The Independent Councillor’s Budget Speech (2011-12) To Full Council

In the same way that we reproduced David Pugh’s budget speech, given at the cuts full council meeting, here’s the one presented by the group of Independent councillors, delivered by Vanessa Churchman.

As before, the words she used in the chamber may differ slightly from this, but this is what she read from – Ed.

David Pugh - Self-suppliedIntroduction
Before presenting the Independent budget I would like to thank those officers who have helped and guided us in formulating this document. As a Group we do not have quite the same access, let alone time, of the ruling group and therefore that help has been very much appreciated.

Our alternative budget has been constructed on the lines of the amount of money available but has focused on the wishes of the people of the Isle of Wight, who are our constituents and most importantly are the source of the money paid into County Hall.

Views of the electorate should be paramount
Councils have no money – they only have what the people pay via their taxes therefore the views of the electorate should be paramount; and we have certainly had many, forthright emails and letters over the last few weeks regarding the cuts suggested by the current administration.

Budgets are a combination of what has to be done and what could be done, you could say the latter part is a ‘wish list’. Nobody can predict what will happen in the next 6 months let alone a year and a budget is a framework within which we retain control of how the money is allocated and spent. However budgets are also subject to political overtones as well as Government funding.

The Audit Commission were warning Councils over a year ago that because of the uncertainty over funding, they should be responding then to minimise the impact of cuts on frontline services.

Why did our administration buried its head in the sand?
Most people seemed to realise that whoever was voted in at the last General Election would have to make drastic cuts. I cannot understand why our administration appears to have buried its head in the sand and done very little to take strategic action to reduce the impact of the expected cuts in Government funding. Businesses across the country have featured regularly in the press over the last 2 years as they have re-aligned their structures to cope with the inevitable downturn in the economy.

We feel that the ‘knee-jerk’ reaction to the cut in Government funding is inappropriate and will damage not only the fabric of the Island but its long-term viability. We have therefore come up with a budget which will allow time to explore different ways of doing things and to find solutions to our problems, where there is a will there is a way. The difference between our budget and that of the ruling group is ours maintains front-line services through the implementation of further back office savings.

Whilst this budget is not intended to be an amended version of the ruling group proposals, it is inevitable that our ideas are constrained by policies that they have imposed during the last 5 years.

The provision for reductions in certain areas such as adult social care and cuts to staffing and schools are made as a consequence of these policies. Had we been able to make policy, it is our contention that these cuts would not have been necessary to the degree that they now are.

Mismanagement of the Council’s finances
In particular, the reduction in reserves, that leaves us with little or no room for manoeuvre, is a serious constraint that would not have been applied had it not been for the mismanagement of the Council’s finances. We are however pleased that we have been able to demonstrate that cuts to many services can be avoided and the impact of others lessened through the reallocation of funds.

Our residents are appalled at what they see as ‘cultural vandalism’ with the closure of libraries and the possible threat to archives and museums. We have therefore reinstated these and perhaps the under-investment in many of them could be addressed and measures put in place to revitalise them. If we lose these valuable assets for any reason we will never get them back.

People are genuinely concerned at the reduction in budgets for adult social care and the ramifications for not only the vulnerable but those who are ‘carers’ in our community. We have therefore reinstated things such as ‘direct provision of general care in the current year, in-house home care, change to adult social care eligibility criteria, reinstated the ‘small repair’ service for the elderly (surely prevention is better than expensive hospital bills), advocacy and general welfare information advice, crucial to the elderly in obtaining state benefits to which they are entitled.

We feel it is imperative that we reintroduce the music service and support our youth, this will assist the Council’s Music Dept. in continuing to help our young musicians who otherwise would not be able to participate.

We are a tourist Island
We are a tourist Island and a very large proportion of our income is generated through our visitors. Again there has been an extraordinarily strong criticism regarding the proposed closure of public toilets across the Island. In some instances cafes and businesses could be forced to close as they do not have provision within their premises for toilets. We find it unacceptable that in a world where the population is increasing we are trying to close basic amenities.

