West Berkshire Council have released details of savings proposals for 2014 to 2016, including a video from Gordon Lundie, Leader of the Council, and are looking for your feedback please. You can find more information at: http://www.westberks.gov.uk/savingsproposals

Their little spending pie was interesting

I couldn't help thinking about all the money they spend on sh*t like , for example , the probably thousands on a certain Allotment members shed.

I think they need to have a serious review of what they are spending their money in, who they are paying, and what they are getting.
Asking the question "Is this value for money"

Most of the time in the Public Sector the answer is no......
Schools paying £800 a pop for Laptopts you can buy for £350 from the PC World sale, for example

Particularly of interest to me are the roads.

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=28533


Where it states:

(i) Some lower priority sign repairs and road marking refurbishment will not be carried out

(ii) Fewer crash barriers and guard railing repairs will be carried out meaning that only priority areas such as outside schools and on higher speed roads may be undertaken. The frequency of gully emptying in some areas will be reduced with priority given to those areas prone to flooding

(iii) Fewer roads will be gritted during the winter months

(iv) There will be a reduction in some road repairs

(v) We will review the way we instruct our contractor to deal with unscheduled highway works

(vi) Seasonal summer grass maintenance will be reduced which may result in some areas being overgrown and looking untidy especially in rural areas


___

So more potholes... cheers

I've had a look at some of them:

Totally getting rid of the Duke of Edinburgh's Scheme - I didn't know they were spending money on it and certainly don't understand why?

Closing Tourist Information office and all tourism related stuff - I guess that will be a popular one.

Reducing library hours - one or two small libraries seem to be taking a much bigger hit than others. I'm a regular user of Newbury library - it wouldn't be a disaster to close it one day a week so I'm not so sure why its hours are not changing?

Means testing and charging for old folks care - bound to be contentious, but without any details how on earth can we make a judgement on the fairness of it?

Road safety - withdrawing support for various campaigns. I guess we might find out how effective local campaigns were.

Closing public conveniences - it seems that loos in villages are to go unless the parish councils find alternative funding. But Newbury's loos are protected. Not sure I agree with this one - surely there are plenty of alternatives in Newbury that don't exist in the villages. I'd close the Pembroke Road conveniences ahead of, for instance, Pangbourne.

Public transport - do they really run a bus from Beech Hill to Newbury? Is there anyone on it?

The ones that worry me are the ones that aren't there: Administrative costs, councillor expenses/jollies, free parking for council employees - I wonder how much a £3 a day charge would raise?

wonder how much a £3 a day charge would raise?


£3 a day?

Then again I'd be pissed if I got told I hda to pay to park at my place of work.
Luckily as I don't work in the Public Sector I don't have to find out

Allotments are the province of the Town Council, not WBC as I'm sure Simon will confirm.

Interesting point there that a few people got a bit hot under the collar about WBC employees getting free parking in the KC. There was a government initiative some while ago that work place car parking was a benefit in kind and therefore taxable.

If an employer owns the space, I see that as different than an employer paying for you to park the car you use when going to and from your normal place of work.

"According to Nottingham City Council Register of Payments to
Elected Members, councillor Jane Urquhart received £29,532.84 in 2010/2011." for parking charges.

The above snippet is from an article about Nottingham workplace parking introduced a short time ago.

The article was actually about the parking problems of residents displaced by employees not using and paying for workplace parking. So another niggle for charge payers.
Stuffed by allowance receivers. £29,000 would fill a few potholes for motormad
And stuffed by employees poaching their space.
The article was in the Telegraph in August this year. The cost to park would have been £1.00 per day
or for those with only six fingers £300+ per year.(Or Anum, if you are a resident )
ce

and lets hope the senior and middle management, who have such poor commercial sense, bear the brunt of the redundancies!

Indeed. WBC might possibly run allotments in some of the other parish areas, but i don't think so.

The Town Council are having their own spending review which I posted about the other day.

