IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >  
Reply to this topicStart new topic
> 2011 / 10 Budget
Richard Garvie
post Feb 1 2011, 09:08 AM
Post #1


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,974
Joined: 8-September 10
Member No.: 1,076



Although the budget is not revealed for consumption until the 9th Feb I believe, what can we expect to see? I believe that we are expecting savings of £10m-£12m this financial year, and between £8m-£10m in the following year.

What would you "cut"???

PS: This is the 2011 / 12 budget as you probably gathered!!!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bloggo
post Feb 1 2011, 09:20 AM
Post #2


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,863
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 41



QUOTE (Richard Garvie @ Feb 1 2011, 09:08 AM) *
Although the budget is not revealed for consumption until the 9th Feb I believe, what can we expect to see? I believe that we are expecting savings of £10m-£12m this financial year, and between £8m-£10m in the following year.

What would you "cut"???

PS: This is the 2011 / 12 budget as you probably gathered!!!

How about the salaries of the senior executives wink.gif


--------------------
Bloggo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post Feb 1 2011, 09:46 AM
Post #3


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



Merge Reading and West Berkshire Councils into one Unitary organisation and reduce overheads.

Job done.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Simon Kirby
post Feb 1 2011, 10:24 AM
Post #4


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,326
Joined: 20-July 10
From: Wash Common
Member No.: 1,011



Though I suspect there are savings to be made, without a detailed knowledge of what WBC does and how it does it, it's just not possible to make an informed suggestion. It's one of the reasons we elect councillors to represent us and balance the power of the state to levy tax, but I have zero confidence in them to do anything but toady to the establishment, so basically we're stuffed.


--------------------
Right an injustice - give Simon Kirby his allotment back!
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post Feb 1 2011, 10:34 AM
Post #5


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



I'd certainly cap council pay at £80k. You don't 'need' to earn more than that. Get rid of Grade CD.

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.a...d=18245&p=0

Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Biker1
post Feb 1 2011, 10:37 AM
Post #6


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 5,064
Joined: 26-May 09
Member No.: 103



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Feb 1 2011, 12:34 PM) *
I'd certainly cap council pay at £80k. You don't 'need' to earn more than that. Get rid of Grade CD.

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/CHttpHandler.a...d=18245&p=0

Ah yes but the argument would be that without paying the higher salaries the council would not attract the type of top performing, professional executives that it needs! laugh.gif laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Feb 1 2011, 11:24 AM
Post #7


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



I doubt capping senior exec pay would make a big difference in the wage bill. Not one that would fill the budget deficit anyway.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post Feb 1 2011, 11:29 AM
Post #8


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



QUOTE (Iommi @ Feb 1 2011, 11:24 AM) *
I doubt capping senior exec pay would make a big difference in the wage bill. Not one that would fill the budget deficit anyway.


Every little helps..
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Feb 1 2011, 11:31 AM
Post #9


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Feb 1 2011, 11:29 AM) *
Every little helps..

It does, but 'remuneration envy' won't fix the deficit problem. We need more radical plans to do that.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post Feb 1 2011, 11:44 AM
Post #10


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



QUOTE (Iommi @ Feb 1 2011, 11:31 AM) *
It does, but 'remuneration envy' won't fix the deficit problem. We need more radical plans to do that.


And you suggest??? Perhaps Daves 'Big Society' idea? Get over to the Librrary Iommi - You need to do your 'bit'. laugh.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Feb 1 2011, 11:51 AM
Post #11


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Feb 1 2011, 11:44 AM) *
And you suggest??? Perhaps Daves 'Big Society' idea? Get over to the Librrary Iommi - You need to do your 'bit'. laugh.gif

While I'm there, perhaps I could get a dictionary for you? tongue.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bloggo
post Feb 1 2011, 12:03 PM
Post #12


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,863
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 41



QUOTE (Iommi @ Feb 1 2011, 11:24 AM) *
I doubt capping senior exec pay would make a big difference in the wage bill. Not one that would fill the budget deficit anyway.

Quite right but it will help.
What about taking the company cars away from those that don't really need them anymore because their job no longer requires it or perhaps they now work from home.
I wonder if any senior managers have looked at this?


