Category Archives: Suffolk Circle

Suffolk Circle – paying to be neighbourly!

As my neighbours will corroborate, if they need help, I am very happy to offer it – and if I need any, I go running to them. No money changes hands. Its about neighbourliness and a sense of community. This isn’t a purely Woodbridge characteristic – good neighbours can be found up and down the length and breadth of Suffolk and elsewhere.  Yet yesterday Suffolk County councillors   looked  at Suffolk Circle which is  a “Pay-for-good-neighbour” scheme funded two years ago by SCC to the tune of £680,000.

(I have blogged querying the basis of  this decision in both February and July 2011)

Suffolk Circle was based on a Good Neighbour scheme  that had recently started  in inner-city Southwark and had -apparently – been mentioned enthusiastically once by David Cameron.  The declared intention was to save money by building sustainable support for the increasing numbers of ‘frail elderly’ in Suffolk and thus saving money longterm.

In order to be part of the Suffolk Circle you must pay an annual membership fee (currently £30pa).  In order to use one of the helpers (for maintenance, TV, gardening etc.), or attend one of the priced events, members must buy half-hour tokens for £6 each.

This scrutiny gave everyone – that is, all non-Cabinet councillors as well as the public –  first sight of the confidential paper provided to Cabinet on the 25th of May 2010 on which Cabinet unilaterally made the controversial decision to fund the programme. This made interesting reading. (Full details here.)

Although the social enterprise could provide evidence of some satisfied users, the taxpayer would find almost all details disturbing:

  • Suffolk Circle was presented to the people of Suffolk as long-term assistance to the council’s social care budget by helping support the vulnerable elderly. However, the social enterprise assumes ‘the elderly’ start at 50 – thus including over a third of Suffolk’s population (and the vast majority of SCC councillors)!  If Suffolk Circle wait for every 50 year old to become frail and elderly they are likely to be waiting 35 years. This is a ludicrously long-term solution!
  • Suffolk Circle missed its first year membership target by over 10% – only getting 362 of 404 target members. This was itself an unbelievable modest target  for £350,000 : 363 people make up 0.16% of Suffolk’s over-50s.
  • Suffolk Circle’s target membership for next year is to achieve 1630 members, and 3500 at the end of the funded three years. This will have cost the Suffolk taxpayer just under £700,000 and ‘reached’ 1.6 % of Suffolk’s over-50s – with no guarantee that many of these would be ‘frail elderly’! And this is assuming that nobody who has joined has ever left.
  • Suffolk Circle now charges £30 per year for membership, although the original financial plan was to charge between £30 and £75 per quarter. Despite this radical shift, we could glean no information as to how this might alter the financial viability of the project.
  • At £6 per half-hour, the tokens are twice the cost of employing someone at minimum wage and the ‘helper’ is given one token for an hour’s work. The rest goes to Suffolk Circle. Outing/ social events cost a lot more than  one token (the last one in April was a cookery course costing £36 a hed) – and instead of offering a discount for theatre outings etc, we were told Suffolk Circle members actually seem to pay a premium. That is, it costs the member more than it would cost the man or woman in the street
    How could this price structure meld with the vulnerable elderly with £107 pw pension? Suffolk Circle told us they hoped to ‘get in’ on ‘Personal Budgets’. I must tell them, it didn’t have a good sound.
  • No account seems to have been taken  (either by the Cabinet who agreed this expenditure, or Suffolk Circle, who proposed it ) of the huge number of existing interest groups and services for the Over-50s AND for the ‘frail elderly’  that were already available in Suffolk.  Locally this includes: Church groups, Suffolk Carers, Royal British Legion, WI, English Country Markets, Library groups, amateur dramatics and plat readings, Good Neighbour Groups, Tea dances, Ramblers, Age UK (including their telephone befriending scheme), Wickham Market Family Carers Support Group, political parties, WRVS, lunch groups, charity work, NADFAS, WAMRAG, and groups for those interested in art, photography, music, opera, ballet, the theatre – to name but a few
  • When questioned about this, spokespeople ( I would hate to call them apologists) for Suffolk Circle, told the committee that Suffolk Circle was still “learning.”  You’d think this was part of the research and scoping SCC paid them £100,000 for  in the year before the enterprise started!

