Skip to main content
Welcome Guest! You can not login or register.

Notification

Icon
Error
2 Pages12>
Tell us how we should save £25 million
Options
Previous Topic Next Topic
redimanager
#1 Posted : 06 September 2010 18:32:03(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/12/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,023
Redbridge Conversation 2010, the Council's major new consultation exercise launches today Monday 6 September - giving people a say on how the Council should make savings.

Redbridge Conversation 2010 is a public consultation exercise which lets residents see how much the Council spends on services and suggest ways to make savings of at least £25 million of the Council's budget.

*Launch of the Redbridge Conversation 2010*

We are launching the Redbridge Conversation 2010 as the Government is considering reducing public spending over the next four years. This means that councils will also have to significantly reduce their costs while protecting frontline services as far as possible.

Although we do not know the scale of the savings needed to be made yet, we know that they will be considerable as around 65 per cent of the Council's budget comes from the Government. The Government will be announcing more detailed plans in October.

*Available options*

There are a number of options open to the Council including reducing services, increasing the money we raise from charges, reducing pay or the number of staff and finding efficiency savings.

Anyone with a computer or access to the internet can take part in the Redbridge Conversation 2010 by completing YouChoose. YouChoose is an innovative online tool which has been created by the Council.

It shows how much the Council currently spends on services and how much the Council can save. Those completing it are required to balance savings and spending to save £25 million in the overall Council budget.

By adjusting spending you will see the direct effect of this on services before you submit your choices. You can also share any other ideas you have about how savings could be made if you do not find them in YouChoose.

*Not everyone has access to the internet*

We understand that not everyone has access to the internet so we are undertaking a programme of community events to make sure we gather the views of those who can't access YouChoose.

We will be visiting day centres, housing community centres, health centres, community associations and elderly groups. You can also go online at any Redbridge library where staff have been trained to help you complete YouChoose.

The consultation closes at the end of October and the results will be analysed by the leading online polling company - YouGov. The results will help inform Councillors to make savings in the 2011 budget in March.

Cllr Keith Prince, Leader of the Council, said, "Over the next few months the Council is going to have to make some very difficult decisions in its quest to find £25m worth of savings, as required by Central Government, as part of the effort to tackle the country’s massive debt. Two years ago Redbridge needed to identify ways of funding its Capital Programme and we undertook the innovative approach of consulting through the Redbridge Conversation. This enabled us to engage with over 5000 respondents and gave a clear steer as to how the people of Redbridge felt we should go forward."

“Now with this even bigger challenge once again we are using cutting edge technology to enable the community not only to give us their views but to engage in the tough process of making difficult choices around our services and functions. I would like to think that as many people as possible will take part in the Redbridge Conversation 2010 as these priorities will give the Council a clear steer when deciding where the savings should be made."

Cllr Ian Bond, Deputy Leader of Redbridge Council said, "Councils up and down the country have very difficult decisions to take over coming months. Here in Redbridge we believe we're leading the way in giving people the chance to get involved and have a say before our budget is set next year. The Conversation will also help people understand the sorts of issues and decisions that councillors are currently facing, and give us their own suggestions."

Cllr Bob Littlewood, Leader of the Labour Group said, "Councillors will be insisting that there is the largest possible number of opportunities for non computer users to have their say. We must reach everyone to find out their opinions. I am particularly keen on the community events proposed.”

To complete YouChoose go to Redbridge i www.redbridge.gov.uk/conversation If you need help in completing YouChoose, for more information about your nearest library or to find out more about the community events call the One Stop Shop on 020 8554 5000.

If you don't have a computer at home, cannot get to a library or to any of our workshops please call 020 8708 3367.
Back to top
 |  Edit by user
weggis
#2 Posted : 06 September 2010 23:40:07(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 04/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 564
Location: Redbridge Eye
And here is the link omitted by Redimanager.

You Choose - Redbridge
Back to top
WWW BLOG
redimanager
#3 Posted : 07 September 2010 11:05:36(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 12/12/2007(UTC)
Posts: 1,023
Hello,

Please see the updated version of the Redbridge Conversation 2010 news item above.