--------------------
Bloggo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post Feb 1 2011, 12:11 PM
Post #13


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



QUOTE (Iommi @ Feb 1 2011, 11:51 AM) *
While I'm there, perhaps I could get a dictionary for you? tongue.gif


Oh no - I misspelt Library. Its the end of the world! rolleyes.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Iommi
post Feb 1 2011, 12:26 PM
Post #14


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,138
Joined: 13-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 20



QUOTE (TallDarkAndHandsome @ Feb 1 2011, 12:11 PM) *
Oh no - I misspelt Library. Its the end of the world! rolleyes.gif

I was also having a joke with you, but never mind, perhaps you don't understand netiquette yet! wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TallDarkAndHands...
post Feb 1 2011, 01:41 PM
Post #15


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 4,327
Joined: 15-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 60



QUOTE (Iommi @ Feb 1 2011, 12:26 PM) *
I was also having a joke with you, but never mind, perhaps you don't understand netiquette yet! wink.gif


Touche wink.gif
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
dannyboy
post Feb 1 2011, 03:15 PM
Post #16


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 6,056
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Bouvetøya
Member No.: 51



Isn't it touché ?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Feb 1 2011, 08:07 PM
Post #17


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Bloggo @ Feb 1 2011, 12:03 PM) *
Quite right but it will help.
What about taking the company cars away from those that don't really need them anymore because their job no longer requires it or perhaps they now work from home.
I wonder if any senior managers have looked at this?


How many employees have 'company cars'?

Mostly it is a lease arrangement, for people who use their car regularly for Council business, in lieu of the 40p/mile essential user allowance. The employee usually makes a contribution, but the lease is cheaper for the Council than the monthly lump sum + mileage (all as per HMRC guidelines applicable to any employee in any job for any employee).

Take away the lease cars and the monthly allowances paid to staff would be a greater cost.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Cognosco
post Feb 1 2011, 08:13 PM
Post #18


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 2,452
Joined: 31-October 10
Member No.: 1,212



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Feb 1 2011, 08:07 PM) *
How many employees have 'company cars'?

Mostly it is a lease arrangement, for people who use their car regularly for Council business, in lieu of the 40p/mile essential user allowance. The employee usually makes a contribution, but the lease is cheaper for the Council than the monthly lump sum + mileage (all as per HMRC guidelines applicable to any employee in any job for any employee).

Take away the lease cars and the monthly allowances paid to staff would be a greater cost.


You must first define if the lease car is essential though surely? Most council staff above a certain station have one just because it is a status symbol. The question is: Is a car essential for the job they do if they only need one on occasions then a car pool would be more cost effective surely?


--------------------
Vexatious Candidate?
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
NWNREADER
post Feb 1 2011, 08:21 PM
Post #19


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 3,414
Joined: 20-November 10
Member No.: 1,265



QUOTE (Cognosco @ Feb 1 2011, 08:13 PM) *
You must first define if the lease car is essential though surely? Most council staff above a certain station have one just because it is a status symbol. The question is: Is a car essential for the job they do if they only need one on occasions then a car pool would be more cost effective surely?

I understand why you ask, but you do need to know something of the WBC policies on the issue before going for a change.
I believe it is so that the scheme is only 'beneficial' at all to certain staff and , as already mentioned, taking the cars away and paying the alternative allowance is more expensive for the Council. The change you propose would likely cost the Council more than the lease car scheme.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Bloggo
post Feb 2 2011, 08:47 AM
Post #20


Advanced Member
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,863
Joined: 14-May 09
From: Newbury
Member No.: 41



QUOTE (NWNREADER @ Feb 1 2011, 08:21 PM) *
I understand why you ask, but you do need to know something of the WBC policies on the issue before going for a change.
I believe it is so that the scheme is only 'beneficial' at all to certain staff and , as already mentioned, taking the cars away and paying the alternative allowance is more expensive for the Council. The change you propose would likely cost the Council more than the lease car scheme.

No, you are missing the point. There are those in the Council that have company cars but no longer use them in any great degree for company business. I am suggesting that the management reveiw this situation to make a judgement if it is still necessary saving the tax payer money.
I am not suggesting that they take the cars away from those that genuinely need them to do the job.
All you need to know about WBC policies is are they up to date and cost effective.


--------------------
Bloggo
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post

3 Pages V   1 2 3 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:

 

Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 27th April 2024 - 05:20 AM