This is the year of the Royal Wedding and the Island Games and because of the strength of the Euro, together with fears of terrorist attacks and the like, we would expect an increase in tourism generally and we need to cater for this. Again with an increase in tourism it seems incredible that we are prepared to give up our blue flags because we are cutting the budget for Lifeguards. For the people who have spent a long time in obtaining these coveted awards it must seem a real ‘kick in the teeth’ – and we want to encourage more volunteers ……….. I think a lot of people will think twice.

Tourist Information Centres have been cut and although there has been an offer to run information centres that is nothing like what is currently in operation. Are the Council aware of the value of the large Red/White Tudor Rose emblem and the accreditation it carries from the SE Tourist Board?

Waterside Pool
We cannot accept the need to build additional facilities at Medina, The Heights and Westridge to incorporate extra gym stations. This work will be carried out at the expense of the Waterside Pool, which unless a community group take it over, will close down. This leaves the East Wight without a very valuable and much used facility. The report prepared for the leisure centres was produced a year ago and things have now moved on and the Island is a very different place. We are not against maintenance work and some refurbishment but we oppose the expenditure on the scale envisaged. It is unacceptable to close the Waterside Pool to provide more work stations in a gym. The Waterside appeals to all ages, gyms are limited in their attraction and exclude children and possibly the upper tier of the senior community.

We wish to introduce a residents parking permit of £150. Many Councillors are seeing their local Council car parks only half utilised since the introduction of the £500 permit. If we wish to keep our local economies alive then we need to allow people to park at a reasonable cost – otherwise, as I have stated before, the Supermarkets will laugh all the way to the Bank as people make use of their free parking.

Please read all the papers put before you
As Members can see from our proposed budget there are other things which I have not mentioned here but I hope that most of you will have read all the papers put before you. In this you will see that we support some of the cuts suggested, such as ceasing Ventnor and Newport fire station builds, Fire Control merger, reduction on parks and gardens maintenance contract.

However we have proposed even further reductions in management costs with the addition of another post to add to the 38 already stated and the sharing of the Chief Executive with a partner organisation. Obviously within our budget there has to be adjustments to salaries as well as service.

Our budget is lawful and balanced
Our budget is lawful and balanced and we commend it to all Elected Members.

We as Councillors must work for our communities and the benefit of the Island regardless of political persuasion. Here’s to Isle of Wight plc.

Cllr Vanessa Churchman – Leader Independent Group

Image: IWC official photo

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
22 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
stultorum infinitus numerus est
28, February 2011 3:30 pm

This is all fine, but could I just add two things? 1)When you have the opportunity to form a large ‘opposition’ group – please, don’t be shy about scrutinising the ruling group or coming forward/publicising anything you are not comfortable with. You mentioned years of burying heads in the sand. The 1st many Islanders heard of it was within the last 3 months! 2)When a colleague offers… Read more »

playingthenumbers
Reply to  stultorum infinitus numerus est
28, February 2011 4:46 pm

Thanks VB for the link to the BBC website trailing tonight’s show on the region’s highways. A little compare & contrast. Kent CC need £250 million for their 5K miles of roads, that is about £50k per mile. IW Council want from the PFI deal nearly £1bn (of total investment) for 500 miles of roads over 25 yrs, or (£1bn ÷ 500) ÷ 25 = £80k per… Read more »

Haulage Bob
Reply to  playingthenumbers
28, February 2011 6:19 pm

Kent council don’t need to import all that tarmac, the Island does and we all know how much that costs. Wightlink and Red Funnel are looking forward to a haulage lorry bonanza, I certainly am, as are my drivers!

Hundreds of thousands of tonnes will be coming over, the tarmac plant on the Island couldn’t cope with these volumes so it’s imports.

Lido
Reply to  Haulage Bob
1, March 2011 8:50 am

Hope you’re right Bob. Of course if I were the contractor, I would want all my trucks liveried in my company colours and driven by my drivers. Even better if I could get the Council to pay for it. Did you see the TV show last night, why wouldn’t Colas use their Pompey supplies & drivers to bring the Tarmac over? I would, cross charge a sister… Read more »

Paying For Island roads
Reply to  playingthenumbers
28, February 2011 10:02 pm

Not sure where you got 1 billion from. £360M is the amount approved but that will dwindle as the con-dems will say there is not enough money in the pot. I doubt we will see £200M but we will still have to pay £11M per year for 25 years. What will be cut to pay that off? going back to the numbers, us islanders will be paying… Read more »

no.5
Reply to  Paying For Island roads
28, February 2011 10:19 pm

we are actually handing over our roads budget, so the money doesn’t come from anywhere else.