Regards,

Redimanager.
Back to top
 |  Edit by user
annesevant
#4 Posted : 08 September 2010 08:48:46(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 14/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 975
Forgive me for asking, but no more 'answers on paper' if you wish and (anonymous too!) for this new version of an important Conversation? Will school children be invited this time to use their computer skills in their citizenship lessons? I have not looked properly to check who is eligible to answer but,
having attended Cabinet last night, I don't think anybody could trim their budget! (Leisure, perhaps.)
annesevant
Back to top
Nell
#5 Posted : 09 September 2010 12:00:47(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 22/06/2010(UTC)
Posts: 51
I've just completed the You Choose survey and there are some things which could be better explained. For example, under 'Council Support & Public Engagement', a small reduction in spending results in 'Significantly reduce service effciency, increase delays and risk of fraud' as a consequence.

What sort of fraud? Are you suggesting that I might be able to hack into the Finance Department's computers and give myself a council tax refund? Or is there an implication that reducing spending in this area will result in residents being defrauded in some way? If so, by who?

On a slightly different note, under 'Staff Pay' there appears the following gem: 'If you wish to make a larger adjustment, it will have significant affect on services....' Maybe you could start by reducing the pay of those staff members who cannot communicate properly in written English?


Finally, I wonder if all of this is merely tinkering at the edges and if it isn't time for a radical re-think about the way councils are run. Start with a list of the minimum legal obligations a local authority must meet and then devise a way of delivering in the most cost-effective way, which might involve sharing resources with other councils, reducing the number of committee and council meetings (what's wrong with teleconferencing?) and letting out the town hall as office accommodation or film studios. Never mind ticking boxes; boxes exist for people to think outside of them.
Back to top
weggis
#6 Posted : 10 September 2010 13:26:24(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 04/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 564
Location: Redbridge Eye
Nell wrote:
Maybe you could start by reducing the pay of those staff members who cannot communicate properly in written English?

Never mind English, what about Maths?

I’ve now had a look at You Choose.

If you add up the spending budgets in the first bit you get £186m. The education part is £18m

Yet according to my council tax booklet total spending is £715m of which £331m is Children’s Services, but the dedicated Schools grant is only £195m.

It also says above that around 65% of the budget comes from government - 65% of £715m is £465m leaving £250m. Council Tax accounts for £99m and income from fees and charges amounts to £66m so where does the other £85m come from?

What expenditure is the council NOT asking us to comment on?

If central government dictates a legal requirement to do something but does not provide adequate funds then are we entitled to go back and say sorry ain’t got any money.

If they provide £195m for schools should we spend that AND only that?

If the government is squeezing the budgets they delegate to councils should councils squeeze the budgets they delegate to schools?

(All figures rounded to nearest million.)
Back to top
WWW BLOG
cllrbond
#7 Posted : 10 September 2010 16:44:57(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 01/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 124
Hello weggis, we spent a long time discussing the numbers to use with the Council's finance department; the problem is that local government finance is ridiculously complicated and it is always difficult to get clear simple numbers.

As I understand it your £715m is the Council's total spending, but this includes significant ring-fenced elements, such as the schools grants which we receive from government and then pass on to schools, and the housing revenue budget where we receive rents from tenants and then spend it on housing maintenance etc, as well as various smaller but similarly ring-fenced grant funded areas. We're not able to touch any of these as far as reducing costs is concerned, so they are all excluded from the exercise (clearly of course the government might itself decide to reduce funding for schools, but this won't help us with our savings target)

There are also significant elements funded by income - registration charges, search fees, hall lettings - which are essentially self-funded.

The £186 m (which is about £10m less than my recollection of the declared revenue budget so there must be some other items left out, such as capital charges and interest on borrowings, which obviously we cannot cut, at least directly) is the amount left to be funded by either general Government Grant or Council Tax.

