Axe

Government cuts will leave many councils unable to afford emergency welfare says LGA

This in from the LGA in their own words. Ed


A survey of local authorities published today (Monday 6th October) suggests councils will hugely struggle to maintain current levels of help for vulnerable people when government scraps the £347 million Local Welfare Assistance fund next year. The ending of government funding for councils’ emergency support schemes comes on top of a 40 per cent reduction in local government funding over the course of this Parliament.

Over the past two years, local welfare assistance schemes have been set up by councils to give a helping hand to thousands going through a time of crisis or transition, including people facing the threat of homelessness, families struggling to put food on the table and care leavers setting up home for the first time.

Pressure to reverse decision
The Local Government Association, which represents councils, is calling on government to reverse its decision to withdraw funding. Otherwise, thousands are likely to miss out on some of the crucial support which councils are currently providing such as food vouchers, basic household essentials and short-term help paying the rent.

Following a legal challenge the Government has now committed to formally consult on its decision to cut funding. Councils are urging it to use this as an opportunity to reconsider.

Many councils will have to scrap scheme
A survey of local authorities in England carried out by the LGA found that three-in-four expect they will have to reduce support offered next year if government funding is pulled, with 15 per cent of local authorities expecting that they will have to scrap the scheme completely.

Cllr Claire Kober, Chair of the LGA’s Resources Board, said:

“This fund has been used by councils to provide crucial support to people facing personal crises in their lives, from help paying the rent to putting food on the table. By helping people at an early stage and targeting support at where it is needed most, we have been able to assist people in their time of need and prevent short-term problems escalating.

“We think the Government has made the wrong decision to remove the funding for this safety net and it was misjudged to have done so, especially without councils having the opportunity to show what the consequences of such a move might be.

“Taking away this money could prove counterproductive and risks storing up much bigger, and more costly problems in the longer run.

“Thousands of people have been helped through local welfare schemes, which have been far more effective at getting support to those most in need than the Government crisis loans scheme which it replaced.

“If government pulls the plug on funding from April, many local authorities will be unable to afford to make up the difference at a time when we are tackling the biggest cuts to council funding in living memory.

“Councils will be doing everything in their power to support those who need it most, but with less money and fewer resources to work with this is going to become increasingly difficult. For some local authorities, where budgets are already on the brink, they will have no choice but to close their local welfare assistance schemes down altogether.

“With Government now agreeing to consult councils, it brings an important opportunity to reconsider, or we risk letting down people when they are most in need of help.”

Image: suckamc under CC BY 2.0

Advertisement
Subscribe
Email updates?
43 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Janet Scott
21, December 2011 6:40 pm

Why did they choose ‘over the next 9 years’.

What is the significance of ‘9 years’.

adrian nicholas
21, December 2011 7:22 pm

well – divide the previous pre-2010 spend on tourism comparative to the new ‘private’ sector all embracing scheme of £3m over 9 years and hey presto – less iwc support for tourism – although as it now relabelled private sector then the iwc does’nt have to commit further budgetary resources.

I other words less money for anticipated less tourism.

John Allen
Reply to  adrian nicholas
21, December 2011 7:47 pm

Most of the interesting detail on this is in the appendix, from which you will see that the Council are committing to maintain their current expenditure on tourism for 8 years provided that more funding comes from elsewhere from year 4 onwards. With a fair wind this venture will be a vehicle for attracting funding from other places, which the present arrangement does not easily allow. More… Read more »

John Allen
Reply to  adrian nicholas
21, December 2011 7:50 pm

Sorry I meant the funding is committed for 9 years (I’ll have to put the light on when I’m typing!).

No.5
Reply to  John Allen
22, December 2011 12:00 am

No chance…the private bodies investing are the same private bodies who currently contribute to the coffers i.e. RF WL RH BC etc….they have been putting money in the pot for some time and running (down) tourism on the Island….problem was, the council got to spend that pot!!!!! (badly) At least these bigboys (and anybody else that can donate at least £10,000 per annum) will be desciding what… Read more »

John Allen
Reply to  No.5
22, December 2011 12:20 am

And how do you know that? You are confusing the contributions from people to be members with the ability of the organisation to raise money. Visit England, for example, have money available but won’t contribute unless it is from the proper model of a Destination Management Organisation. This may not be any better, that is to be seen, but it is unlikely to be worse than the… Read more »

No.5
Reply to  John Allen
22, December 2011 12:49 am

agree…it could hardly be worse.

I just doubt their ability to do better

Tanja Rebel
21, December 2011 8:47 pm

How about reinstating the Tourist Information Centres? Now there’s an idea!

