In the summer the Government announced that it would fully fund the pay rise for all classroom teachers, yet it has since emerged that this will not apply to teachers employed directly by councils. The majority of these centrally employed teachers (CETs), provide music tuition.
The Local Government Association, which represents 370 councils in England and Wales, is seeking assurances from the Government that it will meet the cost of the additional 1 to 2.5 per cent salary rise for CETs – estimated to be £5.5 million – which councils will not have budgeted for. The LGA says this burden cannot fall on local authorities.Continue reading Music Lessons Under Threat→
Opposition’s “call in” of Suffolk County Council school transport cuts unsuccessful On Tuesday 19 June, Suffolk County Council’s Cabinet voted to change the Home to School Transport policy so that only children travelling to their nearest school would receive free transport. The changes are due to be phased in from September 2019.
As you may be aware, LibDem Councillors and their Green and Independent colleagues have been opposed to this policy change since it was announced in September 2018. As was the Labour group. There has also been very vocal opposition from schools, parents, carers and parish councils across Suffolk.
All the opposition cross-party worked collaboratively to call in the decision to Suffolk’s Scrutiny, with Cllrs Otton and Page as the Lib Dem signatories.
The “call-in” was successful on three fronts:
1. Concern at the quality and reliability of the financial modelling;
2. Whether the Cabinet were fully informed of the role of the Consultation Institute;
3. Whether there was enough analysis of the experience of Essex County Council, who implemented a similar policy in 2013.
Unfortunately despite the considered opinions of really competent and well-qualified members of the public, the Conservative administration failed to recognise their own financial forecasts were flawed. The decision will therefore go ahead.
Major review of Suffolk Highways announced The new Deputy Leader and Cabinet Member for Highways, Cllr Mary Evans, has launched a major review of the way highways in Suffolk are maintained.
Areas due to be reviewed include:
• Existing policy which determines how resources are deployed, known as the Suffolk Highway Maintenance Operational Plan (HMOP);
• How the location of potholes on the road is considered alongside the width and depth, recognising the impact they can have on cyclists and motorcyclists;
• How utility companies coordinate roadworks and are held to account for their actions;
• How residents, councillors and businesses are informed about road repairs and how they can access information;
• Financial control and contract management;
• How town and parish councils can work closer with Suffolk Highways to make the best use of their local knowledge, skills, money and time.
Consultation launched on future commissioning of specialist education services Suffolk County Council have launched a consultation into the commissioning strategy for the development of Suffolk’s specialist educational provision.
Demand for specialist education places in Suffolk for children with SEND continues to grow, and currently the county council has a much lower number of specialist education places than other similar authorities. This means that many children in Suffolk are forced to travel out of county to access the education provision they need – and often Suffolk County Council foots the bill.
At a time when the Council wishes to reduce the amount of free home-to-school transport it provides citing fears of escalating costs, it is vital that we begin to provide more SEND provision within Suffolk.
Update: The Call-in was successful! The decision will now be scrutinised by SCC’s Scrutiny Committee on 9 July, who will investigate the quality and reliability of the financial modelling; whether the Cabinet were fully aware of the actual role played by the Consultation Institute , and whether enough weight was given to the negative experience of EssexCC when they attempted the same policy.
Suffolk’After Suffolk County Council’s Cabinet voted unanimously for undemocratic cuts to school transport changes, – ‘the option that nobody wanted,’ your LibDem Councillors (Leader and Transport Spokesperson, Caroline Page and LDGI Education Spokesperson Penny Otton ) are part of a cross-party opposition attempt to ‘call in’ (that is, challenge) the decision. Both councillors (and especially Penny Otton as ‘councillor on the ground’ for Thurston)have been very vocal on the subject
If the ‘call in’ is accepted, this means the decision will not go ahead until SCC’s scrutiny committee examines it fully.
The call-in was cross party, as was the unanimity of focus of the opposition questioning on Tuesday . Concerns focused the grounds whereby Cabinet discussed only the unpopular Option 2 (phased change) instead of the universally popular Option 3 (best described as ‘leave well alone.’) Lib Dem, Green and Labour questioning was forceful and forensic and took – literally – hours.
LibDem Leader Caroline Page queried the administration’s terms of reference. Was Suffolk’s offer genuinely “more generous” than the government minimum, when the government minimum covered urban and rural students indiscriminately, she asked? City students do not have 3 mile walks to their catchment school: city schools are closer and public transport is plentiful and cheap.
