Category Archives: Fire services

'Divesting' services, Council reports, Council spending, cuts, eXplore card, Fire services, Helping the community, Libraries, Lollipop patrols, New Strategic direction, Pedestrians and Walkers, Roads, Schools, Suffolk County Council, Uncategorized, Woodbridge

Woodbridge Town Council Report March 2011

Leave a comment

This month’s report deals with the legitimisation of  various appalling cuts by the administration (who at the same time are letting money flow through their fingers on such essential front line services as extremely expensive consultants training them to ‘listen’ (hah!) and ‘gagging’ payments – £520,000 last year alone) to stop the mouths of ex-staff members

SCC  2011-12 Budget

The end of February saw Suffolk County Council’s  final budget setting meeting. Here the budget of cuts, already approved by the Cabinet, was voted through by the Conservatives on the County Council.  The cuts will affect many people in rural and urban areas throughout the county.  I strongly opposed, in particular,  decisions taken to reduce vital frontline services, including the scrapping of school crossing patrols, local buses and the eXplore card.

At the meeting my group put forward an amendment to the budget which would have saved many frontline services.

I feel that the people of Woodbridge NEEDc to k now what there WERE fully-costed options to these cuts, although the Conservatives would have us believe there were none.

We believed it would be possible to provide funding for all these services if we looked at savings from the centre of the organisation and used a small proportion of the £108m which the council holds in reserves.  Our amendment would have saved the following services:

  • Libraries
  • Youth Clubs /Youth provision
  • Subsidies to public transport services for Sundays, evenings and Bank Holidays
  • Park and Ride Service from the Bury Road, Ipswich site
  • Funding for the eXplore student card, which gives half price travel on buses up to age 19
  • School Crossing Patrol Service
  • Retain all Household Waste Recycling Centres, instead of reducing them from 18 to 11
  • Continue checking lorries to see if they are overloaded.
  • Stop the divestment of the Fire Control Function to Huntingdon
  • Keep Felixstowe as a Day Crewed fire station, instead of reducing it to retained
  • Retain full time crewing of the Ipswich Aerial Appliance

By using these funds;

  • Re-open Bury Road Park and Ride by reviewing revenue streams for Park and Ride to increase income, including from concessionary fares, creating a cost neutral service
  • Reduction in Road Maintenance Revenue Budget – not affecting emergency repairs
  • Business Mileage reduction of 10% – saving nearly £1m a year
  • Reduction of hours, to enable the continuation of all Household Waste sites
  • Reduction of one Director and 2 Assistant Director posts
  • Reduction of 2 Cabinet posts
  • Reduce back office staff in Fire Service & review the number of appliances attending incidents (at present, for example, they send 5 appliances to a cat up a tree)
  • Reduce External Room Hire by 30%
  • Felixstowe Fire Station to 5 day weekday manning
  • Use of Service reserves
  • Reduce Corporate Contingency reserve
  • Reduce Management of Change reserve

These savings would be heavily focused on the use of the ‘management of change’ budget, which was set up for business transformation during the year at the council, and the ‘corporate contingency’ fund, which is there to help manage risk throughout the year.  We believe with the current financial situation this is the best time to use the reserves to ensure communities will continue to receive essential services.  Even Eric Pickles agrees with us. Unfortunately the Suffolk conservatives did not, and the amendment was defeated on the day, with every Conservative voting for the cuts.  You can find all the information regarding the budget at this link

http://apps2.suffolk.gov.uk/cgi-bin/committee_xml.cgi?p=detail&id=1_15073

Libraries Update

The consultation for Libraries is still going ahead, as the County are looking to divest, or close most of of the Libraries around the County.  A meeting between SCC  officials and councillors and Suffolk library activists on 25th February  has brought forward new information (see James Hargraves and Andrew Grant Adamson’s accounts of this meeting which both attended, as supporters of Stradbroke and Debenham libraries individually)

The original classification of the 44 libraries into 15 county libraries, to be protected and divested as a group, and 29 community libraries, which would close if community groups did not take them over, has been effectively abandoned.

