Harringay, Haringey - So Good they Spelt it Twice!
Comprehensive Spending Review - Resident Consultation
Below is a link to the resident consultation for the budget - the more response we get on this the better to get over residents views.
From Cllr Kober
"As we all know the Comprehensive Spending Review will mean we have to consider carefully the services we provide. We are keen that we are well informed about the views of residents and members as we make difficult decisions and agree a very challenging budget.
To help us gather this information we have begun a consultation which will allow residents to tell us what is most important to them. Although many of you will already be involved in the budget setting process, I hope you will all complete the survey and encourage as many residents as you can to do the same."
The survey can be accessed at http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/council/haveyoursay.htm
Thanks
Cllr Karen Alexander
From Cllr Kober
"As we all know the Comprehensive Spending Review will mean we have to consider carefully the services we provide. We are keen that we are well informed about the views of residents and members as we make difficult decisions and agree a very challenging budget.
To help us gather this information we have begun a consultation which will allow residents to tell us what is most important to them. Although many of you will already be involved in the budget setting process, I hope you will all complete the survey and encourage as many residents as you can to do the same."
The survey can be accessed at http://www.haringey.gov.uk/index/council/haveyoursay.htm
Thanks
Cllr Karen Alexander
Tags for Forum Posts: consultation, public spending cuts
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Richard Willmsen on
-
Yes, there's a very good point to made here given that Chile was the first site of the neoliberal experiment of slashing public services to the bone, letting the private sector vultures feast on the last few fleshy remains, and leaving the population to drown in poverty. Interesting that noone seems to have talked about the cost of the rescue operation, if the same had happened here I presume that the coalition and the servile bureaucrats running supposedly Labour councils would have held an indepth consultation process on whether or not public money should be spent on getting them out of there, given that, as we're constantly being told, times are hard and we're ultimately responsible for our own fate. The fact that they have been rescued says a lot about people's deeper priorities; money is less important than human life. And on the subject of Churchill: as Tony Benn says, during the second world war no general was ever refused permission to bomb a German city because of the financial cost. If we can have full employment to kill people then why can we not have it to build houses, recruit nurses and teachers, provide care to the elderly and support to young people with few prospects to prevent them turning to drink and drugs, crime and gambling.
Whoever wants to have a meaningful say in protecting vital public services in Haringey should come along to the protest on October 18th. More details at http://www.hapsnews.net/. Nationally opposition to the austerity programme is growing, and we need as many people as possible to make it clear that Haringey rejects the notion that society's most vulnerable should be made to pay for the crisis created by the least vulnerable.
-
Permalink Reply by Clive Carter on
-
I also know from my own experience that the council leader does respond quickly to questions. If only this good example was followed by some others ...
-
Permalink Reply by Alan Stanton on
-
Again, Alison I agree with your criticism. Though I'm pleased that Claire Kober is willing to enter a dialogue and accept suggestions.
Having looked at some of these online tools I'm ambivalent about how useful they'll be. On the one hand, it feels a bit like a local council TV reality show called Big Budget.
Phone now to cut Highway Repairs by 50% and shut a local library !
On the other hand, I'm willing to give public credit to any council - whichever political party is in control ─ which is willing to experiment and invite people's views.
On this site, both I and Hugh have suggested Participatory Budgeting as a possible approach. I contacted the Unit in Manchester and I have suggested to Claire Kober that this is explored by our staff.
As you know, all councils share the problem that none of them will know the full extent of the cuts until the Comprehensive Spending Review announcements on 20 October. Which also means this is not a one-off exercise. More cuts will be coming over the next four years.
-
-
Alan: can you, hand on heart, say that you honestly do not know of a single area of waste in the council? One of the reasons I will defend my local library is that I believe it is well-run, good, visible valuable service and because there are items of council spending that I would cut long before cutting the library services.
-
-
"Oh and cut all consultations as they are clearly a waste of time and money ;)"
Yeah, good point, time to roll out the next stage of the Tories' programme, the one in which we all come to accept that letting the great unwashed have any influence over political decisions and national expenditure was a terrible and expensive mistake. Public libraries, taxpayer-funded hospitals, elections in which non-landowners are allowed to have a say - what a frightful nightmare it's all been! My grandchildren will never believe me when I tell them one day about the 'national health service'! Pfft!
-
-
I'm not sure who you mean by the "great unwashed", but it is questionable whether ordinary members of the public have had much influence over some decisions, especially the more important ones.
