Reading Labour's Political Priorities

Labour councillors were keen to point out to those of us in attendance at Cabinet on Monday that they had different, superior, priorities from the previous Lib Dem - Conservative Coalition administration of the Council.

We were given a steer about Labour's priorities at the June Cabinet meeting but Monday evening's meeting was where the rubber hit the road, so to speak and smoke began to clear about what Labour priorities will really mean for residents.

And, as laudable and popular as many Labour priorities may seem - and some of them we are very happy to support - the reality is that for the residents of  Reading the effects of reorganising the Council's budget to reflect some of them are far from benign.

On Monday, the phrase that fo me defined the evening came from the Deputy Leader of the Council, Cllr Tony Page:

"We won, you lost!"

He repeated this at least three times in the evening.

So much for an and to Punch and Judy politics signalled by the Leader of the Council, Cllr Lovelock at the last meeting.

But why is Cllr Page's outburst important?

Because it tells you all you need to know about the thinking behind all Labour's decisions in power.

For Labour, regardless of the subject under discussion - whether it is community cohesion, free schools, social care -  everything is political.

For Readng Labour Party every decision boils down to satisfying particular interest groups or groups of voters.

Ensuring that these groups or individuals are not disadvantaged by any decisions lies behind every decision Labour councillors take.

And if you are not in Labour's list by virtue of your background, location or voting habits you will not benefit.

To give Labour credit this is a highly effective politicial strategy.

But what it is not  is a recipe for good, ethical government.

And it is in fact very bad news for taxpayers and everyone who relies on Council services.

Turning to Cabinet, what did we learn from Monday evening's exchanges about Labour's real political priorities?

1. Reducing child poverty is not a priority for a Labour administration

Read documents about Labour's priorities for the year and you will not see child poverty identified anywhere as an issue that needs to be addressed.

On Monday Labour councillors did not bat an eye lid when public money previously ear marked for tackling child poverty was 'reallocated' towards funding Reading Council for Racial Equality and a vague notion improving community cohesion.

Improving community cohesion and promoting equality is one thing but why do other areas of Council activity have to suffer in order to deliver it?

The fact is the number of children living in poverty rising to one quarter when Reading had a Labour government and a Labour Council.

Last December, one of Reading Borough Council's longest-serving Labour councillors Cllr Mike Orton, who represents one of the most deprived wards in Reading said he was horrified at the levels of child poverty in our area.

And yet, he along with his Labour Cabinet colleagues agreed to this dreadful cut.

I questioned this decision and was roundly attacked by Labour councillors in the meeting.

This latest decision however follows a clear pattern of spending by Labour.

They have a long history of spending large amounts of public money on projects and areas where spending is not tied to any particular outcomes or objectives.

Lack of transparency over decision-making in the Council before has made this hard to question but recent development led by Liberal Democrat and Conservative councillors have made Labour's ability to avoid public scrutiny much more difficult.

Furthermore, Labour may have got away with throwing good money after bad in in the past but at a time when all public spending is being reduced their approach looks reckless.

Nationally, the Coalition Government has signalled that cutting child poverty is a priority with the publication of a Child Poverty Strategy, increased early intervention and improvements to years education, and the launch of the Pupil Premimum which will see spending on the poorest children in Reading rise significantly.

2. Labour councillors are in favour redistribution of wealth: from those on low or middle incomes to those on high incomes:

Labour's Cabinet approved plans for Council Taxpayers to foot 70% of the bill for people with savings over the minimum threshold to attend day centres. I am aware of at least one case of someone with in excess of £100,000 savings who will benefit from this - part of Labour's pre-election bribes.

This generous move (who wouldn't want to introduce it?) will set the Council back £123k adding more pressure to the Social Care budget which is already facing in-year demand pressures of just under £400k through demand pressures alone.

Labour councillors also agreed to scrap Green Waste charges and revert to a situation where thousands of people with no gardens will subsidise residents who do. This move will add £180k to this year's budget.

Labour councillors rejected a proposal put forward by officers whereby people on low incomes should get concessions on the charge preferring to introduce a scheme whereby some of Reading's wealthiest residents will be subsidised to get free collections by some of the town's poorest Council Tax payers on low and fixed incomes.

3. Arts , Parks and Planning are not priorities for the Labour administration:

On Monday we learned that Labour's free green waste election pledge will be funded by:

• 70k from Cultural Head of Service staffing budget
• £40k from restructure of Cultural Services
• £30k from Parks and ground maintenance efficiencies and seasonal maintenance
• £30k from Planning Delivery Grant
• £10k from Joint Strategic Planning Unit

These cuts were tabled at short notice at Cabinet making detailed pre-scrutiny by opposition councillors impossible.

To suggest these cuts will not affect front-line services is laughable given we know they involve job losses and reductions in services.

4. Labour have no plans to bring back their 'gold standard' concessionary fares scheme.

Labour councillors pledged to reinstate concessionary fares only for people with Access Passes (5,000 residents) - funded through a one off £65k windfall to the Council's coffers via Bus Lane fines, something we are happy to support and something we would have done had the money been available.

Labour made clear they have no plans to reinstate concessionary fares for the 30,000 or so pensioners.

This would cost the Council £300k.

5. Labour's idea of consultation: agree consultation behind closed doors first

The Lead Councillor described as 'politically neutral' a letter that was circulated by a Labour councillor to residents before Cabinet had even met to agree a public consultation should take place on the issue.

Is this what Labour councillors mean by 'a fair, open and transparent process' to consultation as set out in their Priorities for the year at June Cabinet meeting?

6. Labour councillors have no idea how much their pre-election pledges on changes to Residents Parking will cost.

When we took control of the Council last May, Labour's Residents Parking Scheme was running a deficit of £300k.

Labour are reviewing the new scheme but made no promises about delivering any changes.

A report will be brought forward to September Cabinet about the financial impact of Labour's planned changes to the scheme.

7. Labour's approach to promoting community cohesion and equality under the microscope

Despite an independent review of their own community cohesion policies  in 2007 which identified a number of flaws in the Council's approach to promoting equality (including LGBT equality) Labour councillors are only now getting round to promoting the full range of equalities.

Labour councillors have agreed to fund RCRE by a further £45,000 on 'a defined piece of work to be agreed with the Head of Policy, Performance and Community but failed to restore RCRE's  core funding grant as according to the Cabinet report on the issue the service outlined in the service level agreement  'was limited to race equality, where a wider equalities perspective is now envisaged'.

Labour councillors have agreed to set up a new equalities body which will...scrutinise the Council among other public bodies (despite being dependent on the Council for all it's funding).

8. Absent Friends

Finally, it's easy in the discussion of Labour's priorities to forget the two councillors that helped make all the above happen: the Greens.

Their two councillors didn't turn up to Cabinet on Monday and once again where absent during discussions about the Council's Budget.

It's possible to draw several conclusions from this and I'm afraid none of them are positive.

At the moment, Reading's Labour councillors are tweaking this year's budget.

The budget we successfully set without closing a single library, sure start centre or leisure service.

For Labour this is the easy part.

But as we speak, officers are preparing options for next years budget.

As I explained last month this will involve needing to find at least £9 million pounds worth of savings or potentially more if they don't stick to our budget.

Behind the scenes Labour councillors are already preparing the ground to make massive cuts to key services in Reading.

The time to start worrying about the future of  those areas we have highlighted which are clearly not priorities to Reading Labour' Party's Town Hall bosses is now.

Sorry Labour, the buck stops with you

The new Labour administration of the Council has finally got round to publishing their priorities for the coming year.

