Council services face 20pc cuts in merger talks (From Worcester News)
Get involved! Send your photos, video, news & views by texting WN NEWS to 80360 or e-mail us
Council services face 20pc cuts in merger talks
7:10am Tuesday 11th September 2012 in News By Tom Edwards
KEY council services in Worcestershire are facing cuts of up to 20 per cent under controversial attempts to save money, it has emerged.
Fears have been expressed the county council’s plan to merge certain functions with Staffordshire and Shropshire will lead to job losses, a lack of accountability and redundant buildings.
As your Worcester News first revealed in June, councils in the three counties have agreed to “team up” to explore common ideas for cutbacks.
Five areas have been earmarked for some kind of shared agreement: fostering and adoption, education services, faster broadband, IT, and procurement, such as buying stationery.
Now a briefing paper has been published, saying bosses aim to slash costs by 20 per cent in all of them by 2015.
The project, known as the Tri-Council initiative, was debated during a meeting of the overview and scrutiny performance board at County Hall.
Councillor Ken Pollock said: “If you’re looking at saving money there’s only two ways you can do it – firstly by paying less for a service, and secondly by operating with fewer people.
“I just wonder where the jobs will go, and if the pain will actually be spread out – it’s got the potential to become a bit messy.”
Luke Willetts, of the performance development team, said: “When we get details on that difficult conversations will need to be had, but there is a willingness to work together.
“I don’t see it all about job losses, as there are other ways to be more efficient, but we can’t get away from the fact that job losses may well be possible.”
Coun Pollock added: “On another point, one of the council’s corporate aims is to be ‘open for business’ – there’s real competition between Worcestershire and both of these other counties on economic development – if we look to share this area, it could get hairy.”
Other politicians said they were worried a ‘one size fits all approach’ could cause damage.
Coun Tom Wells said: “Worcestershire is very different from Staffordshire and Shropshire.
“What people see as priorities in my division are different from people in Stoke-on-Trent and Telford.
“Look at fostering and adoption, that’s included as one area for this scheme but it’s so sensitive – I would have thought it was best kept local.”
Coun Sue Askin said she was concerned about the role backbench politicians could have in the process, and buildings becoming empty as departments come together.
Mr Willetts said officers were working on the proposals and that “by the end of the calendar year” more details should start to emerge.
He said talks had also started with Herefordshire to potentially become a fourth member of the scheme.
Comments(8)
Jabbadad
says...
8:29am Tue 11 Sep 12
If they genuinely want to save money disband the county council and just let Worcester be responsible for Worcester City.
More Tea Vicar
says...
9:25am Tue 11 Sep 12
Focus on the basics, sack the high earners and replace them with lower numbers of reasonably paid people. Get rid of the people involved in marketing, 'diversity' initiatives etc.
If there was a point to having a Worcester Council, I would want it retained. But as things stand, it looks like an unnecessary extra layer of admin, so there are savings to be made in terms of numbers of councillors, and, no doubt, staff.
Oh, and how much is the SWDP costing? There could no doubt be major savings if the council got rid of the staff and stopped the sham consultation.
And let's not forget 'skivitis'. Seems council staff take almost twice as much sick leave as their private sector counterparts. I wouldn't want anyone who is genuinely ill to be forced to work, but the discrepancy does raise questions about 'working' practices and management in local government.
jb
says...
10:27am Tue 11 Sep 12
Landy44
says...
1:27pm Tue 11 Sep 12
Merging FUNCTION will actually make matters worse. I'd like to see the detail of the mentioned paper, as the WN article makes some assumptions on that...
For example: would it make sense to order common stationery and procure common IT for the three counties - ABSOLUTELY there are potentially big cost savings there IF DONE PROPERLY (which they won't, but that's a different matter)
Luke Willetts clearly needs some common sense - "Job losses may well be possible". OF COURSE THEY ARE. More than that, although it pains me in some ways to say this as it will be innocent people who get caught in the crossfire, they are ESSENTIAL!
It's so simple, even kids know this:
There isn't enough money. Taxes are already higher than they need to be. There are services that could be streamlined or cut entirely without too much pain, although before this out, having kicked the economic can down the road some more, we'll be forced to confront the fact that future cuts will be too late to stop the worst depressiont this country/Europe/the world has ever seen.
Jabbadad
says...
3:14pm Tue 11 Sep 12
There has always been the easy option to sack people which will have a more direct impact on any spreadsheet, but is short sighted. Without the local knowledge councils have great difficulty operating since ONE SIZE DOES NOT FIT ALL.And when you look at the skills that different departments require which are definitely locally identified when you move these skills by sacking or relocation huge problems occur. Look at call centers that were shipped away from areas even countries and after realising that this had a backwards reaction, those who made the original errors are now returning them to where the local knowledge can resume to have a wise input.
The manufacturing jobs that were lost to this country were again moved abroad by the captains of industry, who knew nothing about communities and their important input, and could see no further than the end of their cheque book. So as you mention even kids know the majority of mistakes in this country and others are made by those who think they know everything (politicians etc) but in fact lack the common sense that makes this world tick over.
Landy44
says...
6:28pm Tue 11 Sep 12
My point on the stationery is that at a macro level to leverage greater volume in order to reduce price, and therefore cost (ultimately to the tax payer) is just good business and I would have expected this to be done as a matter of course (but clearly it isn't - I shouldn't be surprised, the London borough councils are only now consolidating their IT purchasing - don't even think about what the total pre-consolidation cost is - it will hurt).
Clearly local knowledge to deliver local services is the most efficient and customer focused approach, with commoditised "back end" services centralised somewhere (where it makes logical sense).
Unfortunately, I think we're well past the "cost cutting" that these guys are talking about now - They are clutching at straws, and have left it way too late to cut deep. Just about every branch of government (and most global Governments for that matter) is either already, or teetering on the edge of effective bankruptcy.
Pretty much everyone "in charge" knows it (but doesn't know what to do about it......other than "tinker irrationally") - based on today's news, the union leaders clearly don't understand - most people haven't given it a second thought. They're either too busy nose to the grindstone, or blaming someone else.
Unfortunately, public sector workers (those good people "at the coalfaces") will be the unwitting victims.
No flavour of government is innocent, and none seem to have the answers regrettably.
C'est la vie.
Landy44
says...
6:30pm Tue 11 Sep 12
denon says...
7:24am Tue 11 Sep 12