think the problem here is with the not so subtle differences between the way WBC is run and the genuine efforts of RBC. Whereas RBC has adopted a hands on/community based policy WBC is still painting by numbers. A vast majority of WBC staff seem to think getting paid to turn up is reason enough for their continued employment. A diversion of inter-council funds is a means to an end and local councillors are finally realising this cross-pollination is the lesser of two evils. The situation is very similiar to the recent shakeup of the civil service where a culling of 'dead wood' was a necessity...
The problem has arisen not because of RBC has adopted a hands on/community based policy but because people from Reading want to send their children to WBC schools, because they're so much better. WBC foots the bill for these students, and RBC get the money via their residents' Council Tax. Does this seem fair?
What you've said about cutbacks is a fallacy given Gershon and previous initiatives. Remember, 10 years ago a private company came in to WBC to try and make savings over 25 years. They pulled out after 5 or so because, as I understand it, there were none to be made and still operate as a private company, i.e. make a profit. This was prior to the cutbacks in local government over the last 10 years and again as I understand it some of how WBC can only function due to the good will (for that read unpaid work) of their staff.
Uninformed statements like yours can only discourage people to work for nothing for the betterment of their community, after all would you work for someone for free if they were as ungrateful as you seem to be?
There
will be more cuts enforced by whoever takes power after May 6th; expect these to impact on local services to varying degrees depending on who is making them.