Tuesday, 9 December 2014

Cuts may have greatest impact on the most vulnerable says Brent Council budget report

Brent Council spending
There was a short Twitter exchange during last night's Council Meeting on the possibility of raising Council Tax with some arguing that by freezing Council Tax for five years the Council had undermined its own revenue base.  Others said that the amount raised beneath the 2% limit was so small as to hardly compensate for the loss of government grant made to Councils who freeze the tax. In terms of the amount raised as a proportion of the £54m cuts required it was piffling.

Former Labour councillor, and Brent Executive member, James Powney discusses this on his blog today. LINK

In Green Party circles the idea of a 'progressive' Council Tax has engaged people in debate LINK

Meanwhile here in Brent full reports have been published for each  potential area for cuts or revenue raising possibilities. In some cases there are soft and hard options given. The latter being ceasing service delivery.  The report to the cabinet makes clear that no decisions are required of the Cabinet at this stage except to go out for consultation on the proposals.

These are the links to the various reports:
The main report states:
There is a risk that the collective savings will have a significant impact on those vulnerable people who are the greatest users of council services.
Overall, the groups most at risk of being impacted are older people, disabled people, children and people from black ethnic backgrounds.
There would also be a low impact on women, people who do not speak English and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people. There is a risk that disabled people could be severely affected by experiencing a raft of changes from different service areas, even if each proposal may appear to have a limited impact in isolation.

Many proposals will have an impact on staff, especially in corporate services where the majority of the budgets are made up of staffing costs.
Given the scale of staffing reductions, there is potential for these proposals to have a significant impact on all levels of the workforce. The majority of the workforce is BAME and it is important that changes are not disproportionate in terms of their impact. Brent’s Managing Change Policy and Procedure provides a framework to be followed during times of organisational change to minimise the risk of a negative impact on any equality groups. The Managing Change Policy requires that staffing changes undergo equality analysis to ensure that the restructure process is conducted in a fair, transparent and non-discriminatory manner. The Equality Team will review the cumulative impact of restructures on the workforce diversity profile.
 Cllr Sam Stopp's commentary on the Full Council meeting should perhaps be read with the above comments in mind LINK

at

11 comments:

  1. Anonymous9 December 2014 at 18:27

    It would seem Sam Stoop and the whole of Brent Labour might be delusional if they are banking on not having to deliver the cuts after May 2015 !

    Nationally Labour are in crisis, unless they quickly replace Miliband with someone like Alan Johnson Labour have not got a chance.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Unknown9 December 2014 at 20:20

    Just had the misfortune to read Stoop's blog.

    Stoop believes that "Brent will emerge stronger, fairer and more prosperous." post these cuts.
    They are deluded, more so in attempting to shift their role in this to that of the coalition government.
    They must think that people are stupid, we all know that Ed Miliband and UK Labour, of which Brent Labour are affiliated, have pledged to match the economic plans of the lib dems and the Tories. Ed Balls has even pledged to go further with this 'austerity.' - Only Greens are anti-austerity.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Unknown9 December 2014 at 20:25

    Just had the misfortune to read Stoop's blog.

    Stoop believes that "Brent will emerge stronger, fairer and more prosperous." post these cuts.
    They are deluded, more so in attempting to shift their role in this to that of the coalition government.
    They must think that people are stupid, we all know that Ed Miliband and UK Labour, of which Brent Labour are affiliated, have pledged to match the economic plans of the lib dems and the Tories. Ed Balls has even pledged to go further with this 'austerity.' - Only Greens are anti-austerity.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Anonymous10 December 2014 at 01:26

    Would that that be the same Sam Stopp who was a member if the Conservative Party and used to work for a Tory MP? Was it worth the switch because I can't spot the difference?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10 December 2014 at 10:02

      Sounds like Sam Stoop might be an undercover spy, who's secret mission is to bring legitimacy to austerity cuts.

      His short and young career might be finished if he thinks the voting public will continue to accept The Big "A" for Austerity.

      What we need is radical thinking. We do not need more yes men like Sam Stoop, who simply deliver the message they want us to hear and believe from those afar.

      What about a message Sam "Austerity No More !, We Shall Not Be Moved !"

      What people don't understand is UK national debt is now near £1.5 Trillion
      And USA is getting close to $ 18 Trillion. This debt is mainly as a result of both bailing out banks and corporations paying virtually 0 Tax and even getting tax credits for a variety of reasons.

      Under Osborne the national debt has nearly doubled, so austerity clearly does not work. Few actually realize the national debt has been rising, despite austerity.

      In 2008 we bailed out the banks as the least worse scenario, but how have they repaid society ? More money grabbing for themselves.

      Labour are not standing up and offering anything different to austerity.

      Interest rates may rise sooner than people expect and we are in very similar circumstances before the bust in 2008.

      A complete debt write down is the only way. It would be painful for those who are wealth, but then we truely "would be in it together."

      Delete
    2. Anonymous11 December 2014 at 12:40

      The ex-Tory bit at 01.26. Is this true?
      If so, and given his current Green pash, he could well be in Class War by Christmas.

      Delete
    3. Anonymous12 December 2014 at 01:07

      Have you considered getting a job at a bank instead of bashing what you clearly don't understand?

      Delete
  5. Anonymous10 December 2014 at 12:43

    Sam. Stopp.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Nan Tewari10 December 2014 at 21:43

    Oh dear, I simply had to laugh at the following on page 3 of the Human Resources report:

    "There is an increased chance of litigation if managers do not adhere to HR
    policies and procedures. This will have implication s on legal support internally
    and on costly employment tribunals."

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Anonymous10 December 2014 at 22:04

      1. It's called leading by example, Nan.
      2. I know it's what everyone says but, really, you couldn't make it up could you?
      Are we sure they're not an alien species sent to Earth on a reconnaissance mission, trained to pass as Earthlings but in fact displaying a variety of giveaway insensitivities to normal human behaviour and responses? If so, it's almost forgivable. If not, it's pathological.

      Delete
  7. Nan Tewari10 December 2014 at 21:55

    I notice on pp 64-65 of the Environment report that the council is claiming there will be no disproportionate adverse impact on any protected groups. Really? Things have certainly changed since my days in equality practice.

    As a pavement user, I find myself frequently picking up various hazardous items that I know could cause harm to people with visual impairment and /or people who use wheelchairs or other mobility aids. Last time I looked this qualified as disproportionate adverse impact on people with disabilities.

    ReplyDelete