Would you pay a few pounds a month to keep our community services?, West Berkshire Council unveils budget cuts Options

[On the edge]

All I'm suggesting is that WBC do something to help local charites - that costs them next to nothing and costs nothing to anyone else who doesn't want to support any of the charities. What is so bad about that?

Nor am I suggesting that charities should take on former WBC responsibilities - just that WBC could do some small thing to help the charites to continue doing what the charities have been doing in the past.

Wholly accept what you are saying. However, everything WBC does costs and there are hundreds of good ideas which would mean an expenditure of next to nothing, which when added together is quite large.

Take your suggestion - WBC could suggest charge payers pay a little extra with the community charge. Costs for that would be:-
1. Officer time to work out the scheme
2. IT costs to enable collection of monies and subsequent dispatch to charities
3. Audit and supervision.
Even if it was a flyer sent with the Community Charge bill and perhaps a reference on the web site - time and effort would still be needed. That equates to cost.

The local charities could do things to help themselves; which would involve volunteer labour. However, appeals direct are likely to be much more productive.

[blackdog]

Even if it was a flyer sent with the Community Charge bill and perhaps a reference on the web site - time and effort would still be needed. That equates to cost.

I accept that the scheme would involve some cost - everything does. One solution: costs are recouped from the charitable donations (ie WBC acting as chuggers - Blake will approve ).

As for the flyer idea - why not use up a bit of the space in the bumph they print to send out with council tax bills to promote the charities they have shafted this year? This is all going to be printed anyway - and there must be extraneous bits of WBC self congratulation that we could do without in order to make space for the charity promotions.

[On the edge]

I accept that the scheme would involve some cost - everything does. One solution: costs are recouped from the charitable donations (ie WBC acting as chuggers - Blake will approve ).

As for the flyer idea - why not use up a bit of the space in the bumph they print to send out with council tax bills to promote the charities they have shafted this year? This is all going to be printed anyway - and there must be extraneous bits of WBC self congratulation that we could do without in order to make space for the charity promotions.

See where you are coming from - that would be self financing. Wholly agree about replacing the self satisfaction pages with something that is worthwhile; again that would simply be redeploying existing 'officer time' to achieve tangible benefits.

[Adrian Hollister]

Interesting to think that cost cutting from these community services only saves money today. The services they provide are essential to keep our community functioning correctly. If they stop doing their tasks then we will pay to pick up the mess tomorrow, it is likely to cost us more (both financially and as a functioning community) in the future.

It's like the old argument to stop children's community services as it's too expensive, where often the people who call for the cutting of their service also moan the bored children act antisocially outside their house.

Personally, I would be happy to pay more to keep things together and to know that there is support out there for all my friends, family and community.

[Simon Kirby]

Interesting to think that cost cutting from these community services only saves money today. The services they provide are essential to keep our community functioning correctly. If they stop doing their tasks then we will pay to pick up the mess tomorrow, it is likely to cost us more (both financially and as a functioning community) in the future.

It's like the old argument to stop children's community services as it's too expensive, where often the people who call for the cutting of their service also moan the bored children act antisocially outside their house.

Personally, I would be happy to pay more to keep things together and to know that there is support out there for all my friends, family and community.

How do you know that the grant funds essential services? I've not looked in detail at the other businesses, but as I understand it WBC contracts with Mencap to supply essential services and the grant is a small additional voluntary contribution and it's by no means clear to me what it pays for. How does that work then? If I buy a £150 washing machine from John Lewis I don't pay £150 and then bung them another £20 for the heck of it, and neitehr would John Lewis sell it to me for £120 and then tap up some other poor shopper for the remaining £30.

[NWNREADER]

Interesting to think that cost cutting from these community services only saves money today. The services they provide are essential to keep our community functioning correctly. If they stop doing their tasks then we will pay to pick up the mess tomorrow, it is likely to cost us more (both financially and as a functioning community) in the future.

It's like the old argument to stop children's community services as it's too expensive, where often the people who call for the cutting of their service also moan the bored children act antisocially outside their house.

Personally, I would be happy to pay more to keep things together and to know that there is support out there for all my friends, family and community.

Interesting you think only paid-for centrally-provided services can deliver those requirements.

[Adrian Hollister]

I don't think that is the only option, but it is the best value for money. Imagine the cost of tendering for contracts, that cost is included in the final price for an awarded contract (and tendering is not cheap). Or perhaps imagine the reliance upon donation, how much of that donation will be re-spent on marketing just to ensure continued donations. There are a lot of efficiencies to be gained by our LA giving us the right resources based on local need and not commercial pressure.

Happy to hear of a more efficient alternative though.

[NWNREADER]

I don't think that is the only option, but it is the best value for money. Imagine the cost of tendering for contracts, that cost is included in the final price for an awarded contract (and tendering is not cheap). Or perhaps imagine the reliance upon donation, how much of that donation will be re-spent on marketing just to ensure continued donations. There are a lot of efficiencies to be gained by our LA giving us the right resources based on local need and not commercial pressure.

Happy to hear of a more efficient alternative though.

You only referenced one element.....

The full-on voluntary sector has something to offer, at nil cost.

[On the edge]

Interesting to think that cost cutting from these community services only saves money today. The services they provide are essential to keep our community functioning correctly. If they stop doing their tasks then we will pay to pick up the mess tomorrow, it is likely to cost us more (both financially and as a functioning community) in the future.

It's like the old argument to stop children's community services as it's too expensive, where often the people who call for the cutting of their service also moan the bored children act antisocially outside their house.

Personally, I would be happy to pay more to keep things together and to know that there is support out there for all my friends, family and community.

Sorry they are not essential to keep our community functioning correctly. They are only essential to maintain the status quo. Arguably, providing 'Children's Community Services' has not stopped problems of juvenile delinquency; indeed some would argue its got worse since the welfare state started. Neither has it stopped the cycle of depravation. The are alternatives - some seemingly unpalatable. However, they exist and history demonstrates that they work. Arguably, and yes, its by no means perfect, American society works just as well as ours, and in many ways better, without much central intervention in welfare.

The way we implemented the Welfare State created a dependency culture it also seems to have sapped the UK's spirit of enterprise - we always need a dad to do things.

[Guest_xjay1337_*]

Adrian, sorry my PMs aren't seeming to work (probably me having an "ID10T" moment), did you get anywhere regarding that RBC subsidy regarding their reduction of speed limits?
Cheers

[Adrian Hollister]

.