Forum Topic

H&F Council's Budget Update

We had a chance to review the budget last night (Wednesday 24th Jan) at the Council’s value for Money Scrutiny Panel. The Council is looking to save £34 Million from its £180 million budget. I appreciate that people will have very different views on the budget priorities for our borough – which is fair enough – but I think it’s healthy for our local democracy for people to actually see what happens with their money. I’ve listed the budget highlights below. The budget papers are also available via the Council’s website.• Raise meals-on-wheels charges to the elderly by £200.75 per person, per annum • Cut £1.4 million by tightening criteria for the elderly and sick to get home help and restructure the service• Cut £915, 000 from street cleaning and refuse collection service• Cut £317, 000 from the play and youth services• Cut £150, 000 from Occupational Therapy Service making it harder for low-income, elderly and sick people to have their homes adapted to suit their disabilities• Cut £223, 000 from the vulnerable children's budget• Cut £530, 000 by closing mental health day-care facilities• Cut £325, 000 libraries and archives • Raise £300, 000 from parking• Cut £100, 000 reducing staff that process homeless people onto the housing register• Cut £100k used for school improvement and achievement• Cut £30, 000 to reduce storage facilities for homeless families to keep their belongings• Raise £436, 000 from advertising • Raise £150, 000 by lobbing the Home Office and ensuring the deportation of 25 asylum seeker children, currently in the Council’s care• Cut £505 from housing homeless families in temporary accomodation• Cut £200, 000 in grants to bring private sector homes up to standard• Cut £50, 000 from theatresLast night, the Finance Director and the Leader of the Council confirmed that they want to recycle monies raised from selling land off into repaying balances and reducing debt. Interestingly three of the sites they are considering selling off are currently occupied by schools. The Council has already published a notice to close Hurlingham and Chelsea Secondary School (one of the best improving schools in the country) and they're looking at closing two primary schools. The Administration was well aware of the political implications of confirming that they want to sell the school's land to private property developers (which have an estimated value of around £70m to £100 million) and so they would only say that it was a “consideration”. My advice is, watch this space as it will happen.You’ll recall that H&F cut 3% off the council tax this year. That’s equal to £27 of a band D bill and was partly achieved by taking £1.1 million from balances – which the Council hopes to repay through land sales.

Stephen Cowan ● 6913d23 Comments

Simon, I really appreciate your long and thoughtful reply.  Any efficiencies to deliver good services are a good thing and your note contains lots to think about.  For example, it would be good to know more about this dependency culture that the last Council apparently created. But your response still doesn't address the one question I keep asking, which is: why is the new council cutting services to poor people to pay for an irrelevant council tax reduction?  How can that be moral?  Or are the people only losing services which were "unhealthy and patronising to working class people"?  I don't see how meals on wheels (now costing lots more) or the mobile library (now being cut) fall into this category.And a new question, I'm afraid: why is it impossible to get a Conservative councillor (as opposed to supporter) to engage with this?

Ben Coleman ● 6860d

A good friend of mine works for the council and has done for the last 14 years. He is a Labour Party supporter and is popular and respected in his role as a manager in the organisation. He says he has had at times close working relationships with both Labour and Tory members and likes them both believing whatr they both want is the best for residents.  He says he was proud to work for the last Labour Council and that it provided excellent services in many areas and that he is grateful that the new Conservative Leader has acknowledged the last adminstrations acheivements and the hard work of officers. However he thinks the Conservative Council has transformed the organisation and made it a more stimulating and exciting place to work where suddenly many positive things are possible. Previously he says trying to get modest reforms to make real improvements in the delievery of services was problematic, because of the power of local trade union officials which he says many of the Labour Councillors would not challenge. Managing became extremely difficult, he has given me many examples of inflexible trade unions not allowing any reasonable discussions on modernising work practices. He says the far left notably from the Socialist Workers Party hold many positons of influence in the local Unison and he thinks they are hell bent on bringing about a strike if they possibly can for their own political ends. He feels the unions lack of flexibility hurt the last Labour council.  He also thinks just as BNP members are banned from holding council positions SWP members should be banned too for they seek to undermine democratic society just as much. He thinks there was a lot of waste under the previous council and that the new Tory council is very right to challenge this, for too long he says H&F has had very generous provision of services (almost unique in London in some cases) creating a degree of dependency in the community which is unhealthy and patronising to working class people. He also says the degree of political correctness was OTT and at one point he got told off for describing old ladies as "old ladies" and got reprimanded by colleagues who said he should have referred to them as "old women." Since the Tories were elected he feels they have hit the ground running in an impressive way, and the air of complacency that use to fill the town hall has been lifted. Finally he feels the Tories have empowered local managers to manage and this couldn't have happened under Labour.  For the record I am a Conservative supporter but as I say my friend is not.