We were told how expensive our spend was- over £100 a student head as opposed to Salford’s £2. However, as Caroline pointed out, Salford has a total area of 8 sq miles, and it would be almost impossible for a child to live more than 3 miles from their local school! Suffolk, in comparison, has an area of 1466sq miles, “Are you not comparing apples and pears, in order to justify hard-to-justify decisionmaking?” she asked.
Cllr Page also asked why there was no Traffic Impact Assessment for the county – and while the very limited (Thurston area only) TIA failed to consider issues such as pollution and air quality? (Answer: too expensive/work in progress.) And, as over 70% of consultation respondents were women , and LG cuts disproportionally affect women, whether Cabinet could be genuinely satisfied that the IA’s conclusion that “impact on women would be minimised by phasing in the changes”, fully addressed the actual impact these changes would have on women. Ominously – but unsurprisingly -this question was not answered at all.
Penny Otton thanked Thurston school for their months of hard work. She also asked Cllr Hopfensperger whether or not she had confirmed ahead of the publication of this report (and decision of the Cabinet) that ‘local solutions’ are be implemented in September 2018, and asked for confirmation as to whether – local solutions having been provided by Thurston college and wholly ignored, whether any schools have reconfirmed their desire to work with a council that had so totally ignored their input.
John Field asked why the Cabinet report used just three years historic data as the basis of an average growth estimate. “Is that standard local government accounting practice?” Cllr Field inquired. He also pointed out that the administration was using just three very different years of rapidly reducing cost growth as the basis for their forecast. “Is that a valid forecasting technique?” he asked. (The answer in both cases was to explain what had been done – but failed to address the validity of the processes).
David Wood asked whether the Cabinet member could confirm that there would be no teacher redundancies and that no villages who currently all go to one school will now need two routes to take them to their nearest school. The answer was not the positive affirmative that one would desire.
Cllr Wood also asked why the administration didn’t commission experts from the University of Suffolk to undertake the educational impact assessment for these proposed changes.
This was new Council Leader Matthew Hicks first time chairing the Cabinet and it was a baptism of fire. It is only fair to say he chaired the meeting with justice and impartiality, allowing the opposition all the questions they wished to ask and cutting short members of his own party who wished to speak in order to make loyal declarations rather than questioning Cabinet.
Suffolk shows overwhelming public opposition to proposed Tory school transport changes- Leaked documents from Suffolk County Council show overwhelming public opposition to proposed school transport changes. Of the 3600 responses to Suffolk County Council’s recent home-to-school transport consultation, 85% “strongly oppose” the proposals and a further 5% “oppose” them.
This is the most responses received by a Consultation in recent years, and it is clear that parents, teachers and communities have very serious concerns about the proposals.
New Council Leader elected Following the recent Conservative Group leadership challenge, Cllr Matthew Hicks has been elected as the new Leader of Suffolk County Council, replacing hard-liner Cllr Colin Noble. His Deputy will be Mary Evans, former Chair of Scrutiny, and previously Chair of the highly effective crossparty Transport & Highways Policy Development Panel, before Cllr Noble abolished these on becoming leader a couple of years back.
Cllr Hicks has promised us a “new era” of politics at the Council, with a focus on mutual respect, collaboration and co-operation. We hope he will be more open to working with, and listening to, councillors from other parties.
The first major change has been the replacement of the only-just-established unwieldy and untransparent Cabinet Committees with new Policy Development Panels. We do not currently have full details on how these will operate but, well-organised, they provide excellent crossparty consensus.
Some ‘Outstanding’ Suffolk schools in Suffolk have had no Ofsted inspection for a decadeThe National Audit Office has revealed that over 1600 schools in the UK have not been inspected by Ofsted for 6+ years!
In Suffolk, 23 outstanding schools – almost half of those rated ‘outstanding’ – have not been inspected for at least 6 years. SIX of these schools were last inspected over a decade ago! This means that whole cohorts of students have gone through school without a single Ofsted inspection.
LDGI Spokesperson for Education, Lib Dem Cllr Penny Otton, raised the issue and her concerns at a Council meeting on 24 May. The Cabinet Member for Children’s Services and Education, Gordon Jones, assured her that he shared her concerns and would raise it with the head of Ofsted.
Ofsted have said that the majority of ‘outstanding’ schools are exempt by law from inspections. However, if a number of concerns or complaints are raised against a school, they would have the power to carry out an inspection.
Citizens rights of EU born residents Our very own Lib Dem County Councillor Inga Lockington hit national and international headlines when the Home Office turned down her application for citizenship despite her 40 years uninterrupted residence in the UK, married to an English doctor, her 19 years as an Ipswich Borough Councillor, her 17 years as a Suffolk County Councillor and a stint as Mayor of Ipswich! Apparently the Home Office felt she couldn’t prove residence!