It's the Government Grant that the government will be reducing directly - we don't know the precise amount yet, but the press is full of figures around 25% over four years, as you'll know. Additionally there will be limits on Council Tax (again as yet no precise details) which could put additional pressures on our funding. Hence £25m pa seemed an appropriate ballpark figure for the scale of savings we're likely to be looking for, and this is used as the target figure in the Conversation.
Back to top
dopeyf
#10 Posted : 11 September 2010 10:49:41(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 29/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 554
I applaud the effort to consult the people of Redbridge, however one has to question the basis of the figures -
for example
Havering - £52m over 5 years
Edinburgh - £90m over 5 years
Bucks £27m over 4 years
Oxford £200m over 5 years
West dorset £30m over 4 years
REDBRIDGE £25m over 4 years

It is disturbing that this whole exercise is based on "we don't know the precise amount yet, but the press is full of figures around 25% over four years"- rumours in newspapers.So if the best guess is out by 50% or 100% do we do the exercise again.? Do we have here shades of the first "conversation"- we know its wrong but we can correct it"
It is not for me, a lowly commentator, to question the thinking? of a Chief Executive who now earns £60,000 a year more than the Prime Minister, a Management Board that individually earns almost as much as the Prime Minister and Councillors, that to have raised this consultation on such a flimsy basis as newspaper rumours,
without an explanation as to how this figure was arrived at,is the height of impertinance to the residents of Redbridge.Once again we only get half a story, with no assumptions or parameters explained, This is not a survey "Do you like Ice Cream" - Yes/No" This is an important and fairly complex set of questions, that have no meaning unless the thinking behind it is explained, although using newspaper reports might give "thinking" a whole new meaning.
Back to top
cllrbond
#11 Posted : 11 September 2010 13:53:37(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 01/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 124
Whilst we've tried to make the scenario as realistic (i.e. as close to what we're currently considering) as possible, it's important to recognise that the figures are just a means to an end - what we're trying to discover is the various priorities that people have, and conversely what savings they thing we can make - and it doesn't much matter what total £s these add up to for this purpose, since the outcome can guide us in setting the new budget however much or little was have to spend.
Back to top
dopeyf
#12 Posted : 11 September 2010 14:57:22(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 29/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 554
To some extent I agree with you,the figures dont actually mean much, but it is symtomatic of so many things presented by Officers that we are expected to believe whatever they say without question,and with no explanation,
It is tragic that Senior Officers and Councillors allowed this into the public domain with no explanation,perhaps they dont understand it themselves or they cannot justify what they have written and its really all just guess work.The problem is, the "council " have said its £25m and if it turns out to be more then (as Oxford have guessed £200m)then that leaves councillors looking idiots, and having to take the flak, whilst extremely highly paid Officers are immune from public anger, exactly the people who have caused it,the mentality of secrecy,despite the known correlation between transparency and lower council taxes.There is certainly no transparency in Redbridge, nor it would appear much desire for it from Officers, I wonder why?
Back to top
weggis
#8 Posted : 12 September 2010 16:59:49(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 04/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 564
Location: Redbridge Eye
cllrbond wrote:
Hello weggis, we spent a long time discussing the numbers to use with the Council's finance department; the problem is that local government finance is ridiculously complicated and it is always difficult to get clear simple numbers. <snip>

Thanks Ian.

So, basically the scope for manoeuvre is placed on about 25% of the council's total budget making the impact of any cuts more significiant than they would otherwise be if applied elsewhere or across the board.

The case for more local autonomy, free from the big pointy finger of State interference is even more important in times of austerity than in times of plenty.

What are the coalition's plans on this?
Back to top
WWW BLOG
julie bradley
#13 Posted : 13 September 2010 12:08:11(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 20/11/2007(UTC)
Posts: 349
I thought that the idea of budgets was to save lots of little things over a lot of things and therefore save a lot without major cutting back on one or two items! Why not ask all the council workers how they think costs could be saved, since they are at the "coalface", all savings being useful in the long run.
Back to top
julie bradley
#14 Posted : 28 September 2010 12:28:12(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 20/11/2007(UTC)
Posts: 349
My hubby says the banks should face hefty fines, since monies from public bailed them out and they caused the reccesion (or did they?)
Back to top
cllrbond
#9 Posted : 29 September 2010 10:29:32(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 01/10/2007(UTC)
Posts: 124
weggis wrote:


The case for more local autonomy, free from the big pointy finger of State interference is even more important in times of austerity than in times of plenty.

What are the coalition's plans on this?