I thought the Gordon Lundie video was good. I'd be unhappy to see the library service hit but it's clear that something needs to go.

They're sounding out public views on a volunteer run library service. Clearly the death knell for libraries as a whole - they'll attempt to run libraries with volunteers, find out that it's virtually impossible to provide anything like the current service for any sustained period and then cut it back to the bone. Triple G&T's all round at the Conservative Association!

That's going to hurt... Could be a bumpy road ahead for this proposal...

Is that figure right? Can we really be currently spending nearly £1m on grass cutting? That's more than the road maintenance budget (Cue lots of people saying "Well I NEVER see them cutting the grass in my street.... Have to do it myself")

Perhaps some joined up thinking is required with a reduction of the numbers of empty VF buses driving around town.


Full rate charges for parking on Sunday.... That'll be popular "You're KILLING the town!!" they all cry...


Again, why have they got away with us payng so much to them so far? More cutting required...

Small beer as far as the figure is concerned but what impact will it have on road safety...



no biggy..... Why have we been paying so much in the first place...



That's quite some snip.. Are our roads going to be 'unsafer' as a result? What price a life? The Safer Roads Partnership runs the speed cameras so presumably they will be left idle while motormad goes mad with his motor?


Sad but an understandable cut..

I have to say that I've disagreed with libraries being some sort of cheaper subsidised Blockbuster, renting out DVDs and having an impressive stock of music CDs for people to rent for a nominal fee and burn to their hard drives.... That side of the library should have been a cost cutter ages ago. And as for books, whilst many may gnash their teeth over the loss of a library in this day and age more and more of us are Kindle users or electronic media users when it comes to book reading, so perhaps they've had their day.......

Well, savings need to be made, and the library service is relatively low down on the list of essential priorities. It's a valuable resource for people without internet access, but there are internet cafes. It's also a valuable resource for people who read of course, but e-books could change that.

I don't like the idea of running services with volunteers as a way of saving money - my idea of the Big Society is a small state that enables people to do stuff for themselves, but the object is to create an active engaged society and not to save public money per se. That said I could see a community library being an outside possibility, but I think it would take some visionary leadership to build something that people wanted to get involved in because it's a bit out-there.

Volunteering to cut the road verges is a definite possibility, and seeing how much money is spent on it I think that's something to think seriously about. It's something I'd gladly volunteer to do, so I'm guessing others would enjoy it too. To be honest I've often wondered about estates I've seen with unkempt public spaces and wondered why no one would think of just taking their mower over and taking pride in the place where they live. But then I've seen how oppressive public authorities like our town council can be in defence of their grounds maintenance empire - they're after grabbing every tax-spending pretext they can, so it's simply not in their interests to empower communities to take care of themselves. This really is the challenge of the Big Society - convincing public authorities to let go and let people take ownership, and now we've got used to sitting on our hands being spoon-fed by the nanny state it will take a bit of re-learning if we're to look after ourselves again.

It is means tested and charged for currently.

To offset all these cuts what can WBC do to generate a cash flow inwards? Introduce On-street Pay & Display? Up the charge for resident permit parking from £25 to £30 for the first permit and £50 for the second permit?

For a start they could look at the amount of money that is just spent on taxis to get children to school. So many of the families that qualify for this service have too often been allowed to get away with pretty much demanding an exclusive chauffeur driven motor for their ungrateful and disruptive brat.

Public Transport team try to arrange a shared taxi for two children in the same village going to the same school. Too easy. The parent of one of them will phone up and claim that the children hate each other and will fight, or one of them bullies the other at school so they can't possibly share. So two taxis get booked.

Other scenario is where taxi turns up to take teenage brat to school but said brat is still in bed and refuses to get up. Taxi driver is sent away and told by the school transport team to go back in an hour and see if child is out of bed. Two trips, two lots of cost.

I guess the point is how many of the employees would still park there if they had to pay. Everyone who currently parks there wouldn't just continue to park there. I'd guess there'd be a significant drop in numbers and we'd get more people parking in nearby roads and walking the last part into town. Plenty of free parking around own if you know where to look and are able-bodied

More than ever, the land for the Sandleford Country Park needs handing over to a trust along with an endowment that will generate sufficient revenue to run it in perpetuity. Without this the promise of a Country Park is empty.

Yes, if we could just stop this, then the town will be saved!

well

So then if child is late for school child gets no lift to school and parents are billed the cost of the taxi trip

Easy.



Because it is?
It's cr@p.

Now all the secondary schools are academies WBC has no control over them; so why do they have to deliver children to them? If schools want to run their own affairs let them run them all.

Good point but the Coalition are generally in the business of privatising profits and subsidising or nationalising losses and this fits with that philosophy. Cameron, in the meantime, boasts about how many private sector jobs the Coalition have created but include academy staff in that number even though they're paid for by taxpayers! http://goo.gl/39JnpW I guess the son of a serial tax dodger has dishonesty in his blood. http://goo.gl/ig6pJ

You would know Simon but isn't most of the grass cutting in town including the street verges, the remit of NTC. If that is the case, then the village green and verges in the villages should fall upon their parish council. This may already be the case, I don't know.
There is still the need to keep the verges of the highways and roads under the control of WBC cut back. There isn't a householder with a lawnmower able to do that so is that why there is such a high figure.



What is the criteria for children being delivered to school at public cost. I suspect that the free run comes under the heading "Special needs child" and as such, the child is allocated to the school. In that case, could the school refuse to pay the travel costs as often, especially in the case of younger children, the school it not always the closest to the residence of the parents.

if saving £165,000 on road maintenance includes the people in a lorry who stop, 1 gets out throws a shovel full of black tar stuff in the hole scrapes overspill in with the edge of his boot and tamps it down
with the back of his shovel then returns to the cab 20 seconds later (as seen outside my house , only to return a few months later to repeat the process "cos the rain has washed away the first lot of tar) I'm all for that

You can see a map of grass the council currently cuts here: http://ww2.westberks.gov.uk/InternetMappin...7&opencat=2

They're not

They need to do it once, and do it properly. That is the problem.

Plus the cost from paying to replace peoples tyres, wheels and suspension components adds up quickly.....

Oh? Which one has stayed under WBC control?

Dear Forum Members,

I am sure by now you will have seen the video of Cllr Gordon Lundie outlining the proposed cuts to services of West Berkshire Council, and will also impact on the Town and Parish Councils as well.

I would be only too pleased to know what people think will be the results of these cuts to not only those living in the urban areas, but also those living the rural areas, and what can be done to mitigate the negative impact on the most vulnerable.

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.

I look forward to hearing your positive contribution to the local governance of Newbury.

Yours

Ruwan Uduwerage-Perera
Councillor for Victoria Ward

Well that map is a load of porkies. The WBDC or NTC haven't cut the verges down Newtown Road for ages.

As the map that Phil most helpfully posted shows, the verges are mostly done by WBC. I have very little idea of what the other parishes do and to be honest there's a world of difference between the small ones and the large ones, with the small ones spending like £20-£30 per household on a very minimal set of services, and the big ones spending around £100 per household and a much broader range of stuff.

NTC have something like 50 bits of green-space that they manage and the maintenance bill is around £100k. This is separate from the maintenance of all the parks. It's a wild extrapolation, but if the five biggest of the West Berks parishes do the same kind of thing then that's a total bill of £500k - a serious potential for savings. There is some scope for residents adopting lengths of WBC verge to maintain where the verge is in a residential area, but virtually all of these green areas maintained by the parishes are amenable to adoption - interesting bits of land in residential areas where keen gardeners would love to adopt the maintenance for the sense of ownership and pride that it brings.

As this is the WBC thread I'll post my thoughts in the NTC thread.