More than one of the latter has ended up in the High Court – I nearly said, to the council's embarrassment, but that would not be true.
The council will sometimes consult copiously and/or in a ham fisted way over unimportant matters; but over important matters, it sometimes fails to consult at all (see post above on Wards Corner, the Race Relations Act and the Court of Appeal).
I do not require any council consultation to know the value of my local public library and if the council tries to close this before reducing its own waste, there will be trouble.
-
-
Clive, not only are there things I'd like to to see trimmed, and others scrapped. But over the months - oh dear, it's years - I've posted on HoL and on my Flickr web pages, I've listed some of those areas. Others I suggested to my colleagues. They include: conferences and travel costs; consultants; buildings the Council needs to take back to reuse, or in some cases sell-off. I'd like to see a lot more joint use of buildings; also job redesign and multi-skilling. Some of these suggestions have even been taken-up.
But c'mon, Clive, let's not pretend that tens of millions can be 'saved' simply by cutting out 'waste'. That fib was colluded with - I accept - by all the main parties who, during the General Election, were less than candid about the detail of what they would actually be cutting. For very good reasons of course. "We promise to cut your child benefit" would not have gained many extra votes for Mr Cameron.
Anyway deciding what constitutes 'waste' is contentious. Is it 'wasteful' to buy books for the libraries? If some are bought, should it be at the lowest possible price from Amazon - or do local bookstores get a look-in? With the same questions for every other area of procurement when local businesses with local jobs are involved. How far should councils 'drive down' costs if it means people already on low pay, have their hours reduced?
-
-
Alan, I appreciate your candour. I also think that procurement is a big area where savings could be effected: for possibly huge savings at the national level, check out today's FT (available in most good public libraries!). There are lessons here for local authorities and not just Haringey.
If you suggest that millions cannot be saved by re-sourcing library books, I'm sure I'd agree with you. I have mentioned this before, but I'll say it again: I wonder how much the council pays to a certain multi-national company, convicted of big-time monopoly abuse, in respect of software licences? Will the council look at Open Source seriously or will it continue to listen to vested interests?!
I am not suggesting that those on low pay have their salaries cut. I do wonder about the size of wedges going to those at the opposite end of the pay scale. I don't think anyone has yet commented on the merits of Mr Cameron's suggestion that in the public sector, the maximum pay differential should be 20 times. This principle would seem to be stretched already.
-
-
Glad we can at last find something we agree on, Mr Hoyle. Yes, it gets a bit boring.
-
-
-
Savings though better procurement? Ah yes. Although I don't remember you mentioning this before, Clive. Perhaps you are inspired by the Review by Philip Green?
I don't deny that there are savings to be made if Government Departments and local councils are tougher when buying goods and services and pool their buying power.
Of course this is nothing new. Once upon a time there was a publicly owned organisation called Greater London Supplies (GLS) which operated as a joint purchaser and wholesaler for the London Boroughs and ILEA schools and sold them office equipment and supplies at rock-bottom prices. Its warehouse at Tottenham Hale provided local jobs as well.
I accept, Clive that you are not advocating cutting terms and conditions for low paid staff. But that's what tends to happen when contracts are put out to the lowest bidders.
-
-
Alan I haven't mentioned procurement as such before, although I have mentioned before the cost of software licensing from a single (distasteful) source.
Potential savings probably don't run into millions and the savings would be over the long run. I don't doubt there are lot of council staff who have a vested interest in maintaining the status quo.
Yes, Philip Green has uncovered industrial-scale waste, or at least potential economies, in central government. For a few examples (with an IT bent) take a look at The Register's article. -
-
-
Businesslike?
It may surprise you, but most public services in this country are run on a business footing. If I can’t justify running a service I close it (inkjetpack, possibly employed at national level in the public service)
I think this remarkable claim illustrates the gulf that exists in perception about the scale and quality of waste. It is a kind of public service version of the equally dubious "efficient markets" hypothesis that exists the capital markets world. It suggests that waste and inefficiency either cannot exist, or if it does exist or develop, it cannot do so for long, before someone like inkjetpack will take swift action!
An alternative version of the current efficiency of some public services spending is disclosed in the link that Alan provided (to the Green report) which illustrates how far removed procurement, at least, is from being run on a business footing. NB. this report looks at a relativey narrow area of government spending (procurement) and does not seek to address other aspects of spend.
.
- ‹ Previous
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- Next ›
© 2024 Created by Hugh.
Powered by