Below is the somewhat rambling preamble drafted by the Leader of the Council, Cllr Jo Lovelock:

"During the recent election campaign we were very clear to the public that the financial situation we find ourselves in will mean that we will have to make difficult choices.

The Conservative-led coalition Government has not only imposed severe and front loaded cuts in local government grant, but has also introduce a new way of allocating grant which disadvantages urban councils like Reading with high levels of need."

"Where we have committed to reviewing the service changes and charges introduced by the previous administration, we will find alternative strategies for savings in order to remain within the budget set for 2011/12.

For this reason, we will need to ensure that the council is restructured in a way, which promotes innovation and even greater efficiency.We will need to work with the public and council staff to ensure we can deliver on the priorities which most matter in our local communities and which protect those most in need. As this is such a major piece of work we have also created a cabinet post to focus on service delivery and improvement, who will work with other lead councillors to ensure a common direction of travel."

'Financial situation we find ourselves in'?! I think the previous Labour government bears rather a large responsibility for that, Cllr Lovelock.

Don't forget, Labour chancellor Alastair Darling pledged to make £44bn worth of cuts to public spending.

And finally, she admits Labour WILL have to make cuts to balance the budget.

For 'alternative strategies for savings'... read cuts to services
 
For 'restructuring the council'... read job cuts.

Sadly no detail on who or what will get the chop.

The budget agreed by Lib Dem and Conservatives in February protected the vulnerable.

So come on Labour, it's time to come clean with the public - what are these alternative savings you plan to make?
 
And what will you do to set the budget next year?

Some facts.

1. The Council's forecast budget for 2012/13 anticipates that savings of around £15 million will need to be found.
2.  If all the savings the Lib Dem-Conservative coalition administration identified for 2011/12 are delivered according to plan then the full year impact of these savings into 2012/13 would generate savings of £5.5m which would mean the further savings to be found in 2012/13 of £14.2m would be reduced to £8.8m.

The document goes on:

"A vital role for all members of the Cabinet will be ensuring the public are fully involved in our decision making."

From the Party which brought you the one-way IDR debacle, this rings rather hollow.

If the public is going to be 'fully involved' don't you think it was time this administration told the public what it what services it plans to cut?

We all know Labour will try and blame the previous administion and the 'Conservative-led government' for any cuts they make.

Sorry Labour, you wanted to run the Council at all costs and the buck stops with you for whatever decisions or cuts you make in office.

If in doubt, launch a review

'"To govern is to choose. To appear to be unable to choose is to appear to be unable to govern"

So said former Conservative chancellor Nigel Lawson MP.

I'm no fan of his, but I like the quote and I think it describes particularly well the behaviour of Reading's new or new-old Labour administration.

Politics is about choices.

What you choose to do and not do.

What services you choose to fund and not fund.

So what will Labour spend public money or rather, what services will they cut?

After they have already promised to freeze Council Tax and with a need to make many millions of pounds worth of savings next year, something's got to give.

It may not be rocket science to say this it but leadership is about exactly that - leading.

Not waiting for others to tell you what you should be doing.

Taking decisions, not just talking about them.

And occasionally, sticking your neck out.

I had plenty of experience doing this as lead member for social care.

And let me tell you it's not easy and you don't always make yourself popular.

But leading isn't about being popular - it's supposed to be about doing the right thing.

As lead councillor the clue is in the title - you're job is to 'lead' - to take decisions and stand by them.

Sometimes I wonder what planet some Labour councillors have been living on for the past 12 months.

They are about to get a taste of decision-making in tough times financially, and fun it ain't.

However Labour councillors spent their year in the political wilderness I do hope they have found time to get a briefing on the budget and the financial outlook for the Council now - for the sake of residents.

I'm not sure they have, as one week the actions taken by the new administration of the Council (if action is the right word) are characterised by vacillation and weakness.

Is the new administration setting a radical new policy direction?

Hardly.

Labour are 'reviewing' one of our policies.

And according to Labour's manifesto we should expect more where they came from -  with reviews of Social Care and senior management promised.

The latest review will focus on our decision to introduce a charge for the collection of green waste.

A popular move, yes.

A sensible or credible move? no

Scrapping the charge for green waste collections would blow a hole in the Council's  budget, threatening the viability of Council services thousands of people depend on.

It was part of a total budget package Lib Dems worked hard to deliver that would see:

• Services to the most vulnerable - protected
• No libraries close - in fact opening hours were extended
• No Childrens Centres close
• No leisure facilities cut

So if Labour scrap the charge, wow would Labour make up the budget shortfall?

No-one knows, least of all it would seem, them.

Launching the review, Labour Lead Member for the Environment, Cllr Gittings said:

"We gave an undertaking to review this decision and that process is now under way. I will be working closely with council officers to consider the options and bring forward a clear recommendation on the way ahead.
 
"It goes without saying that any decision we make will need to take account of the tight financial situation which we currently face, but we are determined to identify the best possible deal for our residents in the circumstances."

Notice the wording of the announcement: 'review' rather than 'reverse' suggesting that Labour councillors probably have no intention of scrapping the charges altogether.

Notice the acknowledgement of the 'tight financial situation'.
Where were Labour when we were looking at ways to protect key services?

I don't remember them coming up with any bright ideas.
Answer: busy sticking their fingers in their ears and putting two fingers up to the Council's formal budget process.

Anyway, I fully expect Labour will just tweak the original proposal, because in reality there have no wriggle room financially.

And that's politics and it's now Labour's problem, along with their friends the Greens.

So the question is - who cares?

Well, we do as actually what they are doing is incredibly short-sighted and potentially very damaging to Council services.

By reviewing the original decision Labour are throwing the budget into chaos leaving Council staff (already planning next year's budget) to worry and ask the question: where will the additional revenue come from?

To be clear, the green waste charge was not something we Lib Dem councillors took any pleasure in introducing but given the hard choices we faced - between cutting services and increasing the Council's income to ensure key services such as libraries stayed open.

With invoices just about to be sent out, Labour councillors are pulling the plug on over £300,000 worth of potential income to the Council which would have been spent on services.

Let's not forget, under Labour's Green Waste collection service Council Tax payers living in properties without gardens, for example flats, or those who are unable to take advantage of the green waste collection service subsidised those who could.


Are Labour councillors advocating a return to such an unfair system?

Who knows.

"To govern is always to choose among disadvantages"

So said, Charles de Gaulle.

One week in office and Labour are already showing they are not up to the job.

Reading Labour Promise Council Tax Freeze in 2012

Good if rather surprising news for Reading residents today as Labour are publicly promising not to increase Council Tax whatsoever in 2012.

See this exchange from Twitter earlier today:

@ReadingLabour:
Disappointed to see @CllrDaisyBenson using twitter to dispense worry on the #rdg hashtag. Labour have no plans to raise Council Tax. None.

When Labour ran the Council in previous years they increased Council Tax year on year adding to the burden faced by residents - particularly those on fixed incomes.

So if they deliver this it would be a first for them.

There was no reference to such a pledge in the Labour manifesto so it is a surprise promise.

Labour have also promised no cuts in services.

As I have already stated, the Lib Dems will be keeping a close eye on the new Labour administration and making sure they keep all the promises they made to residents before, during and after the election.

Labour's Social Care Plans Could Cost Residents Dear

Reading Labour state in their local election manifesto that they would reverse our plans to introduce charges for people who could afford to pay for day care services.

They also say they would suspend our reforms and launch a full review of the service.

These pre-election pledges are both costly and risky.

I have already demolished Labour's arguments against day care charges (which compare very favourably to those charged by neighbouring councils and the private sector) but I thought it was worth explaining what Labour's ill-thought out plans actually mean to the Council's budget, local services and taxpayers in Reading.

In March the Council agreed plans I had been developing with officers over a period of months to transform community care so that was fair to all and sustainable in the long term.

They are designed to ensure that vulnerable people who need services get them at a time when the number of people needing social care is increasing due to an ageing population.

This decision has wider ramifcations which are now being felt across the Council.

Our reforms to adult social care mean that taxpayers will avoid £3.8 million pounds worth of cost pressures linked to social care over the next three years.

• Enabling the Council to increase funding to the voluntary sector - one of the few councils to do this
• Enabling the Council increase support available to unpaid carers.
• Helping the Council to keep vital services like libraries and leisure services open.
• Helping to reduce the finanical burden on Council Taxpayers.

If after the election Labour failed to implement these plans immediately the cost to taxpayers would be £100,000 per month.

So we return to the question which services would Labour cut to pay for their pre-election promises?

To which Labour's manifesto fails to provide any answers.

Before the Council agreed our plans to transform community care services in March a full public consultation and equality impact assessment was carried out.

• Over 20 individual consultation meetings were held.
• Over 1,000 public comments were submitted.

And Labour's former Lead Member for Community Care Cllr Mike Orton commented that our plans would indeed protect the most vulnerable.

With just days to go before the local elections Labour now say they would rip up the consultation findings, the policies agreed in Council, and  at the Budget set in February in favour of a new review of the service.

This would cause huge disruption and concern to many vulnerable people and their carers who receive services from the Council just months after they were first consulted.

And why? Just so Labour could score a few political points.

Adult social care is too important to become a political football.

I have put the work in build a system that works for the future.

Labour councillors routinely ducked the tough choices but we haven't.

As I said in March:

'There is only one compassionate, sustainable and equitable option on the table this evening.


I urge members across this Council to support it"

Empty Promises: Manifesto Shows Reading Labour Have Nothing to Offer Residents

Back in March I posed the question on my blog: which services would Reading Labour cut to balance the Council's books? This has since proved to be one of the most popular posts ever on my blog.

 Back then I wrote:

"Over the past year Labour councillors in Reading have opposed every single saving we have identified and every charge we have sought to introduce which when taken together help protect services to the most vulnerable.



In their mindless opposition to everything Labour councillors have not differentiated between bulky waste charges and day centre charges: they are opposed to them all.


When pressed as to what they would do to fund services the Labour Group Leader stated that "we wouldn't start from here".


So no alternative Budget was tabled.


This near silence has left me in no doubt at all that were they running the Council now Labour would be cutting more jobs and axing more services than the Coalition Administration has.


So the question then becomes not if but what would Labour cut and which services would they axe.


Libraries? Leisure Centres? Sure Start Centres?


Labour councillors are always quick to point the finger at us but more reticent about offering solutions."

Fast forward to 22 April and less than two weeks before residents go to the polls Reading Labour Party finally got round to publishing their manifesto.

Well, I've read it and I still cannot find any details of what services Labour would cut or indeed how they would find the £19 million pounds savings the Council has to make from it's budget over the coming year.

I don't need to rehearse the arguments that have already been made. Lib Dems and Conservatives put together a budget to protect the vulnerable where Labour could not.

We are not complacent about the work we still need to do to make Reading a better place for residents - publishing our 'Six to Fix'  local Lib Dem manifesto earlier this week which builds on the work we have done this year and sets out our plan of action for the future.

As outgoing Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liam Byrne MP said when he handed over the keys to the Treasury to the incoming Coalition Government:

"There's no money left."

So we have to do things differently.

Ministers who have visited Reading have had nothing but praise for the work the Lib Dems are doing working with the Conservatives to protect and improve services for residents.

Let's have a look at some of Labour's election pledges in more detail.

1. Labour will stand up for stand up for a cleaner Reading by making clean streets a priority.

• This is a completely uncosted commitment - Labour failed to put forward ANY proposals to fund increased street-cleaning during the Budget process.
• When the Council was run by Labour streets in many out of town areas were ignored as Council staff were forced to face national targets around street cleaning set in Whitehall.
• Lib Dems successfully campaigned for extra cleaning in 12 local shopping areas across Reading.
• When Labour controlled the Council dog-fouling, fly-tipping and littering went unpunished because Labour failed to use powers given to councils under the Clean Neighbourhoods Act passed by the Labour Government in 2005!
• The Coalition Administration swiftly brought in these powers and set up a new Environmental Warden service to crack down on environmental crime and keep local streets clean.

2.  Labour will radically re-organise the Council and its services to deliver savings and protect people in need.

• Apparently this will include plans to 'radically review senior management' - so presumably this will mean cutting more jobs, something Labour have always said they were against.
• Given the £19 million pounds savings the Council will have to make this year regardless of who is running it I would have thought getting rid of the people who manage vital services to among other people vulnerable children and adults does not sound like a good idea.
• Labour plan to 'restructure' the publicity function of the Council - this is already happening.
• Lib Dems forced Labour when they were running the Council to scrap the Council's costly magazine.
• Labour plan to 'overhaul electronic communication to make radical savings' - a review of IT services is already underway. What are Labour planning? Getting rid of the Council's website?
• When Labour ran the Council the Council had no social media strategy - this is one of the first things we brought in as a new administration.
• We are committed to exploring new ways to engage residents beyond Council meetings - and I have led this agenda in Reading.
• Reading Labour Party ran the Council for 23 years and failed to make any inroads in cutting wasteful bureaucracy or delivering services differently.
• I have seen no evidence that Labour Group Leader Cllr Lovelock and other senior councillors who once ran the Council would bring any new ideas to the table this time.
• Since the Lib Dems and Conservatives took over the running of the Council last year we have brought about several important changes to the way the Council delivers services to save money.
• We brought forward plans to share legal services with Wokingham Borough Council
• We agreed plans to repair Wokingham BC's council houses which will bring in significant income to the Council helping tenants and taxpayers.
• We scrapped unaffordable car allowances to Council staff and taxpayer funding of trade union officials which existed under Labour.
• We also launched a new landlord accreditation scheme in partnership with the National Landlord Association to improve standards in private rented housing.
• Labour councillors advocated a system which would have costs thousands and delivered little.
• Under Labour many Council services overlapped - wasting taxpayers money.
• Labour councillors opposed our review of the warden service which will result in a more cost-effective and joined up service.

3. Labour will use the Council's watchdog powers to stand up for the local NHS

• Under Labour, the Council had not powers to scrutinise private sector providers of health services in Reading.
• The Coalition Government's Health & Social Care Bill currently going through Parliament includes new powers for Council scrutiny committees to scrutinise all providers of NHS services - including private sector providers.
• The shadow Health & Wellbeing Board we recently set up includes places for 3 councillors + 2 opposition councillors as observers so will have more democratic input than many other councils

4. Labour will stand up for those least able to care for themselves

• Labour have pledged to 'reverse the daily charge of £43 for day centres' and 'Labour will suspend the cuts to community care and undertake a full review of the service to ensure no elderly person is left without support they need.
• As I have said many times Labour's approach to adult social care is completely wrongheaded and will lead to services to the most vulnerable in Reading being seriously threatened in future.
• A 3 month consultation about transforming community care services has already taken place, with over 1,000 submissions being received.
• Labour's plans will be costly and disruptive coming so soon after the recent in depth review
• Where is the money going to come from for this?
• They will lead to the Council's budget being overspent by around £2 million pounds per year.
• As Labour are not proposing to cut any service it is clear they intend to pay for this overspend by massively increasing Council Tax.

5. Labour will involve people more effectively to ensure that all voices are heard equally

• This is possible one of the least credible pledges of the lot as Labour's record on public consultation is dire.
• Labour's attempt to force through a new one-way IDR and introducing fortnightly bin collections are just two examples of their unwillingness to engage the public.
• The coalition administration of the Council consulted the public before setting it's budget - something Labour never did when they ran the Council.
• Labour plan to set up more Council forums but don't say how they would fund them.
• We introduced a social media strategy to involve more residents in decision-making.
• We are publishing all Council spending online to increase accountability and transparency - this never happened under Labour.
• We have increased funding to the voluntary sector to build community capacity and to ensure all communities have a voice in Reading.
• We have set up new funding streams to enable community groups fairer access to funding.
• Our recent review of operations at the Civic Centre saved the taxpayer £60,000.

6. Labour will set up a New Local Partnership to stand up for Reading

• Reading already has one Local Strategic Partnership and Reading CIC (economic development) so why are Labour politicians proposing another one?
• Reading is one of the most successful economies in the UK - it doesn't need another unelected body to 'stand up' for its interests
• There are no details in Labour's manifesto about how this new body would be funded - so that will be the taxpayer then.
• The Labour government set up more unelected quangos at national and local level than anyone else.
• We are committed to investing public money in public services and the voluntary sector - not more bureaucracy.

7. Labour will work with our partners to continue the regeneration of the town

• Thanks to Labour's mismanagement of the public finances public money for regeneration and other capital projects has been scarce.
• Despite this the Coalition Administration of the Council has been very successful in securing public and private investment in Reading.
• We secured £9.7m additional investment from Government to deliver much-needed overhaul of Reading Station.
• We are actively lobbying ministers to localise business rates as part of the Government's review of local government finance to enable more money raised in Reading to be spent in Reading.
• Labour councillors opposed plans to invest £10 million pounds in investing Council homes and estates at Council this year as part of our campaign to maintain decent homes and neighbourhoods in Reading.
• We are investing £400,000 this year in improving council estates across Reading which were allowed to get run down by Labour when they ran the Council.
• Since the Coalition Administration has been running Reading Council we have won millions of pounds of external funding to build much needed new homes.
• We are building the first new council homes in Reading for 20 years on the former Avenue School Site in Katesgrove.
• When across the Country regeneration projects have stalled we won £.3.7 million pounds from Government to develop 76 new affordable homes in Dee Park in Reading.
• We also successfully won cash to build new homes for disabled people in Southcote and are bringing forward plans to increase supported living accommodation for people with learning disabilities.

8. Labour would review the Green Bin Fiasco

• There are no details in the manifesto as to what this 'review' would involve.
• If Labour were to reverse this decision there would be cost to the taxpayer attached so which services would they cut to fund it?
• Council Tax payers living in properties without gardens, for example flats, or those who are unable to take advantage of the green waste collection service would be subsidising those who could.
• As I blogged in February  throughout the year Labour have rejected every single idea we have considered to help fund vital services to Reading by increasing the Council's income.

9. Labour will maintain the Council’s commitment to paying a living wage.

• We are fully committed to paying Council staff a living wage - always have been, always will be.
• It was the Coalition Administration of Reading Council that brought in policies to ensure fair pay between male and staff Council staff.
• Labour councillors new about unequal pay for at least three years and failed to act - so much for standing up for the workforce!
• The Lib Dems and Conservatives have worked together to keep job losses to a minimum - unlike many Labour-run councils.

So that's Labour's pledges. What won't will you see mentioned in Labour's manifesto?

1. Cuts to services - Labour will not say which services they will cut if they regained control of the Council in Reading. Yet look around the country and there is clear evidence in Manchester, Camden, Brent and Islington that when Labour are in charge they axe services and cut jobs.  No sure start centres or libraries are closing in councils run by the Lib Dems.
2. Council Tax - no mention anywhere in Labour's manifesto. I wonder why.
3. Child poverty - 1-5 children in Reading live in poverty and the number grew when Labour ran the Council. We want to reduce poverty and improve social mobility so we are investing in education for Reading's poorest children through the Pupil Premium and diverting council funding to community groups that are working with the Council to reduce poverty.
4. Carers - for years the needs of carers in Reading got overlooked. Carers are local heroes and we are working with a range of organisations to deliver more support to carers.
5. Empty homes - this has never been a priority for Labour. We are one of the few councils continue to invest in bringing much needed-empty homes back into use.
6. Mental Health - 1 in 3 people in the UK suffer from mental health problems at some point in their life. In Reading the Government is investing in 'Talking Therapies' so more people can get support and the Council is working closely with the voluntary sector to support residents.
7. Pot holes - the Council under Coalition control is  investing more in improving local roads after years of underinvestment by the Labour.
8. Sorry - no apologies from Labour for screwing up the economy and the Council's finances
9. Trees - parts of Reading have very little tree cover and despite massive public spending during the last 13 years Labour made no effort to increase the number of trees in the borough. We will be planting new trees across Reading this year thanks to the smart budget agreed by Lib Dem and Conservative MPs this year

11 months in opposition and Labour still don't get it. They have not learned from their past mistakes or embraced new ways of doing things.

Don't give them the chance to mess things up in Reading again: vote Lib Dem in 5 May!

Which Services Would Reading Labour Cut?

I read online this week that Labour councillors in Reading are opposed to the Coalition Council's plans to charge residents for Green Waste Collections.

This service isn't free to deliver. So how would they pay for it?

They say they care about local services but how would they fund them?

Over the past year Labour councillors in Reading have opposed every single saving we have identified and every charge we have sought to introduce which when taken together help protect services to the most vulnerable.

In their mindless opposition to everything Labour councillors have not differentiated between bulky waste charges and day centre charges: they are opposed to them all.

When pressed as to what they would do to fund services the Labour Group Leader stated that "we wouldn't start from here".

So no alternative Budget was tabled.

This near silence has left me in no doubt at all that were they running the Council now Labour would be cutting more jobs and axing more services than the Coalition Administration has.

So the question then becomes not if but what would Labour cut and which services would they axe.

Libraries? Leisure Centres? Sure Start Centres?

Labour councillors are always quick to point the finger at us but more reticient about offering solutions..

Under the Liberal Democrat - Conservative control of Reading Borough Council none of these services in Reading will close, and in the case of libraries the reality is quite the reverse with opening hours being extended across the town.

So in Reading politics the real political gap that is opening up is one of credibility.

As former Labour minister Hazel Blears commented earlier this week: it's time Labour got real and told the public what they would cut.

We know that former Labour Chancellor Alistair Darling's plans planned in massive cuts in  public spending:

"Darling’s three-year cash freeze, to begin in 2011, will mean big cuts in real spending for government departments. Compared with this year’s expected £387 billion total for spending by departments, the equivalent by 2013-4 will be £351 billion"

And outgoing Labour Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liam Byrne helpfully confirmed his Party's financial legacy when on leaving office he announced "there is no money left".

So how would Reading Labour councillors have dealt with this?

Locally It has been widely known in that in setting this year's budget the Council needed to find in the region of £19 million pounds worth of savings in one year as a result of reductions in government grant.

Finding these savings was far from easy but Lib Dem and Conservative Councillors did what had to be done to balance the budget in order to fund services that local residents hold dear including libraries, leisure services, children's services and care for the elderly.

As part of this process in January this year the Council’s Cabinet considered a report setting out saving targets and income proposals to help set the budget for the financial year 2011/12.

One of the proposals agreed by Cabinet was to introduce charges for the collection of green waste.

Labour councillors opposed the plans in their entirety failing to put forward any alternative.

And it gets worse.

Once again by burying they heads in the sand and favouring the "doing nothing" Labour councillors are once again defending unfairness.

Under Labour's Green Waste collection service Council Tax payers living in properties without gardens, for example flats, or those who are unable to take advantage of the green waste collection service have been subsidising those who could.

Not very fair, is it?

At a time when the Council must prioritise spending charging people who use green waste collections rather than cutting essential services would seem to me to be a fairer way of approaching savings.

Many Local Authorities currently impose a charge for the collection of green waste and many more will be in the future.

So the question is - if Labour are opposed to raising revenue through fees and charges what services would they cut to balance the Council's budget?

You don't need to look very far to see what Labour-run councils have done when faced with budget pressures.

In Manchester Labour closed five libraries, cut bin collections and closed leisure centres.

Down the road in Sheffield (run by the Lib Dems) councillors had to make identical savings (more than 8 % of their total budget) but there they kep every swimming pool, library and Sure Start Centre open.

In Camden Labour closed two SureStart Centre and cut library services.

Across England not one Sure Start Centre has closed where Lib Dems control councils.

So what would Reading Labour do?

Their previous record in local government is a useful guide:

When they ran the Council Labour habitually increased Council Tax.

In 2000/01 – the Band D council tax in Reading was £848. By 2010 it had risen to £1,500.

This is a 77% increase – meanwhile over the same period inflation increased by 26%.

Over a 10 year period, when Labour ran the Council in Reading Council Tax rose at three times the rate of inflation.

We have calculated that by opposing all our savings proposals, if Labour were in control they would increase next year’s Council Tax by 30%.

With elections coming up it's about time local Labour councillors came clean with Reading residents about how they would pay for services: Council Tax hike or slash and burn?

Government Invests More Cash to Help Fix Reading Roads

Back in February I blogged the welcome news that Reading Borough Council was set to benefit from £400,000 additional funding from the Coalition Government to mend potholes. Today as part of the Budget settlement the Department of Transport announced that the amount of funding going to councils to repair roads was being doubled from £100 million to £200 million pounds. This cash injection comes as a response to the severe weather experienced across England in recent months which caused massive damage to the road network.
In Reading the Council will be receiving an additional £295,344 specifically to help the Council fix potholes and road damage . The investment means the Council will not have to increase Council Tax or reduce spend elsewhere to fund these much needed road repairs. This is good news.
As part of this additional funding, the Department of Transport is requiring local highway authorities to publish a brief note on their website by 30 September 2011 so local communities can see how this extra funding has been spent. It is good to see the Government continuing to invest in vital local infrastructure which will benefit all road users.

Council Tax Frozen and Key Services Protected

Council Tax in Reading is not rising for the first time in many years as a result of the decisions taken by Liberal Democrat and Conservative Councillors. 
We have delivered on our pledge to the public which we agreed via our Coalition Agreement last May.
At a time when household budgets are under huge pressure this is one bill that will not be going up over the next year giving some respite to families and elderly people in particular.
And despite the need to find over £18 million pounds worth of savings from the Council's budget, unlike some other councils :

• we have not closed any libraries or leisure services
• we have protected care to vulnerable children and adults.
• we have increased financial support to voluntary groups
• we have increased the number of trees in the Borough
• we have launched a new warden service to tackle environmental crime
• We have increased support to carers
• we are continuing to improve Council homes and estates
• we are continuing to take action to reduce empty homes - a discretionary service

It is worth pointing out that the Labour opposition group on the Council opposed all the above measures and failed to put forward an alternative budget of their own.

A Labour administration would seriously threaten many key services we have sought to protect. Labour have shown time and time again they cannot balance the books and overspends in areas such as social care could break the Council's budget in future years.

Residents in Reading should consider these facts they come to vote in the local elections in May.

First Person

This week the Reading Evening Post published a 'First Person' article written by me on the tough choices we face in social care in Reading. Read it here.

Budget speech

Below is the speech I planned to make on the Budget last night.

In the end I gave a much edited version due to the large number of poorly thought out, ill-conceived and politically-motivated amendments to the Coalition's proposed Budget tabled by the Labour Group at full Council last night which meant that the meeting to agree next year's Budget did not finish until about 12am.

"The need to set a fair, balanced budget for this Council, has never been more urgent or more important:

• Over 900 members of the public have had their say via the Council’s first ever ‘Have Your Say’ consultation.
• Over 600 people have responded so far to our social care consultation.

Now it is time for Reading’s political parties to put their cards on their table.

Or rather put their money where their mouth is.

As the outgoing Chief Secretary to the Treasury Liam Byrne observed: “There is no money left”

And the Labour Party’s dire financial legacy he spoke of is now having a profound effect on us here in Reading.

None of us on this side, least of all me went into politics to inflict damage on local public services or harm the life chances of individuals – quite the opposite.

When the Coalition was formed we were united in agreement that that we must make the best of resources available to us to help protect the most vulnerable in our community and fund the services local people value.

We were under no illusion that the challenges we faced would be easy but we firmly believed there was a better way of doing things, focussed more on outcomes than inputs and longer term stability than quick fix.

The Liberal Democrat and Conservative Groups in Reading have embraced new politics -

Putting aside narrow political interest to work together for the good of the people of Reading.

In the course of preparing for this important debate I was struck recently by something Theodore Roosevelt said.

“In any moment of decision, the best thing you can do is the right thing, the next best thing is the wrong thing, and the worst thing you can do is nothing”

The do nothing option is not open to us.

In my area of housing and community care demand for affordable housing is rising and the number of older people and vulnerable people needing support grows year on year.

In health, after record investment by the last Government we find pockets of serious deprivation leading to health inequalities across the Borough that we must tackle.

There will always be budget pressures in Community Care and Housing regardless of the financial situation the Council is in.

However, the public finances are not a bottomless pit.

In 2009/10 when the Council was Labour controlled Adult Social care overspent its budget by £1million.

This is not something this Council can afford to do any longer.

How we respond to this financial challenge says a lot about us as an administration.

•  In this financial year (2010/11) the Council's Housing Community Care Directorate has managed growth pressures of around £2.3 million and is predicted to break even at year end.
•  In 2011/12 this administration is proposing a budget for Adult Social Care Services of £43.27m
• To meet these growing social care needs the Council is proposing to increase funding in 2011/12 by £2.6m, with the majority of this funding supporting individuals with Learning Disabilities (£0.9m) and Older People (£0.84m).
• Adult Services are have a targeted expenditure savings and income generation programme that is supporting the Council to achieve the £18.8m savings target of £5.2m.
• These savings are mainly part of the transformation of Adult Services and are focused on areas of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the services
• On Housing, this administration has gone out and secured funding from government for much needed extra-care housing to provide homes for older people
•  We will be investing £10 million pounds in improving Council properties and £400,000 in improving local estates
• Next month sees a report to Cabinet on generating income for the Council by providing a housing repairs service to Wokingham borough council – helping to make our own service to our tenants more sustainable
• On empty homes this Council is continuing to support efforts to bring long term empty homes back into use where other Council is cutting back
• On Community Care this Council is leading the way on reablement services and active ageing helping hundreds of residents regain their independence

Let’s be clear this budget will protect the vulnerable.

In social care we are proposing to move to a system which makes public money go further,

As system where those who are assessed as needing support but who are unable to afford pay will continue to receive care free.

• We have rejected proposals to cut back on domestic violence support – there was an error in the papers
• We have rejected proposals to ration care to people that need it (demand management)
• We have rejected proposals to reduce much needed breaks to carers

One of the ways we are able to fund social care services in the future is to reject policies which do not represent a good use of resources – take for example the Disabled Facilities Grant:

when I took on this post we inherited a policy for allocating grants from Labour which was not sustainable in the long term – if we continued spending at such a rate there would be nothing left in the future.

