THAT gate.......it just won't go away!

When I was elected last year, I promised to try to persuade Churchmanor Estates to re-open the infamous "Wilkinsons Gate" and you may recall I was told it would stay closed on safety grounds.

I failed.

If you refer back to June and July 2010, on this blog, you can read all about it. I feel that this issue will never go away, as long as Churchmanor - a company professing to have the interests of OUR town centre at heart - keeps this gate closed. They will certainly win no fans by keeping it closed.

Today, I read on the Hunts Post website about the stationers, Colemans'. This shop's name was "used" by Town Centre Manager, Katy Sismore when telling us all how the town centre was "cutting the mustard" after a small business opened in premises above the present Colemans shop. Colemans are moving to a smaller unit.

Here's what it says in the Hunts Post:

Declining sales prompted Colemans’ contraction into its smaller premises, but managing director Joanna Patterson-Gordon said the firm remained “totally committed” to continuing its 30-year presence in Huntingdon. “We traded very successfully in Huntingdon until the gate (to St Germain Walk) went up – that had an impact overnight. It was like turning a tap off. Sales have been declining since,” she said.

I think this issue needs revisiting. And soon.

So why is the gate there?

Churchmanor told me (the letter is shown in full on the July 2010 blog pages) that the gate was closed, and remains closed, on grounds of health and safety. I have lost count of the number of people who have told me that they just don't believe it's just that, and one prominent member of the business community told me "we all know it was done to drive pedestrians past the Churchmanor properties such as Starbucks and Vision Express."

I can fully appreciate why Katy Sismore "talks up" the situation regarding the High Street, and whist the new "Barney's Plaice" looks quite smart, we still have a plethora of empty shop units. HDC has plans to build a £3 million multi-storey car-park, and when Sainsbury's moves up near the station, the idea is that three or more "recognised retail outlets" will move onto their present site.

If we aren't careful, though, we'll have a High Street containing just opticians, estate agents and mobile phone shops, which already make up around 20% of the shops in town. Anything that can be done to breathe life into the town centre should be done, and whilst it will be VERY late in the day, surely Churchmanor can help by taking that gate down. I'm sure most people are perfectly capable of looking after their own health and safety.

Within a month of the formation of the Coalition Government last year, the following statement was published:- "Communities Secretary Eric Pickles and Local Government Association Chair Baroness Eaton joined forces today to urge all councils to publish details of all spending over £500 in full and online as part of wider action to bring about a revolution in town hall openness and accountability." What's more "(Pickles) He makes clear that transparency and openness should be the default setting for the way councils do business, and calls on local government to move at speed to adopt this new approach." Now anyone reading this blog might wonder why that's a huge step forward. Simply put, it not only gives the general public morte access to what's going on, but it helps Councillors like me ask more detailed questions, both in Council, and at Overview and Scrutiny Panel meetings. The Huntingdonshire District Council website - http://www.huntingdontown.gov.uk/ - has published lists of items over £500, as well as publishing details of senior management salaries and expenses. I urge everyone to read the numbers. Ste

On 9th March, in the House of Commons, it was pointed out at Prime Minister’s Questions that the Newcastle Citizens Advice Bureau dealt with more than 26,000 cases, supported by 75 volunteers, yet its budget has been slashed. Newcastle’s MP Catherine McKinnell asked “How can this shambolic situation possibly contribute towards the big society?”

David Cameron replied that the Government has made sure that the national funding for the CAB debt service has been maintained, and that is a vital part of it. He went on “I urge all local councils, whoever controls them - I have had this conversation with my own council - to make sure we do as much as we can to support CABs, which do such a vital job in our communities.”
I’d love Mr Cameron to have a word with OUR Council, because as has been well publicised, HDC plans to cut voluntary grants by 81% in two years – and the biggest recipient is Huntingdonshire CAB.

In addition, the Communities Secretary Eric Pickles, has this to say: “In their approach to budget setting, the best councils are showing that they understand that a strong, thriving voluntary sector is more important now than ever and could be the key to providing high quality, good value services to their residents. But this is not the case everywhere. Councils that are failing to recognise the importance of the sector are being short sighted in their approach.”

I never thought I’d say this........but I agree with Eric!

In my view, HDC is being short-sighted, and whilst a review later this year may go towards a reduction in these cuts, a firm commitment to look more closely for other savings would give the voluntary sector more security.

Mindful of all the presentations I have seen by representatives of the Voluntary Groups in our District, and the people I have met from those Groups, I thought I would say why I abstained from voting in support of the HDC Cabinet’s Budget 2011/12 and Medium Term Plan 2012 – 15 at last night’s full Council Meeting.

Prior to the vote, Council considered an amendment proposed by Liberal Democrat Leader Peter Downes. It asked that (a) The Council acknowledges the invaluable role of the voluntary sector in promoting well-being in Huntingdonshire (b)The Council welcomes the intention of the Executive Councillor for Finance and Customer Services to undertake a review of the way in which the Council offers support to local voluntary organisations (c) The Council recognises the need for the voluntary sector to have long term security for its forward planning and activity development; and (d) The Council requests the Cabinet to identify alternative savings to allow the financial support for the voluntary sector to be retained when the Medium Term Plan is reviewed during the coming year.