The Downs; John O'Gaunt; Little Heath; Willink are all LA maintained schools

Denefield; Kennet; Park House; Trinity are all academies

Community effort on verges and green space can do other things. For instance some prudent planting can have the effect of visually narrowing the road and thus encouraging reduced speeds, but without humps. Equally well tended and planted verges make for a more aspiration all area and make great places to plant fruiting trees etc.

Precisely so. I very much approve of the idea of communities adopting their common areas and agreeing between themselves what to plant and mow - it's all about inclusion and enfranchisement. We're simply more social and communal if we live in a place that we feel we own. There's also something quiet fundamental and primitive about planting trees which also seems to root people in their communities too.

And Theale Green I assume? Could have sworn Downs was an academy.


And St Barts

I'm obviously too Newbury centred!

Still half of them are academies, one of which has already demonstrated it can provide school transport cheaper than WBC.

It didn't take too long....

Getting to sound like a new form of free allotments. Strip farming in suburbia...

Sadly the idea of shrubbery or trees invading the grass verges will probably run into one or three problems... Many residential grass verges have underground services which could be damaged by tree roots. Drainage and sewers are generally fairly deep but BT, or fibreoptic TV cables and even gas and water can be fairly near the surface and it doesn't take too much effort for a well intentioned resident with a spade to do some serious damage when digging a plant in.

The other problem is the inconsiderate vehicle owners who want to park on the verges or have few alternatives other than half on/half off the grass....

There are issues of course, but I don't think the solutions are too difficult if there is a will. Green-space adoption can be a relatively simple process but with some formality about what it permissible and what is safe.

For example, the adoption agreement could simply say mowing only, don't dig. Or it might say digging is OK after a survey.

Sure, people park on grass verges, but it's less likely if the verge is well maintained.

With respect to Newbury library we went past at 6.30pm on Tuesday and all the lights were on, that could possibly have been cleaners, however we returned past the library at 9.45pm and all the lights were still on. Surely turning off unnecessary lighting in public buildings would make some savings.

Would that the utility services were in the verges! They wouldn't then need to keep digging up the roads. Can't have it both ways but I suspect the local 'authorities' would use it as an excuse, particularly if they couldn't pin it all on bogus safety issues. In any event, anyone digging could see where cables etc lie, because all utilities are under a statutory obligation to record the whereabouts of their equipment, lines and cables...

Until the last 6 months or so, if you went on the BT Openreach to request plant maps of their underground cabling you would be sent mapping that looked like the BT lines had been drawn by some 6 year old with a thick black crayon.. accurate they certainly were not...

Sending it (or a copy) back with a little note attached saying as they can't properly show where there assets are located, this will significantly reduce any claim for compensation in the event of damage usually ends that little ruse.

Has anyone ever looked at what could be saved by reducing the number of councillors?

I assume they all, at the very least, claim expenses and I'm sure the vast majority of residents wouldn't even notice if, say, their numbers were halved.

There's virtually no real difference between them. There's hardly a cigarette paper between the Libdems and Conservatives nationally and their local in fighting always seems like a rather pathetic attempt to differentiate themselves from one another. Volunteering to cut their own numbers would also show that they're leading from the front.

Does anyone know what they cost us every year?

Allowances and expense payments are listed on the West Berkshire Council website:

http://www.westberks.gov.uk/index.aspx?art...noredirect=true

My own opinion is that on the face of it they are not excessive* ( especially compared to senior council officers' salaries) but I certainly agree that cutting the number of councillors would be a very good idea, especially in those wards which are represented by two councillors. I think this would increase accountability as well.

It might also be an idea to link the allowances to meeting attendances - there was a thread some time back indicating some pretty abysmal attendance records.

*However these figures may only tell part of the story. In addition to their allowance and expenses costs I believe Councillors can join the Council's pension scheme. I believe there are also training costs ( sometimes hard to believe) and presumably officer support costs and transport costs for planning site visits etc.

I think you may be on to something!

As they tend to do as the paid officers tell them rather than listening ot the public it seens as though we may as well save the cost, and the cost of holding elections!