Simon Brooke ● 6860d

A good friend of mine works for the council and has done for the last 14 years. He is a Labour Party supporter and is popular and respected in his role as a manager in the organisation. He says he has had at times close working relationships with both Labour and Tory members and likes them both believing whatr they both want is the best for residents.  He says he was proud to work for the last Labour Council and that it provided excellent services in many areas and that he is grateful that the new Conservative Leader has acknowledged the last adminstrations acheivements and the hard work of officers. However he thinks the Conservative Council has transformed the organisation and made it a more stimulating and exciting place to work where suddenly many positive things are possible. Previously he says trying to get modest reforms to make real improvements in the delievery of services was problematic, because of the power of local trade union officials which he says many of the Labour Councillors would not challenge. Managing became extremely difficult, he has given me many examples of inflexible trade unions not allowing any reasonable discussions on modernising work practices. He says the far left notably from the Socialist Workers Party hold many positons of influence in the local Unison and he thinks they are hell bent on bringing about a strike if they possibly can for their own political ends. He feels the unions lack of flexibility hurt the last Labour council.  He also thinks just as BNP members are banned from holding council positions SWP members should be banned too for they seek to undermine democratic society just as much. He thinks there was a lot of waste under the previous council and that the new Tory council is very right to challenge this, for too long he says H&F has had very generous provision of services (almost unique in London in some cases) creating a degree of dependency in the community which is unhealthy and patronising to working class people. He also says the degree of political correctness was OTT and at one point he got told off for describing old ladies as "old ladies" and got reprimanded by colleagues who said he should have referred to them as "old women." Since the Tories were elected he feels they have hit the ground running in an impressive way, and the air of complacency that use to fill the town hall has been lifted. Finally he feels the Tories have empowered local managers to manage and this couldn't have happened under Labour.  For the record I am a Conservative supporter but as I say my friend is not.

Simon Brooke ● 6860d

"The market will set the rate""We have a responsibility to our shareholders""F*** everyone else. I'm alright Jack"Tha mantra of the caring conservative.Shame I quite like David Cameron but could never vote for his party as I only too well understand the mindset of the people in his party. I can afford my current rate of council tax and would gladly pay more if I thought it was going to help people who needed it. Even though I don't agree with everything it's spent on I do at least recognise the fact that there are people much less fortunate than me that need my help and can't necessarily help themselves. Thats what a "society" is.Not saying labour are much better these days either although I think in H&F council at least we had a well run & decent performing local council. Wonder how long it will take the tories to ruin it? Not long on this evidence.

Bryan Turner ● 6865d

Ms Johnson, I assume you're a Conservative from your reply.  Perhaps you can help me with the one question you will see that I have been consistently asking on this Forum but which no Conservative councillor will reply to.The new Council has cut the wages and services of the poorest in our community (new meals on wheels fees, cutting the mobile library, reducing home help and dinner lady salaries through privatisation, etc.) to pay for a council tax reduction that is so small as to make no difference for most voters - and also, I now learn, to pay for an 18% increase in councillors' salaries.This seems indecent to me.  But am I wrong?  If there's a moral justification, I'd love to know it.(By the way, I am not and have never been a councillor.)

Ben Coleman ● 6870d

Stephen Cowan you were part of a council group that had more press officers working for the council than there were journalists in the borough so get off your high horse.

Amanda Anne Johnson ● 6870d

The problem the Tories have is that their election literature promised H&F residents “better services” not less, worse or more expensive services and the list at the top of this posting makes it clear that’s what they’re now providing in many cases.They’re cutting police numbers in Hammersmith Broadway ward and I’m trying to find out if they’re doing it in other wards too.And on top of all that, they’ve awarded themselves an 18% increase in Councillors’ wage allowances. Meanwhile, Council staff are being told they’ll get between 2% to 2.5% increase this year.I think that many of the residents who voted Conservative will be more than a little surprised by all this.

Stephen Cowan ● 6870d

Raising their own remuneration by 18% at the same time wasn't a good PR move, either.

Andrew Broadbent ● 6870d

The only thing real cut they've made is in services for the poorest and weakest in our community.  But they're too weak to admit that.  At least if they said, "Yes, you're right, but who cares?", that'd be honest.  I wonder what their mothers would say if they knew.Pardon the frivolity, but their bad behaviour is so blatant.

Ben Coleman ● 6872d

IMHO we won't be able to say that they "did well" to cut Council Tax until we've seen the effect that it has on services.

Andrew Broadbent ● 6873d

Yes. But the Tories did well to cut council tax didn't they? Why didn't you vote for that?