The brief debate which followed was interesting.

The first three parts to the proposal garnered a lot of support from all sides. Indeed, one Conservative Councillor said that those first three parts were a “no-brainer”. But when it came to the vote, whilst those three parts were accepted, the fourth was voted down. In my mind, the first three points are intentions – the fourth is a commitment. What’s more, if, as Council agreed, “Council recognised the need for long term security” surely that means FINANCIAL security? What else could it mean? To me, you can’t agree to (c) without following it up with (d). Since the Medium Term Plan sees 81% cuts in the Voluntary Groups’ financial support, and since we were being asked to vote for the Budget AND Medium Term Plan, as one, I could not support it.

In response to the Government's requirement for Local Authorities to publish new items of spending over £500, the job of scrutiny is made much clearer. The HDC website now contains summaries of expenditure for the months from April to December 2010, during which time £739,000 was spent on External Consultants, £368,000 on Hired Staff (temps), £56,000 on Mobile Telephones and Radios and £128,000 on Training. We learned that even in the Budget that was passed last night, just over £500,000 is earmarked for Consultants, £369,000 for Hired Staff , £375,000 for training and £49,000 for Mobile Phones.

Whilst I very much welcome that a review will take place during 2011, to see what help can be offered to the Voluntary Groups, I remain disappointed that cuts of such a magnitude are still planned in 2013 and onwards. The MTP is, it has been stressed, a “living document”.

A comment was made during the discussions on the Voluntary Sector that Councillors should “Get Real”

If we are to believe, and why shouldn’t we, that opportunities for volunteers will be lost if these cuts go ahead, then we need planning, commitment, scrutiny and a willingness to make sure the cuts do not need to be made, assuming that’s what is meant by Big Society.

That’s reality !

Very belated Happy New Year

Right, late New year resolution. To use this blog a heck of a lot more! Starting - late - today.

Alerted by another blogger to the Huntingdonshire District Council website, and the publication of all items of expenditure over £500 since April 2010, I have now copied all the data onto one large spreadsheet, so it can be analysed. It is mind-boggling, and whilst I am sure there are many good explanations for some of the spending, this data will be very valuable in the next few weeks.

The next few months at Council will be very interesting as the budget for 2011-12 will finally be signed off and the projected spend for future years will also be done. All of which will be subject to intense scrutiny, especially now that the HDC has published all items of expenditure over £500 for the 8 months April to November last year.

Meanwhile, I shall be putting time into trying to ensure that payments in grants to the voluntary sector are as protected as can be, or that alternative assistance can be found.

Tories reject Lib Dem bid to save voluntary organisations

Huntingdonshire Tories have voted down a proposal from the Liberal Democrats that cuts in funding to voluntary organisations should be removed from next year’s draft budget.



Faced with a shortfall in resources, the ruling group on the District Council has made several unpopular proposals including a reduction of 81% in the funding for local voluntary bodies that provide much-needed services to the neediest people in the district.



Lib Dem Leader Peter Downes proposed an amendment that this cut be removed from the budget in order to give voluntary organisations funding stability so they could develop further in future. He offered a list of ways in which off-setting savings might be made.



The Tories rejected the amendment but said that the idea would be discussed further at the next meeting of the Economic Well-being Scrutiny Panel on Thursday, January 13th at 7 p.m. in Pathfinder House.



This decision followed an impressive presentation to the Council by representatives of the voluntary sector in Huntingdonshire. Julie Farrow of the Volunteer Forum explained how the small grant to the Forum enables it to help charities and voluntary organisations lever in grants for their work. Last year over £700,000 was generated in this way. Other speakers emphasised the value to the community of the voluntary sector. Mike Baker, LD Councillor for Ellington, said that doing voluntary work was satisfying to the volunteer as well as providing benefit to those in need. He highlighted the social car service as an example.



Huntingdon East Lib Dem councillor Ste Greenall pointed out that David Cameron himself had given his backing to supporting the voluntary sector as part of his vision of the ‘Big Society’.



Steve van de Kerkhove, LD councillor for Eynesbury East, said that St. Neots Town Council, which is controlled by the Lib Dems, would actually be increasing its grants to voluntary bodies in St. Neots next financial year.



Mike Shellens, LD Councillor for Huntingdon East, said that the Tory response was disappointing after the good words they had said about the work of volunteers. ‘The Tories in Huntingdonshire simply cannot bring themselves to accept that the Lib Dems might actually have some good ideas’.

Tough times ......tough decisions

I've now been a District Councillor for 5 months, and it is clear as can be that Huntingdon District Council needs urgent action to address an alarming budget deficit. Last night, my Lib Dem colleague in Huntingdon East, Mike Shellens, put forward a motion for debate. In it he offered some suggestions as to ho the problems might be faced.

Despite some words of support from some Conservative members, others were, I am sad to say, quite dismissive of what Mike put forward. With a large majority in any event, the motion was defeated, although a few Conservatives did abstain - the closest, some might say, to getting them to vote in favour.