Only Ipswich County Library, Bury St Edmonds and probably Lowestoft remain in a core group to be divested. This appears to mean that Chantry (Ipswich), Gainsborough (Ipswich), Beccles, Felixstowe, Hadleigh, Halesworth, Haverhill, Mildenhall, Newmarket, Stowmarket, Sudbury and Woodbridge, join the other 29 seeking community arrangements.

No libraries will be closed without a further consultation. The process of divesting all libraries is expected to take two or three years.

Those who believe libraries should continue to be run as a Suffolk County Council service should write this when filling in the consultation response form.

The consultation began on the 18th of January, and finishes on the 30th of April.  You can find the consultation on the home page of Suffolk County Council under the Consultation heading.   http://www.suffolk.gov.uk

Loss and adverse change to Woodbridge bus services

In addition to the budget cuts as specified above, the County Council has made significant reductions in the levels of subsidy provided to passenger transport, a total of £2.2m, which enable commercial services to operate in non-peak time slots.  This means that some services will cease completely, whereas others will stop operating in the evenings, and on weekends. As I alerted you last meeting, the 61a and b have closed already as ‘non-profit-making’. This was despite representations from me, and reminders to the EME Directorate and portfolio holder that all three tiers of local government in Woodbridge had  told SCC and the operators last year WHY it was non-profit making and suggested a change or route that would make it more so.

The County Council has now released information of all those buses that will now cease or change hours.

The underlying principle of most of the timetable changes has been to remove evening and Sunday services. This of course is not much of an issue  for those who are mobile by other means. It is a tragedy for others. Particularly as the SCC line that these services’will be replaced by demand responsive transport’ does NOT apply as the DRT team confirm they have no interest or intention  in extending the service beyond 7-7 Monday to Saturday. Basically this is a huge loss to people who may have few choices.

I have placed a full list of the cuts and changes elsewhere on this blog (click here for details)

Full information can be found on  http://www.suffolkonboard.com/news/changes_to_public_transport_services_april_2011

Petitioning SCC against cuts

A change in national legislation means that the SCC now has to provide online petitioning for its residents.  This means members of the public are – at last – able to create, and sign electronic  petitions to disapprove a Council decision or bring an issue to their attention.

There are currently a lot of petitions online – all of which relate to recent decisions made by the county.  Once a petition reaches 3,675 signatures, the issue then has to be debated in Full Council. The eXplore card petition  is  proving particularly popular – having got over halfway already. It is an issue particularly close to my heart as losing this card will make a huge difference

a)       to the education and employment prospects of a whole generation of Suffolk’s young people.

b)       to the provision of scheduled bus services

I have recently told that Suffolk County Council is prepared to accept  all the library petitions together as one petition.  This means they have already reached the 3,675 and so hopefully it means this will be brought back to council shortly.

Just to remind you, the epetition site is: http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/News/EPetitions.htm

Ipswich Road: Clarkson Crossing and the Solar-powered 30mph Speed sign

A bit of good news to end with: two of my Quality of Life budget safety projects are now successfully finished:

On Tuesday morning a specially designed commemorative plaque will be unveiled  by Farlingaye students at the new Clarkson Crossing in Ipswich Road (named after Thomas Clarkson, Suffolk’s famous anti-slavery campaigner, and not after Jeremy!). This commemorates the work Farlingaye HS students put into this with Suffolk County Council.

I am delighted to say that the Solar-powered 30mph speed sign I proposed, negotiated and paid for out of my Quality of Life budget is now installed at the bottom of the Ipswich Road hill, just before  the John Grose garage, Sandy Lane and the blind bend.  I hope you have  NOT noticed it, because that means you would have been driving at less than 30mph.

'Divesting' services, Buses, Council spending, cuts, eXplore card, Fire services, Libraries, Lollipop patrols, New Strategic direction, Public Protection, Roads, Schools, Suffolk County Council, Uncategorized, Volunteers, Woodbridge, young people

WE can save Suffolk Services!