James P
Reply to  Tanja Rebel
21, December 2011 9:39 pm

Not to mention loos. In fact, just put it back the way it was, please!

Cynic
Reply to  James P
18, February 2015 7:59 pm

Combine TICs with public loos-in separate parts of the buildings of course- and kill two birds with one stone? Simples!

Sailor Sam
Reply to  Tanja Rebel
22, December 2011 11:56 am

If I understand the maths correctly, £3m over 9 years is roughly how much it cost to keep the TIC’s open! Priceless!

Island Monkey
21, December 2011 10:51 pm

Who IS the genius running the council press office?

This is a blatant cuts announcement, badly dressed up as investment. It’s fairly obvious they will be spending a lot less than ever before.

Stewart Blackmore
Reply to  Island Monkey
22, December 2011 10:23 am

Gavin Foster, ex IWCP. How do you think that the Council is treated so leniently (apart from La Hofton’s column, occassionaly)by the CP?

phil jordan
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
18, February 2015 7:54 pm

stewart blackmore:

Good grief stewart…you *really* are out of touch.
You’ll find gavin up at Island Roads these days…..hasn’t been at the Council for quite a while.

phil jordan
Reply to  Stewart Blackmore
18, February 2015 8:01 pm

ooops……. quite how I got this old thread up and then responded to it….I have no idea.
Very sorry stewart….at the time you posted you were entirely correct.
Need to check more carefully in future..

Stewart Blackmore
Reply to  phil jordan
18, February 2015 10:21 pm

we all make mistakes Phil :)

Asite2c
22, December 2011 9:30 am

The council like to tell us £3 million of council funding be invested in tourism industry over the next nine years, but never say how, where or explain any improvements the money will bring.

I just hope this is not another 3 million going down the drain and into the pockets of big business?

ML
Reply to  Asite2c
22, December 2011 3:35 pm

It probably is. I can never understand why, if tourism is such a great thing for the Island economy, it needs all these subsidies from council taxpayers. Why don’t Island tourist businesses pay for their own advertising?

No.5
Reply to  ML
22, December 2011 5:47 pm

they do..they pay to advertise on the council run Tourists site and the same amount again to advertise on the one they outsourced to last time, but decided to go into competition with rather than hand over the reigns

Island Explorer
Reply to  ML
4, January 2012 10:16 pm

We do pay for our advertising, even if (like us) are promoting the Island. The fact is the loss of the TICs has had a big affect on certian businesses who manufacture souvenirs and publications which use to be sold in the TICs which in turn made a profitt for the council. The TICs were the front line in tourism and the service and guidence they provided… Read more »

CaptainSense
22, December 2011 10:55 am

The Island *should be* a world class tourist destination – it’s just that it’s blighted by 1. our open spaces being filled up with uninspiring identikit housing estates with satellite dishes plastered to the front of each house, 2. trouble in our towns with yobbish drunken behavior and littering, 3. A council who tries to close down anything which may be vaguely interesting to holidaymakers (i.e Waterside… Read more »

No.5
Reply to  CaptainSense
22, December 2011 11:12 am

They just have no vision……we need a world class water park…a Centre Parcs and a Safari Park….all things they have rejected/failed to encourage.

Mitch
Reply to  No.5
22, December 2011 11:17 am

They wouldn’t possibly allow things that would actually give employment to Islanders now would they….

W.H Inger
Reply to  Mitch
22, December 2011 12:51 pm

No, tourists just wear out the roads sooner! Why bother hosting coach trippers when they can get as much income to the Island by building stuff like the Vestas monstrosity, massive housing estates and now this new belching and ugly power station oops, I mean biomass thing! Would you want to holiday at Fawley? I bet their roads are good! :)

Rowan
Reply to  CaptainSense
4, January 2012 8:13 pm

If the people in charge of IW Council had any vision they would have been supporting Ventnor Botanic Garden, countryside management, beaches, parks and public open spaces, museums, theatres and galleries. Have a look at Bournemouth for an obvious comparison. Instead they’ve cut funding every year to anything that makes the Island a good place not just for tourists but for residents as well. They’ve closed the… Read more »

Cynic
Reply to  Rowan
18, February 2015 8:09 pm

“Now we’re about to see the sale of Ventnor Botanic Garden.” Really? Where is that announced?

PAUL MULLERY
23, December 2011 9:21 am

Before we retired to the Island, my wife and I came here for over 20 years as tourists. As once-a-year visitors we noticed that not much effort was made to market the place as a “must visit again” attraction which we put down to an inactive council and idle business owners. As examples: The old crab shack was derelict for years spoiling a nice walk along the… Read more »