Council Cuts

Eighteen percent, Hmmm. Assuming that you had the responsibility, where would you begin to cut eighteen percent from the budget of HBC? What jobs and services would you axe or cut back on?

The current budget is somewhere in the region of £16 Million with £4 million in reserves and a net pensions deficit of £47 million and a wages bill of £13 million.

It is interesting to note that the Managing Director of HBC is paid a total of £147,672 pa (which includes employer pension contributions of £27,608.) and his deputy is paid £119,053 (which includes employer pension contributions of £21,896 ).

I wonder if they will be taking an 18% cut, what do you think?
 
well its not realy a shocker seen as cameron himself stated that he hated the north and couldnt understand why anyone lived there.Yet people in the north still voted for him so they must have thought cameron wasnt refering to them or somthing .Credit where credit is due though cameron said he hated teh north and now hes backing it up
 
Acrylic-bob said:
It is interesting to note that the Managing Director of HBC is paid a total of £147,672 pa (which includes employer pension contributions of £27,608.) and his deputy is paid £119,053 (which includes employer pension contributions of £21,896 ).

I wonder if they will be taking an 18% cut, what do you think?
Click to expand...

From my knowledge and dealings with them, they are both worth every penny. Councillor Moss has mentioned on this site the great (and thankless!) job the Managing Director does in keeping all the different factions together with such difficult political leadership.

What worries me is the cost of the large number of administrative jobs created in recent years, to ensure the right ticks are being put in the right boxes. How much was wasted courting the government inspectors who gave the ludicrous "Excellent" status? All spin, no substance.

That's where the savings are!
 
gynn said:
From my knowledge and dealings with them, they are both worth every penny. Councillor Moss has mentioned on this site the great (and thankless!) job the Managing Director does in keeping all the different factions together with such difficult political leadership.

What worries me is the cost of the large number of administrative jobs created in recent years, to ensure the right ticks are being put in the right boxes. How much was wasted courting the government inspectors who gave the ludicrous "Excellent" status? All spin, no substance.

That's where the savings are!
Click to expand...
But do ya think thats were the savings will be? i sure as hell doubt it.:eek:
 
gynn said:
From my knowledge and dealings with them, they are both worth every penny. Councillor Moss has mentioned on this site the great (and thankless!) job the Managing Director does in keeping all the different factions together with such difficult political leadership.

What worries me is the cost of the large number of administrative jobs created in recent years, to ensure the right ticks are being put in the right boxes. How much was wasted courting the government inspectors who gave the ludicrous "Excellent" status? All spin, no substance.

That's where the savings are!
Click to expand...

Is shooting yourself in the foot a hobby or an obsession.:confused:

He either does a good job or he does like every other politician and employs a laccy who in turn employs another laccy and so down the line we go.:eek:

Good fun innit.:D:D
 
Benipete said:
Is shooting yourself in the foot a hobby or an obsession.:confused:

He either does a good job or he does like every other politician and employs a lady who in turn employs another laccy and so down the line we go.:eek:

Good fun innit.:D:D
Click to expand...
Its better than bear baiting Beni:D
 
This happens the world over. The people of Hyndburn elected a labour MP and we have a conservative government. Where do you think the swingeing cuts are going to fall.
 
setayas said:
The people of Hyndburn elected a labour MP and we have a conservative government. Where do you think the swingeing cuts are going to fall.
Click to expand...

I thought we had ended up with a condemned coalition?
 
I'm on a committee known as Overview and Scrutiny: Resources which looks at how the council spends its money and in six months I am appalled and the vast swathes of waste I see everywhere in the name of ticking the right boxes.

There is a very detailed list of the spending from each department, something which is about the size of five phone books and used to get sent out to councillors as a matter of course in years gone by. I have requested a copy, I feel fairly confident I could whittle out 18%.

Whether anyone listens at Britcliffe HQ is another matter, it'll all probably be due to 13 years of Labour rule when the chips are down.
 
Ken Moss said:
I feel fairly confident I could whittle out 18%.

Whether anyone listens at Britcliffe HQ is another matter, it'll all probably be due to 13 years of Labour rule when the chips are down.
Click to expand...

They can go on about 13 years of Labour rule as much as they want, but they are wasting their breath.

There's still 18% savings to be found.
 
just shows how biased n sad yer both are, blaming government fer local council waste, just remind us, How long as P.B. been leader locally?:rolleyes: the government made enough cock ups of there own but sad gits blame em fer yer own.:rolleyes:
 
Let's leave the political squabbling to the politicians. Who is responsible is, frankly, irrelevant to the exercise ahead.

Let's look at the figures. This years Revenue Budget is 15.6 million pounds, made up of 10.1 million government grants and 5.5 million raised locally from the Council Tax.

Is the 18% reduction on the total spend? That means finding savings of 2.8million.

Or is it 18% reduction on the grant, which means finding savings of 1.8 million?

Either way, its difficult to see how this can be achieved without virtually dismantling the Council as it stands at present. Some very, very painful decisions will have to be made, and I can only wish members well in trying to make them.
 
gynn said:
Let's leave the political squabbling to the politicians. Who is responsible is, frankly, irrelevant to the exercise ahead.

Let's look at the figures. This years Revenue Budget is 15.6 million pounds, made up of 10.1 million government grants and 5.5 million raised locally from the Council Tax.

Is the 18% reduction on the total spend? That means finding savings of 2.8million.

Or is it 18% reduction on the grant, which means finding savings of 1.8 million?

Either way, its difficult to see how this can be achieved without virtually dismantling the Council as it stands at present. Some very, very painful decisions will have to be made, and I can only wish members well in trying to make them.
Click to expand...

Certain things will have to be savaged and it pains me to say it but the first logical casualty would be Area Councils. They serve a function but are by no means essential to the borough and could be easily subsumed by committees within each ward.

To prevent other casualties I would go down the route of a thousand cuts, whittling out all the piddling crap that we spend money on but which serves no practical purpose in the long-run. Awards for this and that, meaningless ceremonies that are forgotten as soon as they're over.

I'll say it again, we aren't here to crow about how lovely we are, we are a council here to serve the public.
 
cashman said:
just shows how biased n sad yer both are, blaming government fer local council waste, just remind us, How long as P.B. been leader locally?:rolleyes: the government made enough cock ups of there own but sad gits blame em fer yer own.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
When PB took over there was a £2 million black hole in Hyndburns finances, there ain't now;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top