2 Comments

Libraries, crossing patrols, eXplore cards – many of Suffolk’s vital frontline services could be saved, if you just look at the budget figures with the right mindset.  Not that the Conservative administration admit this – they have told the people of Suffolk that there is ‘no alternative’ to cutting or divesting these – and many other  – valued services.  We Lib Dems say they are wrong!

Indeed, we have laid out in detail how the council’s upcoming budget could be reorganised to save these services at no extra cost, despite the cuts to central government grants!  Coverage in local news was incomplete so the full list is below. We propose to:

  • Keep all libraries open
  • Retain school crossing patrols
  • Retain funding for youth clubs
  • Maintain subsidised bus services to rural communities
  • Keep the eXplore student discount travel card
  • Reopen Ipswich Bury Road Park and Ride service
  • Keep open all Suffolk Household Waste Recycling Centres by reducing hours (on Mondays and Tuesdays)
  • Retain Fire Control within Suffolk
  • Keep Felixstowe Fire Station as full-time on weekdays and retained at weekends
  • Retain the Fire Service’s Ipswich Aerial Appliance
  • Retain checking overloaded lorries to protect roads and people

As my group leader Kathy Pollard puts it

“Unlike the Conservatives, we have been listening to Suffolk people. It has not been difficult to identify the savings we needed to retain these services. It is a question of priorities.  Clearly the Conservatives at Suffolk County Council are determined to close and privatise as many services as possible. This is ideologically driven and is not being imposed on them by central Government.

It is also very unfair to expect parish and town councils to pick up the extra cost  (for example) of running libraries. They would have to increase their parish rate considerably and people would effectively be paying twice for a service which under statute should be provided by the County Council.”

Lib Dems are suggesting  savings can be made by: Removing one Director and two Assistant Director posts; and  reducing business mileage by 10% (which would save more than £900,000 per year ); external room hire; the “Management of Change” budget; reserves; the Cabinet to 8 from its current 10 members; the road maintenance budget (this will not affect emergency repairs); and variousmanagement and other costs in the Fire Service

    Although we have confirmed these figures with council officers, Jane Storey, deputy leader disagrees with us.

    Of course she rather HAS to disagree. If she doesn’t, she has to address head-on the  peculiar priorities in funding that this council  proposes at this time of huge fiscal constraints. Why, for example, do the Tories stop at proposing libraries and school traffic patrols be run by volunteers?  A school crossing patrol person gets paid £35 a week.  Our Chief Executive ( the UK’s SEVENTH highest paid County/London borough Council CEO) gets £4192 a week – and that’s before the generous pension payments she gets added on top.  Indeed, why stop there? the county council has a number of high salaried posts that could be divested with huge ease (I suspect) to volunteers – people whose only interest is the good of the county, rather than their personal enrichment.

    We already know there are a lot of highly qualified and public-spirited people in Suffolk who are prepared to volunteer their services, Jane. You’re very  prepared to used them for less high-status, more practical,  replacements to modestly paid workers.  Why not think a bit more divergently and use them to replace senior executives if they have the background! THAT’s where you’d REALLY make the savings!

    But sadly,  if you suggest this to our Tory administration (and I have) you only get an incredulous laugh. Clearly, in some peoples’ minds, there are some SCC posts which are too highly-salaried to be divested.  Yet (I fain would ask) WHAT does a County Council Chief Executive actually DO?  I can tell you pretty simply what a lollipop person does, or a librarian or a bus driver. But a Chief Executive?

    Cynically I suspect that only administrators truly value administration. People like me, long-time housewives and carers, balancing a budget  with too many mouths and not enough cash, feel that any sensible housekeeper can learn to cut their coat to the cloth available, without losing the services they need for those they care for!

    Maybe the difference is in the words ‘care for’?