It would seem to me that this dubiously useful project is a prime example of how Suffolk County Council’s undemocratic Cabinet system is failing the taxpayer.  It allowed a few – seemingly mathematically challenged councillors –  to make an effectively unilateral decision that is costing council tax-payers of Suffolk the best part of a million pounds. And without providing any demonstrable benefit to the vulnerable elderly of Suffolk  it was supposedly set up to help. Yet in these straitened times,  the frail elderly need and will increasingly need all the help they can get.

When money is so tight this is a disgraceful example of putting the ideology of private enterprise above the common-sense of making limited resources stretch as far as possible.

And what could possibly have been the rationale? The Conservatives have been heard to say that £680,000  is “really not very much money”. They need to remember that it is is a fortune to people living unsupported and friendless on £107 a week!

What happening in SCC – April 2012

This last month SCC revealed details of pay throughout the council, and found that the differential between top and bottom salaries has diminished significantly since the days of the last Chief Executive. In April, Scrutiny will be examining Suffolk Circle, and has launched a survey to see how effective their favourite Demand Responsive Transport is in real life. Follow the link and tell them like it is before 20 April:

SCC Pay policy Suffolk County Council recently published details of its Pay Policy (as now required by law). Amongst the facts and figures that you may find interesting :

  • In 2011 SCC agreed a (downward) revised salary level of £155k for the Chief Executive post. It is a spot salary meaning it doesn’t attract incremental progression. There are no additional bonus, performance, honoraria or ex gratia payments.
  • Salary structure for Directors ranges from £98,393 to £126,733. New appointments to this level are on a “spot salary” basis and will not attract incremental progression. There are no: overtime, flexi-time, bank holiday working, stand-by paymentsetc. paid to these senior staff:  they are expected to undertake duties outside their contractual hours and working patterns without additional payment.
  • The salary ranges for Assistant Directors and Senior Managers are as follows: Assistant Director (higher) – £85,795 – £96,824 Assistant Director – £ 68,096 – £83,829 Senior Manager – £55,287 – £64,399
  • Rest of the workforce: eight grades ranging from £12,145 to £55,239. the lowest paid full time equivalent basic pay of £12,145 is used to determine the local definition of ‘low paid’.  There are 100 workers currently on this grade
  • The current pay ratio is 1:8.  This means that the Chief Executive (top earner) earns eight times more than the Council’s median earner (for which the rate is £19,621). When measured against the mean average, this ratio is 1:7; and when measured against the lowest paid it is 1:13.

Suffolk Circle At the meeting in April Scrutiny will be looking at the effectiveness of Suffolk Circle. This is a membership scheme for the over-60s piloted in London’s Southwark that the Conservative administration agreed to pay £600,000 over three years in the glory days of the last Chief Executive. According to Portfolio holder Colin Noble last week, after 2 years Suffolk Circle has attracted 372 members, meaning Suffolk has paid out something over £1000 per member.

Perhaps Scrutiny will be able finally to ascertain the rationale of why – at a time when SCC are cutting staff and  frontline services – SCC decided to spend hundreds of thousands of pounds  on transferring a Good Neighbours scheme (which you have to pay to join) from an inner city location with a high population turnaround and where there are comparatively few over-60s to a county packed with good neighbours who have a long tradition of helping each other for free! You can read more details about this decisionmaking elsewhere on this blog, including here

New Suffolk Care Homes provider The name of the provider taking over the running of  Suffolk 16 care homes and eight wellbeing centres will be announced at the Cabinet meeting on 17 April. As part of the process, bidders have been expected to prove they could ensure that enough specialist places for people with dementia and complex care needs are provided.

The new provider will take full ownership of all the care homes and well-being centres with staff currently employed by the council transferring to the new provider under TUPE regulations.

Demand Responsive Transport The Scrutiny committee will also be examining whether Demand Responsive Transport is providing an adequate service for the rural population of Suffolk in the light of further rural bus service closures.

In order to get a good picture of how these service are actually the Scrutiny Committee want to know whether people think it  works and how well, how provision of rural transport can be improved.

I would encourage everyone to fill this survey in – especially as only three weeks have been given for such a very important consultation – and these are over the holiday period. Last year I blogged on the difficulties of having only a non-existent DRT service over the holiday period . You can respond, either via  the link below or by post, or e-mail.

Online: http://www.surveymonkey.com/demandresponsive

By post, to The Chairman of Scrutiny Committee, Democratic Services, Suffolk County Council, Endeavour House, Russell Road, IPSWICH, Suffolk, IP1 2BX; or

By email to: committee.services@suffolk.gov.uk.