We scrapped a failed landlord accreditation scheme brought in by Labour – it cost roughly £16k per annum and reached less than 3% of the private rented market
Aneurin Bevin said about the NHS:

“We shall never have all we need, expectations will always exceed capacity and the service will always be changed growing and improving.”

but it could just as easily have been written about social services.

A world of finite resource and growing demand is the world we live in today.

And it is time that all members of this Council faced up to this reality and adapted our policies to meet the challenges we face.

This budget protects the vulnerable.

This budget enables us to continue to improve the quality of services we provide to residents.

This budget ensures that highly valued services like libraries service can continue to be funded.

This budget should be supported by all councillors."

Questions and Answers on Adult Social Care in Reading

Last night Cllr Tom Steele asked me a couple of questions about funding for social care in Reading and growth pressures we are experiencing. I have attached them in full below:-

Social Care Funding

Councillor Steele to ask the Lead Councillor for Community Care, Housing and Health:

What level of funding is proposed to be spent on social care 2011/12 and how does this compare with previous years?

Answer:

"In 2009/10 Adult Social care overspent its budget by £1million. In this financial year (2010/11) the Directorate has managed growth pressures of around £2.3 million and is predicted to break even at year end.


Following the 2010 national spending review there has been a radical change to Local Government Grant Funding streams. The Council is proposing a budget for Adult Social Care Services of £43.27m (Gold Book report 2011/12); however, it is not possible to make a direct comparison to the position for 2010/11 due to some changes (i.e. specific grants received by the Directorate in 2010/11 have now become part of the formula funding the Council received).

Adult Services are have a targeted expenditure savings and income generation programme that is supporting the Council to achieve the £18.8m savings target (a full break down of these schemes is included in the Gold Book report to Council, page 56) of £5.2m. These savings are mainly part of the transformation of Adult Services and are focused on areas of improving the efficiency and effectiveness of the services.

Social care services are experiencing significant growth pressure from across the client groups supported. To meet these needs the Council is proposing to increase funding in 2011/12 by £2.6m, with the majority of this funding supporting individuals with Learning Disabilities (£0.9m) and Older People (£0.84m).

The Council will not be reducing spend on voluntary sector support and will continue to support a range of discretionary activity, for example support for carers. The major focus of activity will be to complete the transformation of care so that everyone is offered a personal budget and continue to focus activity on the most frail and vulnerable."

Social Care Pressures

Councillor Steele to ask the Lead Councillor for Community Care, Housing and Health:
What growth pressures is the Council experiencing in relation to social care services?


Answer

"Adult Services in Reading is undertaking a major transformation of its services to delivery improved outcomes, but in a more cost effective way. An example of this is our reablement service which is delivering considerable savings and better care outcomes by enabling people to regain their independence. A further example is the merger of Edward Hughes and Tanfield homes – creating a centre of excellence for intermediate care, providing a better physical environment for frail elderly people and saving money.


I am pleased to say that because of this type of service transformation the Housing and Community Care budget will break even in this financial year.

However, even with substantial change to service delivery, Social Care Services are experiencing significant growth pressure from across the client groups supported. This is partially because people are living longer and partially because we are managing much more complex cases within the community.

In response, the Government has established a Commission on Long Term Care which will report in July this year and made additional moneys available to promote better integration of health and social care (around £1.1 million across the PCT area in 2011/12)

At local level the Council is proposing to increase funding in 2011/12 by £2.6m, with the majority of this funding supporting individuals with Learning Disabilities (£0.9m) and Older People (£0.84m)."

Supporting Carers in Reading

Yesterday evening at full Council Cllr Tom Steele (Conservative, Kentwood) tabled a written question to me asking what support is planned in Reading to support unpaid carers. Below is the response I gave:

"Carers in Reading make a hugely valuable and important contribution to caring for some of the most vulnerable people in our community.


As an administration we are committed to placing support for carers at the heart of all our policies and at the top of our local agenda for transforming community care.

The Coalition Government’s Agreement sets out that the Government will look to provide increased support to carers particularly through:

• Extending the roll-out of personal budgets to give people and their carers more control and purchasing power;
• Using Direct Payments to carers and better community based provision to improve access to respite care;
•  Extending the right to request flexible working to all employees, consulting with business on how best to do so; and
• Establishing a commission for long-term care which will consider how to ensure responsible and sustainable funding for long-term care.

Locally, The Carers Action Plan 2010-12 details how RBC, along with other partners will support carers in Reading.

The top priority areas for 2010 and beyond were identified by carers as:

• Supporting carers to get breaks
• Promoting the take-up of Direct Payments from the Carers 
•  Offering back up support for carers in an emergency
• RBC currently funds Crossroads to provide the Back Me Up emergency support planning and emergency respite scheme
• Helping new and existing carers access information and guidance on support and services.

Developing a Reading Carers Communications Plan to reach more carers and ensure carers amongst whom service take up is currently low are targeted for more work.

This will form part of the tender for carers re-commissioning services and will make available out of hours support:

• Supporting carers to look after their health
• On-going work with partners to encourage carers to draw up emergency back up plans
• Offering training to carers and to ensure carers can access appropriate peer support
• Promoting awareness of carers as expert partners in care, through ensuring social care professionals and other teams (i.e. GPS) are aware of the carers information pack and trained in improving carer recognition

Work in progress includes:

• Continuing the Carers Steering Group to ensure local agencies continue to collaborate for the benefit of carers
• Making a positive contribution by ensuring carers are including in service development
• Improved quality of life through raising awareness of services available and to engage with other providers to negotiate better access to services for carers
•  Encouraging take up from underrepresented groups, RBC has funded an additional BME carer support group to complement existing ones offered by PRT
•  Working with JobCentre Plus to make sure employers in Reading are aware of flexible working rights for carers
• Community development work alongside the Thriving Neighbourhoods Programme to ensure carers are identified
• A series of events in 2011 to link in with national events and promote carer rights, support available to them and how to access this."

Response to Petition on Social Care Eligibility Criteria

At the Council's Budget meeting I was due to respond to a petition from Green Party Candidate Melanie Eastwood (Save Our Services) on Social Care. Sadly due to the large number of public questions and other petitions the time allotted ran out so I was unable to give the response verbally.

Below is the response I would have given (and which was circulated in the meeting):

'I would like to thank everyone who signed this petition – it is clear that social care is an issue that matters to many people in Reading.

As an administration we believe that the protection of vulnerable adults and children must be our highest priority.

I am honoured to serve as Lead Member for Community Care and I take the responsibility attached to this role very seriously indeed.

It is my responsibility to ensure that we are providing the right services to people who need them, and to ensure that the money is there to provide them in future.

Funding for social care is a national issue and I am pleased that the Coalition Government has taken the courageous decision to seek a fair, sustainable solution to this issue which affects us all where the previous Labour government failed.

Throughout the challenging budget-making process I have subjected all our community care policies to a series of rigorous tests:

•  Will this policy protect the most vulnerable in our community?
• Does this policy promote independence for carers and those with care needs?
•  Will this policy deliver an improved quality of service for residents?
• Will this policy be financially sustainable in the longer term?
• Does this policy deliver value for money for taxpayers? 

In Reading, like many other areas we face an inescapable reality of increasing growth in demand for our services.

This is not new and it would be the case regardless of the financial position this Council finds itself in.

We face a choice in how we respond to this challenge.

We could have buried out heads in the sand, as Labour did for years and continued to beg for more money from Council tax payers and borrow more money we do not have to pay for services - including services for people who have been assessed as able to pay.