Although Inga’s story ended with an apology and an offer of citizenship, she points out this would not have been the case for many others in her situation.
At May’s full council, Lib Dem leader Cllr Caroline Page asked Matthew Hicks whether Suffolk was doing enough to support such cases of Home Office injustice amongst its residents. Specifically whether we funded the Suffolk Law Centre -the only free law centre in Suffolk- and whether he would be prepared to talk to Centre Director Audrey Ludwig about unmet needs? The reply was cautious, unspecific, and referred to Suffolk’s CABs – all of which had funding cuts in SCC’s 2018 budget.
Unitary council discussions on hold? Back in March, it was announced that Colin Noble had unilaterally commissioned the think-tank Respublica to produce a report outlining the options for a unitary council in Suffolk. This news was not well-received by the (almost all Conservative) leaders of District and Borough Councils, who had not been consulted by Cllr Noble.
However, in the lead-up to the Conservative Group leadership election in May, Cllr Noble announced that work producing the report had been suspended. It is not yet clear whether this work will resume under the new leader, Cllr Hicks.
Possible U-turn on Lowestoft records office At Council on 24 May, a petition was presented by the Save Our Record Office (SORO) campaign group, calling on the Council to reverse the decision to close the Lowestoft Record Office.
Cllr Hicks responded by acknowledging the importance of keeping local records in Lowestoft, and pledged to work with local residents and councillors to develop a long-term, sustainable solution for the storage of archives in the north of the county.However, he made it clear that there is currently no capital or revenue budget available for the project, and so the council would need to seek funding to help deliver it.
New development with affordable homes in Cockfield On 15 May, the Cabinet approved proposals for the development of a 4.5 acre site near Cockfield, which is owned as part of its County Farms estate. The development will be comprised of 51 units, including 12 affordable rented homes. There will also be homes specifically for first-time buyers, affordable shared ownership homes, and self-build plots.
This project is being treated as a pilot for future developments on Council owned land. The County Council is planning to work closely with design and property partners, and there will be a particular focus on local needs and benefits for the local community. The council will also benefit from financial returns as a result of developing the land.
On Saturday 4 March Suffolk’s very own Baroness Ros Scott joined Lib Dem party chair Baroness Sal Brinton to launch the Suffolk Lib Dem party manifesto for the elections in May.
We have now had had a decade of conservative cuts letting local people down. Since 2005 the Conservatives have run the County Council, consistently reducing services, rather than looking after the real needs of local people. Suffolk Liberal Democrats believe there is a better way and we need urgent action in some important areas.
Suffolk Lib Dems’ SIX priorities for local people
Provide a £5m boost to adult social care
Invest in the infrastructure to support new housing – roads, schools and doctor’s surgeries
Fund a county-wide mental health programme in schools
Fix our roads and pavements
Invest in local bus services and make park and ride buses more frequent
Yesterday saw the setting of the County Budget for 2017-18. With an election in May this was always a day when we would emphasise the difference between the parties and it did not disappoint. The was lots of Conservative emphasis on keeping spend down and how they have amassed large reserves over the past seven years. Labour wanted to spend to preserve services and give the residents of Suffolk what they need. We felt the Conservatives were cutting too hard but Labour were spending at the top limit of what would be possible.
My approach -on behalf of the LibDeb group- is below, seeking to use the resources available but not take unreasonable risks. In the end the administration carried the day and a further £30 million will be cut from services.
John Field: Deputy Leader of Suffolk Lib Dem Group & County Councillor for Gipping Valley
At the last County Council meeting (14th July) during the debate on the Annual Equalities and Inclusion Report 2016, leader David Wood asked for the following to be clarified, on his own behalf and on that of Cllrs Penny Otton and Caroline Page :-
Referring to point 3 of the report – ” Empower more people with protected characteristics to live safe, healthy and independent lives”. Could the proposer please tell me how the recently awarded Community Transport Contracts fits in with this report – especially its equality objectives.
For instance I know in Mid Suffolk one cannot use a bus pass to access these services – yet in other areas of Suffolk you can.
In my own area I am receiving complaints regarding these new services: these come from a young person with Downs Syndrome; a person with visual impairment; and a wheelchair user – all have been told they cannot access services they have come to rely on and have become an important part of their lives. In one case a person’s job is at risk; another is seriously considering moving away from the village she has lived in all her life.
My question is, how does this fit in with our equality and inclusion objectives?