    'Divesting' services, Buses, Cabinet, Council reports, Council spending, cuts, eXplore card, Fire services, Libraries, Lollipop patrols, New Strategic direction, Public Protection, Schools, Suffolk County Council, Transport, Uncategorized, Woodbridge, young people, Your councillor

    Woodbridge Town Council Report Jan 2011

    Leave a comment

    Suffolk becomes the only County in the east without its own Fire Control Room

    Just before Christmas, Liberal Democrat councillors ‘called in’ the County Council’s decision to move its Fire Control Room to Cambridge from Colchester Road Ipswich, because the building it currently occupies is being sold. There were other options possible, such as negotiating sharing with the Suffolk police HQ.

    This move was described as ‘an interim measure prior to the introduction of the nations Regional Fire Control rooms’ – planned to be in place by 2013.

    The Public Protection Scrutiny Committee met on the 21st of December to examine the decision, and to listen to our reasons against this decision. These included

    • The total lack of information regarding the certainty of the proposed national Regional Fire Control Rooms
    • No evidence within the original paper of consultation with those many and varied organisations who work with the Fire Control Room such as  Suffolk Family Carers, Trading Standards etc.
    • The lack of contingency plans put in place in case there was a national delay, or indeed an update in policy on the proposed national regional control rooms.
    • The distance of the Suffolk  retained staff travelling to the Cambridgeshire site
    • The diminution of local knowledge and expertise inevitably caused by siting this control room  so far away from the area it controls

    Unfortunately the opportunity to look at this decision once again was turned down by the scrutiny committee’s majority Conservative membership.

    Embarrassingly for them, immediately after this decision was rubber-stamped the Government revealed that the proposed  Regional Control Rooms are going to be abolished.  This ‘interim measure’ is therefore interim sine die

    This leaves Suffolk as the only county in East Anglia without its own regional control room, thereby losing the county the benefits of local knowledge, speedy response, and county control as well as many of its dedicated staff.

    Loss of Woodbridge’s only ‘Lollypop person’

    Amongst the proposals being considered in the continuing issues of the New Strategic Direction  is one to cease funding the school crossing patrol service which looks after 98 schools in Suffolk, including one in Woodbridge: ie. the crossing at St Mary’s in Burkitt Road. If this decision is approved at the  next Full Council on 17th February  then the service will end, probably during the summer term.

    The view of the Service Director, Economy, Skills and Environment  is that:  “We recognise that it is primarily the responsibility of parents and carers to ensure that their children arrive at school safely.”

    However, at the Resource, Finance and Performance pre-Budget scrutiny just before Christmas I asked him :  “What risk assessment has been done on the effect this cut might have on child pedestrian safety?”

    His answer was: “We will be carrying out audits at all the school crossing patrol sites in January and February 2011.  The safety engineers carrying out the audits will examine all available data related to mode of travel to school, casualty data, school catchments and crossing patterns. The engineers will identify alternative crossing points, such as light controlled crossings if they exist close to the patrol sites. In some instances, minor alterations will be made to sites and any inappropriate signs will be removed. Road safety officers will advise parents, carers and children to use alternative sites and routes and provide road safety education and training in the affected schools. “

    This seem to be is a different way of saying “We recognise that it is primarily the responsibility of parents and carers to ensure that their children arrive at school safely.”

    Cuts in concessions for young persons’ travel

    Although the bus services in Suffolk have become extraordinarily expensive as well as patchy, up till now young people have had  to help with their travelling to post-16 education, to work and to find work, and for socialising.

    Explore cards: available free to students 16-19, have  enabled them to pay only half adult fares on buses and many off peak rail journeys. Poorer students have also had EMA.

    As regards post-16 transport, the SCC post-16 transport policy relies on the fact that all post-16 students can have an Explore card to help with fares, and if their parents are poor, EMA too. This means that up to now transport to work and educational opportunities should be in the reach of all young people in Suffolk – and a very good thing that is too!.