The deadline for the consultation responses is the 20th of April.

Co-op is funding Diamond Jubilee Street parties The East of England Co-operative Society are celebrating the Queens Diamond Jubilee by supporting members and customers planning local street parties through a one off, match funded grant of up to £100.  People need to apply right away. They will need to submit an event outline (100 words max) and be supported by three East of England Co-operative Society members. The street party must be taking place in the East of England Co-operative Society trading area of Norfolk, Suffolk and Essex.

There are three ways to apply :

  • Complete an online entry form  or  Download an application form  via this link
  • Request a printed form from our Membership and Community Team on 01473 786068. Postal entries should be sent to – Diamond Jubilee Match Funding Application, Membership and Community, East of England Co-operative Society, Wherstead Park, The Street, Wherstead, Ipswich, Suffolk IP9 2BJ

Closing date for applications whether online or by post  is Monday, 23rd April 2012 with notification of whether you have been successful would be during the week commencing Monday, 7th May.

My next County Councillors Surgery Saturday 21st April, Woodbridge Library, 10-12 midday

Suffolk & Southwark – the non-identical twins

What do these two graphs have in common?

Above is a demographic diagram of the population of Southwark, London. It shows the population by age divided up into 5 year slices. Below is the same for Suffolk.

Wherever you see the bulges, that’s the age group where the biggest slice of the population is found. And where they go inside the line, it means they are less than the national average. Southwark is like an arrow head, Suffolk more like a vase!

They really are not very similar, are they?

The largest age-group in Southwark is aged between 25 and 35, with fewer and fewer over the age of 50 and upwards.  In complete contrast , in Suffolk the 50-64 age group is the biggest age group in the county. A significan proportion of Suffolk residents are over 50.

Whereas the bulk of Suffolk residents have lived in the same place for generations, nearly half of Southwark residents are communities  from Africa, the West Indies, Ireland, China, Vietnam, Latin America, Eastern Europe, the Indian subcontinent, and Turkey  to name just some.  Over 170 languages /dialects are spoken. Life expectancy is substantially lower for people living in more deprived areas in the borough, especially males. Four out of ten people live on their own.

In other words, Southwark is a racially diverse, densely populated, and young urban community with significant social deprivation, where the older people may find  neighbours move in and out frequently,  have little knowledge of  who lives next door – and may not even speak the same language. This is the background against which a social enterprise company (Participle) set up Southwark Circle, ‘a membership organisation that helps older people make the most of their retirement.’  NB the definition of ‘older people’ is 50-plus – the age when the numbers of people in Southwark  tail off sharply.

The demographic  profile of Southwark does indeed bring with it a risk of social isolation for older people, and you  could make a good case for the Southwark Circle being a perfectly good idea.

However, Suffolk couldn’t be more different from Southwark.

Most  Suffolk residents  have lived here for many years,  and many residents for generations. Suffolk is NOT mixed, NOT densely populated, and (whilst there is plenty of social deprivation)  NOT  deprived in the way  Southwark is. Far from being lonely and isolated, the 50-pluses are embedded in the community,  running the county – and practically everything else.

Which is why, many months later, I am still pondering why Suffolk County Council thought Southwark such a close match for our county. Why at a time when SCC are cutting staff and  frontline services did they decide to spend £680,000 on Participle  transferring a Good Neighbours scheme (which you have to pay to join) from isolated inner London to a rural community packed with good neighbours who have a long tradition of helping each other for free.

I am not criticising Southwark here, its just that Southwark and Suffolk are chalk and cheese.

I asked Colin Noble, portfolioholder  Adult and Community Services,  what he considered to be the key similarities between the two areas. His only reply was “there was a great deal of work done by the people who set up the Southwark Circle as a scoping exercise..

In response to the same question they tell me ”the research work is a bit too large to email without clogging up yours and my inboxes” and offer to send me a copy.

But surely the scoping exercise could only have been undertaken after Suffolk had decided that the Southwark project had merit and that there were enough similarities between the areas for the same approach to work?

Look again at the graphs. What similarities can you see?

Update 4 April 2012: I have recently been informed that the Suffolk Circle is costing Suffolk taxpayers ‘only’ £680,000 over three years, including £100,00 up front for scoping and planning. As of April  this means £350,000 has been spent on the project and this has  attracted 362 members,. You couldn’t make it up…