Leader of the Council David Pugh and his cabinet colleagues were conspicuously absent from the Riverside Centre’s meeting for stakeholders on Saturday.
Senior officers and councillors were invited to the meeting, called in acknowledgment of ‘the need for direct dialogue, that is not conversation through the media’ on the impact of cuts to adult social care.
“They made their apologies and went elsewhere,” said Cllr Ian Stevens (Independent). “I don’t know if all of them were invited, but I know the Leader of the Council was.”
VB contacted David Pugh and will report if and when we hear from him.
Working together
Riverside Centre manager Richard Priest said: “It was a very positive meeting in organising community transfer for the facilities. On some of the funding issues we just need some more detail, some more clarity.”
He confirmed that the Riverside Centre’s questions responding to council accusations that Quay Advocacy breached its contract have not received any response:
“We have read stuff in the press and approached them about a month ago to arrange some sort of meeting, but as yet there is no indication of a date, a time or anything.”
Wareham calls for action
Present at the meeting was Liberal Democrat prospective MP Jill Wareham, who called on the Council to monitor what impact Conservative budget cuts could have.
“Action must be taken to stop the Council making these cuts,” she said. “Choices can be made when reducing budgets. Wouldn’t money have been better spent on supporting vulnerable people than on a ‘Design Champion for the Island’ costing £50,000?”
Moreover, the Equality Impact Assessments (EIAs) in the Conservative budget papers are ‘so brief they are derisory’, Ms Wareham claimed. The Independent, Labour and Lib Dem Councillors present have agreed to take action through the Scrutiny Committee.
Seeking Conservative comment
VB phoned 16 Conservative councillors on Monday, seeking the reasons for Conservative absence from Saturday’s meeting.
Of those available, many refused to comment.
“I have no interest in commenting to VentnorBlog, which I think is just a rant,” said Cllr Roger Mazillius, a member of the Adult Social Care scrutiny panel.
Susan Scoccia did offer a full excuse: “There’s just so much on,” she said. “It’s hard to know where you should be at any one time.”
Asked about the current upheaval in social care, she said: “As with anything that is bringing in change, it’s the cause of a lot of anxieties. I’m sure I and everyone will do all we can to ensure that things go as smoothly as we can.”
A private matter?
This year’s budget-builders have ‘absolutely no idea what the personalisation of social care means’, claims Cllr Geoff Lumley.
He points to a planned public meeting on the subject, last week altered to a private ‘training session’ by the Adult Social Care Scrutiny Panel. “I’ve been told the matter will no longer be considered in public at this stage,” he said. “I have challenged this, but the Panel Chair has confirmed the decision.”
Panel Chair Margaret Webster gave no comment on Conservative absence from the Riverside stakeholder meeting, but disputed suggestions that the council are avoiding public discussion of the issues at stake:
“Personalisation hasn’t been removed from the agenda for public meetings,” she said. “It’s been transferred until the next meeting to get more information.”
An independent perspective
Cllr Ian Stevens attended the stakeholder meeting and gave us his view on the transformation of Social Care: “At the moment if you are in need of help, the Council will assess your needs and if they feel you need to go to a respite centre like Westminster House they will fund you to do that.
“What personalisation means is that instead of that they will give you the money and you’ll spend it how you want to.
“In doing that, we don’t know what people want and there is now a risk that these centres will be closed in the meantime. That’s my fear.”