Franco Hayes ● 6873d

Having seen some of the postings elsewhere on this forum I think it would be helpful if I set out for, those interested, the local Labour Councillors’ position on the budget vote.The H&F Annual Council Budget Meeting took place last Wednesday and provided an opportunity for the budget to be debated. Understandably, few of the 176, 800 men, women or children who live in our borough where there to hear how the £180million budget was to affect them. The Conservatives argued that they have a mandate to deliver their plans having won a significant election victory less than one year ago. They’re, of course, right on that and the Labour Group of councillors abstained. In fact, with 13 Labour Councillors and 33 Tory councillors we will be unlikely to out vote the Conservative Administration at any council meeting up until the next council elections - over three years away.At the first full Council meeting, 20 days after the election, we told the Tory Administration that we would work with them - where possible - for the benefit of all local residents but we would hold them to account if they broke the promises they had recently made. We have tried to do that, congratulating the Tories when we agree with them and publicising their actions when we think they’re acting contrary to their promises. We did that at the Budget meeting too.People will recall that the Tories promised better services and lower taxes prior to the elections. The list of cuts at the top of this posting makes it clear that the Tory election promise wasn’t completely true. Labour vehemently opposes the Tory cuts programme but, I recognise that it is up to local residents to work out if they agree with what the Tories are doing for themselves. Our job as the Opposition is to let people know what is happening, and then to offer an alternative programme to local people in time for the next election. That’s when the only vote likely to change the Tories positions on anything will happenRegardsCllr. Stephen CowanLeader of the Labour Group of Councillors

Stephen Cowan ● 6873d

Having seen some of the postings elsewhere on this forum I think it would be helpful if I set out for, those interested, the local Labour Councillors’ position on the budget vote.The H&F Annual Council Budget Meeting took place last Wednesday and provided an opportunity for the budget to be debated. Understandably, few of the 176, 800 men, women or children who live in our borough where there to hear how the £180million budget was to affect them. The Conservatives argued that they have a mandate to deliver their plans having won a significant election victory less than one year ago. They’re, of course, right on that and the Labour Group of councillors abstained. In fact, with 13 Labour Councillors and 33 Tory councillors we will be unlikely to out vote the Conservative Administration at any council meeting up until the next council elections - over three years away.At the first full Council meeting, 20 days after the election, we told the Tory Administration that we would work with them - where possible - for the benefit of all local residents but we would hold them to account if they broke the promises they had recently made. We have tried to do that, congratulating the Tories when we agree with them and publicising their actions when we think they’re acting contrary to their promises. We did that at the Budget meeting too.People will recall that the Tories promised better services and lower taxes prior to the elections. The list of cuts at the top of this posting makes it clear that the Tory election promise wasn’t completely true. Labour vehemently opposes the Tory cuts programme but, I recognise that it is up to local residents to work out if they agree with what the Tories are doing for themselves. Our job as the Opposition is to let people know what is happening, and then to offer an alternative programme to local people in time for the next election. That’s when the only vote likely to change the Tories positions on anything will happenRegardsCllr. Stephen CowanLeader of the Labour Group of Councillors

Stephen Cowan ● 6873d

But left to itself, the market would pay people poverty wages.  And then people wouldn't have the money to spend on other goods and services so we'd be in a downward spiral.  So a bit of human intervention (i.e. regulation) is necessary to ensure people can (a) eat, etc and (b) spend money to boost the economy.  That's why the minimum wage is a good thing.I also think what people get paid is increasingly becoming a moral issue.  At one end you've got City bonuses and Russian millionaires pushing house prices out of reach for most people.  At the other end the Council is pushing wages down for people in our own community who don't earn much to begin with.  It just seems wrong.

Ben Coleman ● 6909d

The market will set the rate for wages.

Franco Hayes ● 6909d

Forgive me but I'm a bit shocked.  Services are being cut and low-income people's wages are going to go even further down (due to privatisation) and in return, what?  A cut in people's council tax that will pay for a few cinema tickets.  Did you really vote for that?And I'm sorry, but I don't see that the council has reduced the role of regulation in our lives at all.  Surely all it has done is reduce services and wages?

Ben Coleman ● 6909d

I would like to thanks the politicians of both parties for setting out the situation.It does look to me like there has been a substancial reduction in the services the Council offers. I think most of us who voted Conservative knew that would happen and were still content to still vote that way. I don't mean to sound harsh. It's just a political fact that the left haven't grasped.Mark be proud of your cuts in tax and for reducing the role of local government in our over-regulated lives.

Franco Hayes ● 6910d

It's real disadvantage is that it's sitting on quite an expensive piece of Fulham real-estate which the Conservative Administration say they will “consider” selling to private property developers at some future juncture.

Stephen Cowan ● 6911d

This seems nuts.  What's wrong with Peterborough?  Where will the kids go?

Ben Coleman ● 6911d

I spoke with a governor of Peterborough Primary School last night. He told me that the Council has given them several disingenuous options - all which seem to involve closing down the school.I only have rumours about the others so will wait until I have info that is more substantial before naming them.

Stephen Cowan ● 6911d

Have they indicated the two primary schools they might shut?

Ben Coleman ● 6911d

It's probably worth having a look at the Council's budget and making that determination for yourself. This link will take you to a scrutiny report; http://www.lbhf.gov.uk/Images/HASCSC20072301_tcm21-74783.pdfThe budget begins on page 22. Hope this helps.

Stephen Cowan ● 6911d

Ok, what's the good news?

Caroline MacMillan ● 6912d