Quote:
Originally Posted by Ken Moss
You of all people should know that there are hundreds of savings to be made from what you termed 'box ticking' politics brought in by past governments but also many which are there just for symbolism in order to win meaningless awards that serve no function within the borough.
|
Yes there are certainly a lot of savings to be made in those areas, and to be fair, the savings identified in the budget report to Cabinet will go a long way towards sweeping away such meaningless work.
What concerns me in the list of savings is the assumption that additional income will be raised. It is one thing to reduce spending, but it is quite another to generate additional monies from outside the authority, especially when there will be fewer staff to carry out the work.
I refer particularly to the following:-
Additional Income from Pest Control £30,000. Yes you can increase prices, with inevitable consumer resistance, but where is this sort of extra money coming from? More rats and cockroaches, perhaps? And if its available, why has nobody been chasing it before?
Budget Re-Alignment Income - Environmental Health £40,500. What on earth is this? How does re-aligning your budgets increase the income from outside the authority?
Income from Better Waste Management £28,000. I thought the Council was already a top performer in waste management. What is it going to do that is even better?
Additional Fees from Regeneration £418,689. Aren't we in a recession? Who is going to pay the Council that sort of money for regenerating the borough in the next 12 months?
Additional Fees - Environmental Schemes £4,400. In a recession?
Accountancy Services - Increased Income £21,000. Who from? Where from?
Corporate Services Additional Income Generation £82,416. Who are they trying to kid? Corporate Services is the cradle of the bureaucratic pen pushers. No outside body would go anywhere near paying them to do anything.
If the answer given to any of the above is that it is increased charging between council departments, then that is a non answer. It is robbing Peter to pay Paul and generates zero extra income to the Council.
The list above totals well over £600,000. Councillors need to satisfy themselves that it is achievable, and achievable in the next 12 months.