Trouble is IOW Council has never spent the full budget before and used the money for ‘other things’

playingthenumbers
Reply to  Paying For Island roads
28, February 2011 10:46 pm

Take the £360 million government grant + the £105million of senior debt + indexation and inflation plus the interest and council contribution 80:20

Bingo approaching £1billion

The figures are in the council’s outline business case

Mike Judge
Reply to  playingthenumbers
28, February 2011 11:25 pm

The millions already spent on our PFI would be far better spent just fixing the roads. Turning the Island’s road surfaces into billiard tables is desirable, but not essential. Most of us would rather have decent social services, libraries and public toilets. If as we saw on the BBC Portsmouth already resent the £24 million per year they have to pay their contractor, then just imagine how… Read more »

DaveQ
28, February 2011 3:37 pm

Thanks Cllr Churchman, so much for the ruling groups “there is no alternative” (I wonder where they stole that sound bite from?). As far as the last comment went “you might be in DPs position in 2 years time”- I and many others sincerely hope so.

islebeseeingyou
Reply to  DaveQ
28, February 2011 4:18 pm

Please no. Not Vanessa (Bottom) Churchman in DP’s place. There must be others! All in all though she is doing better than DP.

Anon
28, February 2011 3:56 pm

just because you are too old to use the gym, doesn’t give you the right to purpose scraping their improvements. Yes young children and seniors don’t use it, but us 16-65 olds who pay our council tax and the gym fee do.

Smoke and Mirrors
28, February 2011 3:56 pm

“stultorum infinitus numerus est” – “Infinite is the number of fools”, could this be an alter-ego of Maximus perchance?

stultorum infinitus numerus est
Reply to  Smoke and Mirrors
28, February 2011 4:16 pm

Nope, I’ll quickly disabuse of that.

I simply picked it today as a reference to the subjects of what I consider is most of the today’s blog comments. Don’t worry I’ll be back to the normal soon.

no.5
Reply to  stultorum infinitus numerus est
28, February 2011 4:54 pm

or alternatively an accurate discription of the ruling party at County Hall !!

montana sliver
28, February 2011 4:28 pm

Infinite is the number of previous pseudonyms

DaveQ
28, February 2011 4:48 pm

some of us are not so worried that we have to hide behind pseudonyms- stand up man and face those you criticise

stultorum infinitus numerus est
28, February 2011 4:58 pm

I bet you’re saying that to all the: Anon, no.5, citizen ken, wabbit, smoke and mirrors, islebeseeingyou, Montana sliver, John, etc then Q?

no.5
Reply to  stultorum infinitus numerus est
28, February 2011 5:04 pm

Ah! but we are nobodies…you pretend to be ‘somebody’ :)

stultorum infinitus numerus est
Reply to  no.5
28, February 2011 5:36 pm

Crikey! It’s just a pen name. 1) Unlike you I prefer not to be a number, but I fully recognise & support your inalienable right to do so if you wish. 2) I am not pretending to be any more of a person than anyone else on this blog. It is my understanding that all comments carry equal weighting. 3) My postings today have been encouragement, not… Read more »

no.5
Reply to  stultorum infinitus numerus est
1, March 2011 12:38 am

No.5 is not just a number, but has broader meaning, its acctually farly presumptive and indicates a persona that doesn’t fit me.

May not be drawn from the classic languages, but its source spoke to millions across the world.

Wannadance

and I’m already over it

mark francis
Reply to  no.5
1, March 2011 10:32 am

I only use the name “Mark Francis” to disguise my real one of Lampedusa Snatterquoin…

Don Smith
28, February 2011 10:27 pm

I understand your jest stultorum infinitus numerus est – Greti un moto cogiti.

reCaptcha Error: grecaptcha is not defined