    The NSD’s proposed cuts means that the EXPLORE card is not just under threat –  sadly, the decision has already  been made to cut it completely. I have always been right behind it because it helps young people with transport to work, to education and to social activities, and liberates teens from dependence on others. It should also get teens out of cars and onto buses in the evenings thus creating a significant saving in  life and limb  (tho the recent appalling reduction in local buses and the planned cutting of so many of the SCC funded remainder – see below – makes this very much more difficult). The loss of the Explore card WILL have an adverse impact on both educational choice and work for the young people of Suffolk.

    In addition to being your County Councillor, and opposition spokesperson on Transport, I am also Vice-chair of Educational Transport Appeals.  With all these hats on I have already raised the issue of these threats to young people’s travel  through direct questioning and minuted statements –with Educational transport AND the portfolio holder AND at the pre-Budget Scrutiny.

    At this last, I asked: Have any calculations been carried out to ascertain what increase is anticipated in the increased use of cars to take older pupils/sixth-form students to school as a result of stopping the Explore card?

    They answered: There has been no attempt to calculate a potential increase in car journeys.  Any impact of the Explore proposal is closely linked to the policy on discretionary transport for post 16 students.  Therefore, discussions with stakeholders will take place around the wider issue of post 16 education transport as a whole, and the impact which current budget proposals may have.

    I have no idea what this actually means.

    Further serious reductions to Woodbridge bus services

    I have also been given details of those bus services likely to be affected by the reductions in SCC’s public transport subsidies (as set out in the proposals for next year’s budget).  Again, these are victims of the NSD ideology – and have little concern for the consumer.

    The budget proposals envisage “a remodelling of public transport services that have been piloted in parts of Suffolk over the last couple of years and  based on the premise that the best way of enabling people in rural areas to access learning opportunities, employment and services will be to use demand-responsive services to access a core of scheduled bus and rail services running on fixed routes. “

    This allows for rural people without cars having transport needs that can be predicted a day in advance – so, remember,  no getting ill or crises at short notice!

    SCC are  looking to roll this approach out across rural Suffolk. Interestingly enough, the administration  made a large capital allocation to fund the operation of demand-responsive transport a full year before these new cuts were deemed necessary under the NSD. I leave you to draw your own conclusions as to why this might have been.

    The list of services described as ones “which would not be a priority for continued subsidy under the new model” includes a number which impact on Woodbridge. Andrew Gutteridge, Strategic Commissioner (Sustainable Transport) –sic – the officer in charge – writes “In drawing up this list we have prioritised core daytime services and those services that maximise accessibility and connections with rail.  The aim is to provide a core network with which demand responsive services can interconnect. “

    Sadly  what this really means  in real English is that all evening and weekend services and the more rural routes are for the chop.

    The Woodbridge related routes that are ‘threatened’ (if this isn’t an understatement) are:

    • 62a and 62b Ipswich – Wickham Market/ Rendlesham (that is, every evening and all the Sunday bus services through Woodbridge!)
    • 70, 70a, 118 – the rural route from Ipswich  to Woodbridge through Grundisburgh and Bealings
    • 70, II8, 119 – the Ipswich to Framlingham routes
    • 71, 163, 173, IP179,  IP512: Orford, Felixstowe, Woodbridge, Ipswich routes. The ONLY easy way for non-car owners to get to Felixstowe

    At the pre-budget scrutiny, I asked the following questions:

    1.  Has an impact assessment been done, for example, on the effects on people who use these buses to get to and from employment and for young people accessing education and social activities?

    Answer: The equality impact screening process has begun.  There is no intention that people will be deprived of the opportunity to travel to learning, employment and essential services, but this is expected to be by more flexible and demand-responsive solution in some cases.  Where there are specific education placements on affected services, there may be specific provision for those journeys, and the draft budget contains an adjustment to the home to school transport budget to reflect this.

    NB: I know many bus passengers. I have yet to meet a single one who has had an impact assessment undertaken on the loss of these buses to their lifestyle

    2 Could sponsorship or cost-sharing be investigated for this instead of reducing the services?

    Answer: Every effort will be made to reduce the impact of the cuts by sharing resources and materials with Eastern Region authorities and Suffolk Roadsafe partners. (CP: ?)