The meeting, as with MANY council meetings, was open to the public, and so, I publish now, the text of what Mike had to say:-

Members we find ourselves in unusually uncertain times:

Economy

Political

Funding

Revenue from charges

This motion reflects concerns expressed by members of both parties as well as independent members on the Economic Panel that it is foolhardy to pin all our plans onto a single forecast outcome.

Instead, we should prepare, now, contingency plans against various outcomes identifying now what we would have to do when, to meet whatever the outcome is.

It may be that things get better:

Extra savings before we “Pass Go” next April, providing a buffer,

The government takes fright at the post VAT rise fall off in retailing

and the rise in the savings ratio heightened by the fear of unemployment

and starts old fashioned Keynsian pump-priming using Local Authorities to inject cash into the economy. Etc.

In that case, we do not want to be committed to the pain of putting into operation plans to yield savings of £9.5m by 2014/15 if all we need is £6m. We should not sell Pathfinder House and move to portacabins on Alconbury Airfield unless it is strictly necessary.

On the other hand a perfect storm of:

adverse floors and ceilings,

higher inflation driven by the falling £ and Vat,

resistance to increased charges,

a large number of Housing Benefit victims deciding to come and join relatives in Huntingdon,

and extra unfunded obligations passed down from central government

could lead to a much more serious situation requiring ever more drastic surgery.

In my experience drastic surgery needs time to be planned, a move to Alconbury would take at least two years to implement. So it would be no use ending up at the dawn of the last year thinking “If only we had started planning for this 3 years ago!”

We need to manage the situation rather than simply administer it. We need to be on the front foot.

During the course of this year we have heard numbers of £5m, £6m, £8m £9.6m and now £10m as the level of savings needed over the plan period to balance the books. What makes us think that the current figure is going to be the actual one? We need to provide for variations.

So we need a variety of plans now, keep them under review as life changes around us, but implement only as and when needed, but with plans already considered.

I have 10 quick suggestions as to what could go into this mix.

This afternoon’s presentation on Balancing the Budget included some suggestions as to areas for consideration. Some of them are duplicated in the following list. But as the copies were committed before that meeting I shall not try and edit out areas on both our lists.

1) Any future increase in members’ allowance should be restricted to the rate of inflation. So do away with the official arbiter to whom we pay I think £5k p.a.

2) Narrower margins and no space under paragraph headings on council papers – only £10k a year savings, but a visible sign that we are trying.

3) Last year we recommended that we councillors share in the pain and reduce all allowances by 10%. This was kicked into the long grass. I understand that Honourable Members opposite refused any increase this year. Many of the Lib Dems implemented a reduction of 10% in accordance with our previous budget proposals.

We should all be moved to that lower scale with effect from 1 April next year,

we should freeze Members’ Allowances until 2014 at the earliest,

we should cap travel expenses to 40p per mile.

4) Move from the Imbucon payroll system to the NJC scales. As I understand it, under the current regime, long lasting employees can migrate well outside the range for the job. What is done is done, but we should stop any more silliness.

5) Voluntary redundancy is a personal challenge both financially and emotionally. Compulsory redundancy can be much worse. Instead, give sections the choice of reduced hours until things get better, using compulsory redundancy only if there is insufficient take up. From the employer’s point of view, this has the merit of retaining the pool of expertise and can be selectively unwound as demand increases in specific areas. It would be necessary to protect pension entitlement and that may take some time to effect so a case for early exploration.

6) Look hard at ourselves. Cut the numbers of District Councillors to 35 from 52, probably not implementable until 2016, but cutting the Cabinet to 7 rather than 10, and 1 Scrutiny Committee rather than 3 could be done now and would bring with it savings on allowances, travel expenses, printing, and officer time.

7) Sub-let Pathfinder House as staff numbers decrease. We should invite other local authority bodies to make use of spare space in Pathfinder House. (e.g. Connexions and Locality Team).

8) Share council tax collection and other back office services with other District Councils. Surely we do not each need to maintain our own complex computer system. In many areas, like Call Centres, we have much to offer others.

9) Sale and lease back of Pathfinder House and other assets should be evaluated.

10) Save huge amounts of back office costs by going unitary with the County.

On the other side, Lib Dems believe that we should not cut grants to voluntary organisations where there is a risk that this will cause more expenditure for us and the rest of the public sector if we take away the highly geared voluntary support that most of them provide.

My final suggestion is that we recognise that what we are about to receive will not make us truly thankful. Residents will suffer deterioration in the level of service that they receive from the Council.

We should therefore provide that little bit of sugar to help the medicine go down. For the towns, I would suggest reversing the decision on the toilets, deeply unpopular and, anecdotally for Huntingdon, diverting shoppers away from the Town Centre.

For the villages the retention of the Customer Service Centres is likely to be welcomed by those, often the most vulnerable and impecunious, who really need our services and would find the trip in from Farcet or the Gransdens both physically and financially daunting.

Members, we would be happy to discuss these suggestions further as long as the approach was not finding 57 reasons for not doing them but rather “What do we need to do to make them happen?”