This is not a sustainable and it does not meet the test of ensuring funding is available in the future to provide care to vulnerable people.

Neighbouring Councils have opted to adopt ‘demand management’ which is effectively rationing care. We rejected this because it failed the first test – it places vulnerable people at risk by delaying access to support and help. It also creates huge problems for other local agencies e.g. bed blocking in local hospitals.

We are not proposing to do any of these things.

In Reading:

•  we are consulting about eligibility criteria

• we are proposing to increase and enhance support to carers

• we are proposing to expand our preventative and reablement services

The Council put these matters out to public consultation on 6th December and the Transforming Adult Social Care Services consultation is open until 27th February.

Any changes to Adult Social Care can affect very vulnerable people, and we are keen to hear from as many people as possible with their views on these proposals.

There have been in excess of 600 responses to the consultation so far, and approximately 20 meetings held to discuss the proposals.

The majority of responses have come from people who have indicated they have a care and support need themselves or care for somebody who does.

A full report on the consultation will be presented to the Health, Housing and Community Care Scrutiny Panel on 10th March.A decision on what action to take in the light of the consultation feedback will then be taken by Cabinet on 14th March.

We recognise that any change in eligibility for Adult Social Care would increase people’s reliance on other support – from families, communities and voluntary groups. Within the consultation we are therefore asking people for their views on what sorts of support like this – which we have described as ‘preventative services’ - they feel are most important.

There are already a range of excellent services like this in Reading, including the free reablement service offering up to 6 weeks of tailored support to regain maximum independence after an illness or injury.

Consultation feedback will be used to inform our ongoing programme to ensure that the funding Adult Social Care already invests and will continue to invest in carers and community support is meeting local people’s priorities.'

A Budget to protect the vulnerable

Yesterday evening Reading's Liberal Democrat and Conservative Groups agreed a budget to protect the most vulnerable in our town and deliver a Council Tax freeze - the first in many years.
I was particularly pleased my detailed plans to protect vulnerable adults won support from members across the Council including from Cllr Mike Orton, former Labour Council Leader and my predecessor as Lead Member for Community Care.
Labour's opposition group voted against and failed to come up with an alternative budget despite 23 years previous experience of running the Council.

In doing so Labour councillors voted decisively:

• against an increase in funding for the voluntary sector,
• against keeping local libraries open
• against plans to plant more trees in Reading
• against transforming community care services
• against plans to increase support to carers
• against plans to improve Council homes and estates
• against ongoing action to tackle the problem of empty homes
• against a Council Tax freeze
• against plans to minimise job losses

As Cllr David Stevens, Lead Member for Finance, confirmed that the Coalition Administration of Reading Borough Council had managed the Council's finances in such a way that we had come in under budget. When the Coalition was first formed Labour councillors claimed we would not be able to manage the budget.
In 2009/10 Labour overspent to the tune of £1 million pounds on adult social care.
Cllr Stevens pointed out Labour's spending plans would result in a 30% rise in Council Tax in Reading. However, as the Coalition Government has said it would cap councils that failed to freeze Council Tax Reading Borough Council would be penalised i.e. lose grant if it attempted to increase Council Tax to this level.
In total Labour tabled amendments that would deliver only £500k savings when the savings the Council needed to find was approaching £19 million pounds - totaly inadequate and showing once again they are not up to the task of running the Council and managing the public finances.
During the debate Labour  councillors tabled amendments opposing increases in fees and charges. This is not surprising given they opposed innovative ideas to recover the Council's costs at the last Cabinet meeting.
This follows the past 9 months were Labour councillors have opposed every cut the Coalition Administration has proposed.  Once agains Labour failed to demonstrate even a shred of economic competence.
During the course of my remarks I quoted Peter Watts, former General Secretary of the Labour Party who recently commented:-

"We lost the general election because we were seen as being arrogant and out of touch. We lost because we were seen as being economically illiterate and having massively overspent. And we lost because we were seen as being in favour of top down big government.
If we are to win the next election, we clearly need to detoxify our own brand. However, it is not clear that we have as yet fully appreciated just how toxic and unpopular we had become. The recent travails of the government, our riding high in the polls and by-election wins have masked this...

Far from detoxifying, we currently risk retoxifying. Ed Balls has done a great job of challenging the government over the pace of deficit reduction. But we are still opposing every cut, every library closure, every reduction in police numbers and every job loss. It might make us feel better and win some short term popularity. But it isn’t an answer to the charge that we had become economically illiterate and had allowed massive overspending.

Attacks on the big society are fun and are incredibly easy at the moment. But does it help to explain that we fully understand the danger of being perceived as a party of “big government”? And we are still out of touch and arrogant, still seeming to think that we are the party of all that is good in the world and everyone else is either flawed or worse. We need to wake up to the fact that right now that is not how we are perceived by much of the public."

I think this description sums up the approach of Reading Labour Party very well. I believe that if they regained control of the Council, Labour councillors would push the Council to the point of bankruptcy - threatening the very services, jobs, and vulnerable people they claim they exist to protect.

In conclusion this evening proved that the Coalition Administration can deliver a balanced budget, can deliver a Council Tax freeze and can deliver a budget which prioritises protection to the vulnerable.

In contrast Labour councillors proved once again they are not a credible alternative administration and they remain unfit to run the Council in Reading.

Tax and Spend: Reading Labour Rejects Ideas in Favour of Old Certainties

Yesterday evening at Cabinet we considered a paper on ways to raise more revenue as a Council. This is not something any of us might want to consider but we need to find new ways to pay for services which does not involve increasing Council Tax and to go some way toward filling the hole in the Council's budget after years of  mismanagement of our local and national public finances by Labour.

The Growing Revenue and Cost Recovery Project involved inviting Deloitte to identify a series of business cases to reduce the Council's net budget and improve cost recovery for our services, and it is in addition to a number of projects that are currently ongoing to place the Council's finances on a more sustainable footing.

Over 10 weeks 12 business cases were developed with a potential net cumulative benefit of £3.4 million over 5 years. Not a huge amount but a step in the right direction.

Not all of the cases will be taken forward but some of them for example where it is proposed that the Council changes its existing processes to recover lost revenue in the delivery of services seem to me to be sensible.

Many such revenue-raising projects have been undertaken by other councils for many years. But not RBC when it was run by Labour. As councillors in my view we need to be open to new ideas, identify the best and then work out which proposals are right for our area.

At the meeting Cabinet we were requested to endorse 10 business cases to explore further. To be clear, to be taken forward any such proposals would need to be worked up into formal proposals in consultation with residents and stakeholders before being formally adopted.

At the Council Meeting of 25 January the administration accepted an amendment tabled by Labour councillors to the motion on Budget savings proposas for 2011/12 which instructs the Chief Executive to include proposals to increase revenue as an alternative to cuts in services.

Following that meeting you might have expected then that Reading Labour councillors would endorse the approach the Coalition Administration is taking then in exploring ways to raise extra revenue.

But no. They rejected them all.

But as we have found since taking over the running of the Council last May it is all about political point scoring to Labour rather than working as an effective opposition i.e. with other political parties for the benefit of Reading residents.

Labour councillors clearly did not expect Conservative or Liberal Democrat support for their amendment that evening in the first place so ended up in the embarassing position of voting against their own motion.

The Deputy Leader of the Labour Group began by saying the previous Labour administration had been working on a number of cost recovery ideas for years (but had clearly never got round to implementing them) before proceeding  to dismiss without exception all the proposlas contained in the paper as 'unimaginative'.