    We will continue to seek support from the Government (and the Highways Agency) and the private sector.(CP: ?)

    The Government produces free publicity materials (under the Think campaign banner) and has indicated that it will support cyclist training through the Bikeability scheme in 2011/12.

    Well, that’s a relief!

    I have had a lot of people writing to me about this –  both anxious individuals and organisations  -and am hoping to get a local group together to raise awareness and protest efficiently about these bus changes  – and the cutting of the Explore cards – and I hope you may wish to join me in this. Please contact me, if so.   In the interim, have a look at this, as a kind of briefing document:

    http://carolinepage.blog.suffolk.libdems.org/public-transport/suffolk-the-death-of-the-rural-bus/

    What will be happening to Suffolk Libraries?

    In the Resource, Finance and Performance pre-Budget scrutiny just before Christmas, one of the 16 proposed savings was “Divesting libraries to communities”.  This was estimated to create a very modest saving (£350,000) and would have a “Medium to High impact” on the public.This divestment-for-the-purpose-of-saving  was, we were told,  in addition to an already proposed saving of £710,000 on this years’ library services that ACS has decided on to compensate for an overspend in the care budget 2010 -11. What a choice, eh?

    I would like to point out that in a recent UK-wide survey, Suffolk’s library service was revealed as the second most cost-effective (ie. cheapest) public library service in the country!

    We (the SCC Lib Dems) asked the following pertinent questions:

    • Will all libraries be divested?
    • What will happen to the mobile library service?
    • How will the current integrated service be protected?

    We were told:

    “In line with the New Strategic Direction, we do not expect that the council will be a direct provider of library services in the future.

    We are already making efficiency savings for 2011/12 by reducing the numbers of management and support posts, and working together with Cambridgeshire, Essex, Southend and Thurrock councils to share the provision of stock services and thus reduce cost.

    We expect to publish a consultation paper in the new year to consult the people of Suffolk about how to provide library services, at significantly lower cost, over the coming three years.  This will cover the mobile and branch libraries and how the integrated service might continue.  Following the outcomes of the three month consultation, we will put final proposals for an affordable library service to Cabinet, and begin to implement them during the second quarter of 2011/12 and in subsequent years.  The action plan is likely to include the procurement and selection of providers from communities and interested organisations.  It is likely to result in some library closures.

    So watch that space! It might replace a library or two.

    Suffolk’s NSD: overarching concerns; SCC Consultations & Online Petitioning

    a ) At the pre-budget scrutiny which looked at next year’s proposed cuts I asked one single overarching question about the cuts proposed by the SCC adminisistration in support of their NSD:

    These proposed savings are in service delivery – many of them frontline – yet there is scope for substantial savings in executive pay via downsizing and divestment of executive roles. Why is this option not being explored?

    Answer: All services have proposals relating to restructures and reductions in staff costs. These are designed to reduce management costs more than frontline staff costs. Restructures are already underway in directorates and this process will accelerate as we make changes to implement the New Strategic Direction for the council.

    This doesn’t exactly explain why the highest echelons of SCC’s senior management seem to be so immune from the cuts that will hit all the rest of us.

    b) Suffolk County Council are currently engaging in a number of consultations and ‘engagement exercises’, including:

    • New Strategic Direction ‘Engagement’ – ongoing
    • Future of Suffolk Country Parks and Recreation sites – ends 14th Jan 2011
    • Suffolk Care Homes consultation – ends 24th Jan 2011
    • Schools admissions Consultation – ends 28th Feb 2011

    I urge you to respond and make sure that you have given your views.

    http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/CouncilAndDemocracy/Consultations/Listing.htm

    c) Possibly in response to adverse publicity about a lack of democracy in cabinet-style decision-making (for example the Fire Control Room move was decided without a general councillor vote  at Cabinet level) Suffolk County Council has launched an online petitioning system, so that members of the public can bring an issue to the attention of the council, or publicly approve or disapprove of a council decision.

    PLEASE USE IT

    http://www.suffolk.gov.uk/News/EPetitions.htm