Cllr Goldson could not provide an answer during the debate but has assured me he will look into this and will be replying to the question raised.
The Portfolio holder for Highways and Transport was strangely silent during the debate.
After a week when momentous change has been initiated by a referendum result that many did not expect, it feels strange to reflect on the more mundane but nevertheless important issues of the last year.
Where to begin? The financial challenge and the Council Tax? The administration promised no rises in council tax for four years, ignoring the challenging social care needs of an increasing elderly population. They have met those needs by outsourcing and changing services in a way that makes it difficult to be sure if all those who need our help get enough of it.
This year, after government encouragement the Conservatives have now introduced a special 2% precept -not a council tax rise – to meet the steadily increasing demand for care. We welcome the move and look forward to knowing just where this is spent.
Had the administration raised the council tax by a similar amount, we all would have been challenged by the need to find an extra £26 or so per household but it would have gone some way to fill the gap left by cuts to government grants.
A feature of the year has been the continuing, cross party, councillor discontent with the outsourced Highways contract. High design costs and slow response to the need for work makes it impossible for councillors to use our individual highways budgets to meet residents’ reasonable demands. It increases discontent and confirms the public mistrust of politicians. Conservatives believe in the outsourcing model, they let the contract -can we see some effective delivery please?
In the education arena we are pleased to see Suffolk – at last – moving up from so close to the bottom of the league tables. Unfortunately, poor past performance leaves our schools at risk of forced conversion to academy status. That is a transition many do not want but our poor management performance leaves little choice. The academy structure in our view leaves management overhead spread across a much smaller base. Dedicated leaders may of course produce outstanding results but the record is far from perfect.
We don’t want to be entirely critical. We applaud Conservative actions to focus intensive action on troubled families and on making every intervention count. The campaign to recruit more foster carers was first class
We thank the administration for the way they have kept us informed as the devolution proposals developed, a pleasant example of openness and honesty. It will be good if the public get the same feeling. However, we will no doubt discuss the public consultation which appears to be heading for the summer holiday period.
Saving money on services like Community Transport or Park and Ride is short sighted. If the administration is so intent on new models then they need to fully finance the transition to working services. When we say ‘working services’ we mean working for everybody – but in Mid Suffolk, older people will no longer be able to use their bus passes.
Dave Wood is pleased DEFRA have noted the importance of our protected landscapes and have guaranteed the grant to our AONB’s with a slight rise in funding. The county has followed suit, sadly without the increase.
One can’t close without a comment on Brexit. We have a new challenge. We are appalled that our nation is not mature enough to stick with our European friends and solve their problems. We prefer to abandon them to their fate and seek a better future in the past. We hope that the course back to 1930 nationalistic attitudes will not lead to a spread of behaviours like those in Ukraine.
One wonders how many who believe our trade will now grow unencumbered by regulation have first-hand experience of the competence and skill of our competitors in other nations and of the international regulation that exists.
We can’t sell railways and steam engines to the empire any more. We need many more companies like ARM in Cambridge if we are to succeed. It is doubtful whether we have them.
One hopes the Conservatives the vision our new future will require, that nationally, they will stop rewarding the rich and punishing the poor who have suffered disproportionately the price of austerity. We need to get them back on side.
Where our consciences allow we LibDems will support efforts to survive and prosper in the new Great Britain, although of course we would prefer to be heading in a different direction.
Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron has pledged to fight the next General Election on a platform taking Britain back into Europe.
Since Britain voted for Brexit on Thursday thousands of people have joined the Liberal Democrats and all Suffolk Lib Dem groups are seeing a share of this surge.
The economic uncertainty following the Brexit vote will affect jobs, people’s homes and livelihoods. While accepting the result of the referendum, the Liberal Democrats plan to make the case for us to rejoin the heart of Europe.
“For many millions of people, this was not just a vote about Europe. It was a howl of anger at politicians and institutions who they felt they were out of touch and had let them down,” said Tim .
“The British people deserve the chance not to be stuck with the appalling consequences of a Leave campaign that stoked that anger with the lies of Farage, Johnson and Gove.
“The Liberal Democrats will fight the next election on a clear promise to restore British prosperity and role in the world, with the UK in the European Union, not out.
“If you agree with us, join us to make this happen.”
Privacy & Cookies Policy
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. This category only includes cookies that ensures basic functionalities and security features of the website. These cookies do not store any personal information.
Any cookies that may not be particularly necessary for the website to function and is used specifically to collect user personal data via analytics, ads, other embedded contents are termed as non-necessary cookies. It is mandatory to procure user consent prior to running these cookies on your website.