I was speaking to the Minister about this last week - the Localism Bill, due to be published November/December - will be the largest bill of the Parliament with a whole range of measures reducing government control over local authorities
Back to top
weggis
#15 Posted : 29 September 2010 16:55:57(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 04/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 564
Location: Redbridge Eye
Thanks, Ian. But we need to watch out for what the other hand is doing in increasing control in other areas, eg Council News Sheets? Wink
Back to top
WWW BLOG
weggis
#16 Posted : 29 September 2010 17:03:40(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 04/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 564
Location: Redbridge Eye
Now, that's interesting.
When you put in a post on this thread, but not any other I've checked, you get additional options - "Attach files to this post" with a tick box. So, Ive ticked it - and nothing happened!Confused
Back to top
WWW BLOG
thebutler66
#18 Posted : 06 October 2010 15:08:06(UTC)
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 06/10/2010(UTC)
Posts: 2
I have recently completed the redbridge conversation and was quite disturbed to see the option to reduce or increase staff or managers pay (yes I am a redbridge employee as well as a residet).
Although you are able to read the average pay of staff by clicking on the read more information (though how many people will I do not know)I do not believe that it gives enough information for people, myself included, to make an informed choice on the options.
There is no mention of how many staff earn less then the national average or how the reduction in staff pay will increase the cost of benefits that staff are entitled to.
Also you could argue that this is a very closed question. In the most simplest form this question to Redbridge residents is asking should we decrease staff pay or increase your council tax.
How many residents can answer that impartially?
Back to top
jeff_wg
#19 Posted : 11 October 2010 22:09:41(UTC)
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 11/10/2010(UTC)
Posts: 2
OK, so the idea isn't bad, let us give a view on what to cut. However, as Cllr Bond says, it's too complex to present in detail. In any useful level of detail, as far as I can see, although I think it's not a bad attempt for the level of detail that's workable in that medium.

However... big gap. The youGov site appears to lack any concept of saving cost without damaging services, by improving efficiency. The implied statement that makes, that local - or indeed any - government operations can't easily be made more efficient, is just plain ridiculous. Look at the early reports of Philip Green's look at central government for good examples.

After a few recent encounters with Redbridge officers on parking, recycling and refuse, I have to say that I think we get poor value in some of our services for money relative to other councils I've dealt with. For example, our recycling service fails to handle things which others have handled for 5~10 years, our leisure facilities are par or worse, parking is not well-managed, and yet council tax is higher here. Hmm. Interestingly, some council staff I've spoken with at the contact centre and in specific departments appear unable to defend the council - their consciences tell them they agree!

Has anyone undertaken a thorough, independent, honest review of council procurement, contracts, property usage and operational processes? Having worked with some public sector organisations in the past, I have never yet found one where substantial savings could not be made without damaging service effectiveness. Indeed, one can often improve services and reduce costs simultaneously. Ask a successful retailer or manufacturer, they're good at it.

Councillors, anything to say? Where can Redbridge look for efficiencies? Is it doing so, thoroughly, independently and honestly?

No political answers, just practical ones if you don't mind ;-)
Back to top
jogreen68
#20 Posted : 13 October 2010 08:47:01(UTC)
Rank: Newbie

Joined: 13/10/2010(UTC)
Posts: 1
I found the YouChoose system reasonably good although when you try and reduce budget you get scared into not resugin due to the effects you say it will have. Is this more of a marketing tool to educatate people on why you can't reduce spending or will there actually be any value in it?
Back to top
WWW BLOG
dopeyf
#21 Posted : 08 November 2010 17:35:55(UTC)
Rank: Advanced Member

Joined: 29/07/2007(UTC)
Posts: 554
This message was delivered by someone well-placed to know: Jane Frost, Director of the Individuals Customer Directorate at HM Revenue & Customs (HMRC), and a person responsible for customer service for many millions of citizens.

“Customer-focused design based on user testing for forms, and all communications, is essential to reduce error rates, she said, although councils should be realistic: “With forms, there is a 5% error rate when you just ask people for their name, and with anything involving a calculation it is over 50%. This suggests that a form that is 10 questions long, even with the simplest questions, will have a base error rate of 25%”



Councillors and Officers should remember this when they attempt to close,Youth Centres, Old Peoples Centres, Libraries,Mentally Ill Centres, and any other services, which use a permanent building as a Centre, be warned once they have gone, these services will never be replaced, the buildings will be sold off and we will never be able to afford to replace them.
Back to top
Rss Feed  Atom Feed
Users browsing this topic
Guest
2 Pages12>
Forum Jump  
You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.
Powered by YAF | YAF © 2003-2011, Yet Another Forum.NET