Here is yet more evidence if it were needed that Labour councillors have completely run out of ideas after more than years running the Council.

I waited but no alternative ideas for raising revenue were put forward by either the Leader or Deputy Leader of the Labour Group in their response to the paper.

Once again this left me wondering exactly what ideas Labour in Reading actually have to pay for Council services given they have opposed every single budget saving we have proposed thus far.

Clearly not committing themselves to any proposals for raising revenue ahead of the coming local elections is a greater priority to Reading Labour Party than helping to repair the Council's finances and ensuring funding is available to protect vital services - cervices which they themselves say they have pledged to protect.

As I said in the meeting their non-contribution to this important discussion leads me to reach the inevitable conclusion that the only 'idea' Labour are likely to put forward at next week's crucial budget Council meeting next week is a massive increase in Council Tax.

Investing In Decent Neighbourhoods For All

One of the areas of housing policy I am most passionate about is around improving the quality of life of residents - regardless of where the live and what type of housing they live in, but particularly those residents living in areas that have been neglected for whatever reason.

I first became interested in this when I was first elected and I noticed areas of Reading including my own ward which were rundown and in need of some TLC - in part because the then Labour-controlled Council focussed on meeting Decent Homes targets and forgot about improving estate areas.

In particular I am thinking of Hexham Road which until we began campaigning was largely overlooked by the then three Labour councillors and Labour-run Council. As I blogged in 2008 over on my ward blog:

"There is no doubt that the whole estate is in need of urgent regeneration. With the Council's focus on meeting the government's target on decent homes, it's hard to know where the investment will come from. It's certainly something I will continue to campaign for as much as I can, as I think decent neighbourhoods are as important as decent homes.

As we we walked round we noticed that there was evidence of vandalism inside the flat blocks on Hexham Road, but thankfully less of the graffiti that had been a problem last year. It seems too easy for yobs to get into the flats, break glass and do damage inside the blocks. The Council's attitude seems to be "there's no point repairing things as they will just get damaged again' I don't think this is the right thing to do by local residents who have to live in the blocks. Everyone deserves to live in a pleasant environment - particularly if the accommodation is owned by the local council.'

It was around this time I developed the idea behind decent neighbourhoods. Between 2006 and 2008 I campaigned both in and outside the Council Chamber around the theme of improving estate areas which had been neglected by Labour. 

In 2009 the then Labour-run Council bowed to pressure from me and other Lib Dems and created a new funding stream from the Housing Revenue Account to fund estate improvements in areas where the majority of housing stock in Council-owned and managed. Since then this money has funded a number of improvements in estates across the Borough including Hexham Road estate in my ward where the fund contributed to new trees and bulbs being planted to improve the look and feel of the estate.

Other works funded by the Council's Decent Neighbourhoods Fund include:-

• The youth development project at Hexham Road
• Landscaping projects in Caversham, Southcote, Coley and Whitley
• An anti cycle/motor bike chicane has been installed at Hexham Road,
• Additional street lighting in Whitley Wood and Southcote
• Improvements at Aveley Walk play park.

The work that has been undertaken has been done in close consultation with ward councillors and residents so it is not about imposing the Council's vision on a neighbourhood - quite the opposite.

In my role as Lead Member for Housing, I am delighted in building our budget we have been able to keep our commitment to improving estates.  In the coming year we will be investing £400,000 in this important work to improve local neighbourhoods. This is not something we have to do as a Council but I think it is very important and demonstrates our committment to improving the quality of life of residents in all our neighbourhoods.

The next area to benefit is Southcote where a new bespoke outdoor gym is being constructed. This follows a consultation with residents which identified a need for healthier activities for residents in their locality.

If you live on an estate in Reading and have an idea for something to improve your local environment please contact me and I would be happy to pass ideas on to the Neighbourhood Team.

Reading Borough Council bucks the national trend on libraries

Across the country many councils are closing libraries. In the neighbourhood that I was born Labour-run Camden Council is making cuts of 20% to its library services, a move which has been opposed by Lib Dem councillors who have argued that these cuts could have been avoided by making savings in other areas.
I'm proud to say that in Reading we are moving in the opposite direction from many other councils - with the welcome news announced earlier this week that the Council is extending opening hours across the local library network.

• Opening hours at Caversham library have risen from 36.5 a week to 50.5
• Palmer Park it has gone from 29 to 41.5 hours,
• Tilehurst is up from 36.5 to 42.5 hours,
• Battle has risen 29 to 39.5 hours,
• Whitley from 29 to 34.5,
• Southcote from 29 to 33.5
• Central from 50 to 52.5 hours

This follows a survey of library users which found that people would like to see more local libraries open at lunch times, for example. We hope this will make our libraries more accessible to residents.
As Labour Councillor Mike Orton noted at Full Council this week politics is about taking tough choices.
As I said in my recent speech on social care, if we do not make better use of available resources rising demand will have a big impact on the amount we have to spend on discretionary services such as leisure and culture.  The Council's auditors KPMG echoed this in their annual audit letter which was presented to Cabinet a couple of weeks ago:

"facing up to these challenges will require revolutionary transformation of public sector services, rather than tinkering. Strong leadership from Members and senior management will be essential as it may be the case that further savings over and above those in the performance improvement plan are required."

I'm pleased the Lib Dem-Conservative Coalition Administration of Reading Borough Council has made the decision to expand rather than reduce library provision for residents.  We have only been able to do this because we are facing up to the financial challenges the Council faces whilst also prioritising the areas that matter to residents.

Residents prioritise social care and housing services

As custodians of the public purse I think it is vitally important that local councillors spend Council Tax payers money in line with local priorities - after all it is residents' hard earned cash they are spending.
When councils are forced to reduce the amount they spend it is even more important to ensure they are spending it on things that matter to local residents. Labour councillors have found themselves in very hot water on this recently.
Last October, following the Comprehensive Spending Review the Liberal Democrat-Conservative Coalition of Reading Borough Council conducted the first ever public consultation about which Council services matter most to local people ahead of setting the Budget for the following year (2011/12).
Residents were invited to comment via a Have Your Say survey form about what services matter to them. The findings helped to inform the budget savings options Lib Dem and Conservative Councillors have been developing in recent months, and which were discussed at full Council earlier this week.
The closing date or the consultation was 19 November 2010. Over 900 completed surveys were received by the Council and the summary of findings were presented at Cabinet on 17 January.
Residents who responded ranked services in the following priority order

1. Children's Social Care Services
2. Adult Social Care Services
3. Education
4. Housing Services
5. Waste, Refuse and Recycling
6. Streetcare
7. Roads
8. Planning and Building Regulation
9. Public Health & Safety
10. Community Safety
11. Leisure, Culture and Sport

As someone who cares deeply about safeguarding and protecting the vulnerable in our community I was very pleased to see children and adult social care and housing services ranked so highly by the public.
Over 50% of respondents rated adult social care services as very important, with housing services close behind on over 45%.This closely reflects the priority the Coalition Administration in Reading has given to investing in education, protecting vulnerable adults and children, and promoting excellent housing standards across all housing types. I am personally leading focussing resources on social care and housing. I am doing this not only because I think it is important but because I know from talking to residents it matters to people in Reading.
Digging deeper into the results it was interesting to read that 68% of respondents felt that the Council should provide adult social care services with over 30% of respondents feeling that others could provide this service. On housing services opinion was quite evenly split with 53% of residents believing that others could provide housing services (compared to 46% who felt the Council should).
This is the first such consultation carried out by the Council since I was first elected (2006). When Labour councillors were in power did not consult residents in this way as part of the budget process. I really hope it becomes a regular part of our budget setting every year.