We got the cuts wrong - council

Worcester News: County Hall, the HQ of Worcestershire County Council County Hall, the HQ of Worcestershire County Council

THE leadership of Worcestershire County Council has admitted it got cuts to funding for the vulnerable wrong - and revealed a public outcry led to a change of tack.

Controversial plans to slash 60 per cent from a yearly £15 million funding pot for the elderly, vulnerable and disabled are being slowed down after an extra £3 million was found to soften the blow.

As your Worcester News revealed last month, the money is being put into a transition fund to give service providers time to prepare for the reductions.

During a cabinet meeting councillors said the 5,500 responses made during a consultation swayed them into putting the extra funds in.

It also emerged at the meeting that the money, known as Supporting People cash, helps 70 outside bodies to offer 165 different services.

It includes domestic abuse help, substance misuse and debt advice, 24-hour wardens for pensioners in sheltered accommodation, call alarms for the disabled and homelessness support.

Councillor Marcus Hart, cabinet member for health and well-being, said: "I'd like to place on the record my thanks for all the positive discussions we've had with service providers, who I believe understand the financial difficulties all 'uppr tier' authorities face.

"I became acutely aware that our £15 million budget being reduced to £6.5 million straightaway was going too far, too fast.

"The message we got during the consultation was concern over the scale and pace of change, with providers saying if they had more time they could look at making things work with less money.

"I think they do understand we need to reduce our base budget and it's another example of this cabinet listening to what we're being told.

"Whilst this, I am sure will not make everyone happy it goes a long way to making sure we treat with compassion and humility some of the most vulnerable members of society."

Councillor Adrian Hardman, the leader, said: "We've had a considerable pause in this process and sometimes it's entirely correct to stand back and re-assess the decision."

The council says the £3 million will ensure around 30 to 40 different contracts can be extended by several months, rather than finish at the end of March.

The transition cash is one-off funding, and the plan is still to withdraw 60 per cent of the £15 million kitty over the next year.

In recent weeks the council has come under fire from a range of housing associations, with Festival Housing claiming it could lead to a judicial review.

Comments (4)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

6:26pm Mon 10 Mar 14

3thinker says...

Perhaps time for all 57 Worcestershire Councillors to give up their £10,000 'slush' funds and put it to better use?
Perhaps time for all 57 Worcestershire Councillors to give up their £10,000 'slush' funds and put it to better use? 3thinker
  • Score: 2

8:41am Tue 11 Mar 14

green49 says...

Councillor Adrian Hardman, the leader, said: "We've had a considerable pause in this process and sometimes it's entirely correct to stand back and re-assess the decision."

IT was either this or face a judicial enquiry for wrongful practice, HARDMAN should be sacked, the meeting that was held eas also supplied with false information with Hardmans knowledge,, figures were NOT correct for SP alone, i have been on here telling whats been going on and this council load of **** are now realising they have to listen to experts, they have some eminent people who work for the council and deal in care etc yet Hardman and Co ignore what they are told as they tow the Tory party line.
It is quite clear that Hardman and CO are not fit for purpose as they are running a council yet have little idea of what it actually does.
Councillor Adrian Hardman, the leader, said: "We've had a considerable pause in this process and sometimes it's entirely correct to stand back and re-assess the decision." IT was either this or face a judicial enquiry for wrongful practice, HARDMAN should be sacked, the meeting that was held eas also supplied with false information with Hardmans knowledge,, figures were NOT correct for SP alone, i have been on here telling whats been going on and this council load of **** are now realising they have to listen to experts, they have some eminent people who work for the council and deal in care etc yet Hardman and Co ignore what they are told as they tow the Tory party line. It is quite clear that Hardman and CO are not fit for purpose as they are running a council yet have little idea of what it actually does. green49
  • Score: 5

8:43am Tue 11 Mar 14

green49 says...

HOW MUCH has all this cost to the taxpayer??? Thousands and it has achieved nothing.
HOW MUCH has all this cost to the taxpayer??? Thousands and it has achieved nothing. green49
  • Score: 4

8:57am Tue 11 Mar 14

mayall8808 says...

THE leadership of Worcestershire County Council has admitted it got cuts to funding for the vulnerable wrong

YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN what a load of ******* The councillors who were lead by the nose by Hardman to vote for these cuts should all be sacked they have no idea what they were doing, despite the actuall experts in the care industry telling them, False information was fed to them by the chairman, and to top it all now the WCC after issuing contracts to companies and are approved for care actually want the companies to pay for some of the cost towards the contracts themselves, what a joke?
The WCC Chairman and his mob are not fit to be in the job, SACK them.

It has cost the taxpayers thousands and got nowhere.
THE leadership of Worcestershire County Council has admitted it got cuts to funding for the vulnerable wrong YOU CAN SAY THAT AGAIN what a load of ******* The councillors who were lead by the nose by Hardman to vote for these cuts should all be sacked they have no idea what they were doing, despite the actuall experts in the care industry telling them, False information was fed to them by the chairman, and to top it all now the WCC after issuing contracts to companies and are approved for care actually want the companies to pay for some of the cost towards the contracts themselves, what a joke? The WCC Chairman and his mob are not fit to be in the job, SACK them. It has cost the taxpayers thousands and got nowhere. mayall8808
  • Score: 4

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree