Spin over services

Notts County Council are planning to make £33m of service cuts - and at the same time they have decided to advertise for a a new Service Director of Communications (aka "Spin Doctor") with the very handsome salary of more than £71,000

This is a slap in the face of the thousands of frontline staff such as care workers, social workers and contact centre staff who will be spending the Christmas break worrying about whether they will be made redundant in the new year

The advert, which you can find here, says "Nottinghamshire has undergone a change in direction." The council has certainly undergone a change in direction as it now values spin over services

Shameful behavoiour.

Show us the money

Many councils are saying they have financial problems and are having to cut budgets. Undoubtedly many are facing a drop income from reductions in planning fees and parking charges. And undoubtedly some are facing increasing pressures on budgets as demand for vital services goes up.

But, for years many of them have been putting money into reserves for a "rainy day." We believe that rainy day has come and some councils have the opportunity to use their reserves to protect services.

Freedom of Information (FOI) requests by UNISON have uncovered that many councils in the East Midlands have relatively large reserves that could be used to help support budget problems in the short term. Councils carry many types of reserve, many of which are earmarked for specific projects. However, the reserves we have focused on are the unallocated reserves, or “General Fund Balance” that is free to be spent on anything.

We believe any second tier council (district or borough council) with more than 10 per cent of its total expenditure in unallocated reserves has enough flexibility to use some of these reserves to support any budget shortfalls for the next few years. See here for the list of reserves of all of the 36 second tier councils in the East Midlands. The report also shows the total expenditure for the council in 2008/09 and shows reserves as a proportion of expenditure. Some have big reserves compared to their total expenditure.

The councils with the green bars are ones where reserves are in excess of 10 per cent of their expenditure. Some councils such as (but not limited to) Ashfield, Derbyshire Dales and South Holland have well over 15 per cent in reserves, while some like Daventry and Melton have over 20 per cent in reserves.

Likewise we believe any first tier council (county or unitary council) with more than 2.5 per cent of its total non schools expenditure in unallocated reserves has enough flexibility to use some reserves to support any budget shortfalls for the next few years. See here for the list of reserves of all of the nine first tier councils in the East Midlands. Unallocated reserves range from £1m to a whopping £39m.

So, as the 45 councils in the region construct their budgets for 2010/11, our research has uncovered around half of them have money in reserves they can use to help support their budget. There is no excuse for these councils to cut services.

Social Work Task Force

Chris Tansley is one of the region's reps on UNISON's Social Care forum and he has written about the Social Care Task Force report that was released today. The report sets the scene for the future of social work and it is vital central and local government make the funding available to enable the report's recommendations to become reality. Chris Tansley's report is below.

There’s a lot to be welcomed in the task force recommendations released today (1st December) and a lot that mirrors what we’ve been saying in UNISON since the Laming report.
http://www.unison.org.uk/asppresspack/pressrelease_view.asp?id=1663

We said to the task force and to the minister, Ed Balls, that the high vacancy levels of social workers meant that those that were employed were carrying dangerously high caseloads.

We also said that the IT system brought in at Laming's recommendation was cumbersome and taking up to 70% of social workers time – time which would be better spent working with the children and families they were responsible for.

UNISON has been saying for years that we need a new grade of senior practitioner to prevent our experienced social workers having only the option of going into management if they wanted to improve their pay.

All of these issues are outlined in the report and Ed Balls has given his commitment to implementing them in full.

The task for us all in social work is to ensure that they are implemented jointly with UNISON representatives at a local level.

These recommendations cannot be done on the cheap. They will require real resources if they are to succeed. This comes at a time when finance in the public sector is in crisis. We need the Government to match their words of support with increased funding specifically aimed at implementing the proposals.

The setting up of a National College of Social Work did not form one of UNISON's proposals. We have been saying for several years now that the image and status of social work needs to be radically improved but we remain sceptical that a National College will just become a distraction from the real issues facing social workers. What matters to social workers is that they get the improvements to their working conditions and career progression in their workplaces.

We also need the Government to build on the start they’ve made in putting the message across that our social workers need to be valued for the great work they do in our communities with vulnerable children and families every day of the year. Perhaps then it will be a career of choice again and social workers can say that they are proud of the work they do.

For the Task Force Report see here.

Chris Tansley
Chair - UNISON National Social Care Forum

Heather Wakefield's blog

Heather Wakefield, UNISON's National Secretary for Local Government has written a very timely piece about the government's recent proposals for a "National Care Service" (NCS). She welcomes the introduction of the NCS but highlights some serious issues about the current situation in care work, in particular, problems with outsourcing; scandalously low rates of pay; workers having to pay for their own uniforms; and patchy service standards.

You can find Heather's article here.

GPF funded billboards

The Notts County UNISON branch are taking their fight against the savage £33m cuts being made by their council right into the community.

GPF funded billboard posters of the image above will be appearing around Nottinghamshire. The current billboard campaign runs at selected locations during the run-up to Christmas. The branch is planning further public campaigning next year. The Council consultation period for the announced cuts is due to end on 22 January 2010.

30 Nov to 13 December:
Carlton: Burton Road (A612), rail bridge, NG4 2QG
Newark: Northern Road near Sleaford Road NG24 2EU
Nottingham: Meadow Lane opp Notts County FC, NG2 3HR

14 Dec to 27 December:
Carlton: Burton Road (A612), rail bridge, NG4 2QG
Nottingham: Meadow Lane opp Notts County FC, NG2 3HR
Mansfield: 37 St Johns St/Quaker way, NG18 1QJ
Mansfield: Kirklington Road opp South Ave, Rainworth, NG21 0JR

28 Dec thru to mid January 2010
Gamston: Morrisons Store, Gamston

Letter to the Notts County Council Chief Exec about the budget cuts

Last week the UNISON regional office wrote to the Chief Executive at Notts Council to ask some searching questions about the budget cuts. The text of the letter is reproduced in italics below.

UNISON have reviewed the budget proposals contained in the Cabinet report of 18 November 09 we have some questions.

Budget pressures
The 2009/10 budget report to full Council on 25 February 2009 initially identified budget pressures of £11.9m in 2010/11.

However, the 2010/11 budget report to the Cabinet on 18 November 2009 now identifies budget of pressures of £31.1m; an increase of £19.2m.

We have been able to identify that of the additional £19.2m budget pressures, £9m is from the decision to freeze Council Tax. We are puzzled as to where the additional £10.2m in budget pressures has come from in fewer than nine months.

These additional budget pressures over and above the original £11.9m identified in February budget report are not individually identified in November budget report. We believe that identifying the specific additional pressures will assist the council in producing a transparent and balanced budget.

Our question is:
1. Can the council please identify the specific individual additional budget pressures totalling £10.2m over and above the pressures in identified in the February budget report?

Use of reserves
The Statement of Accounts for 2008/09 show that the reserve called “Earmarked for Services” was at £18.4m as of 31 March 09. We believe this is what has also been referred to in other documents as “Departmental Reserves.” Our question is:

2. We understand some of these reserves are for capital projects but we would be grateful if you could confirm what level of these reserves could be used to support revenue expenditure?

On page A29 para 11.3 of the document the February budget report the table shows a projected transfer into the County Fund Balances of £3.7m.

3. Can you confirm if this £3.7m transfer is still intended as part of the 2010/11 budget? If the answer is yes, can you please explain why, given these difficult financial times, that the council has not chosen use this money to support the 2010/11 revenue budget?

We have identified from the Statement of Accounts for 2008/09 the total reserves of the council stand at £150.8m as of 31 March 09 and that the unallocated reserves, aka “County Fund Balances” stand at £24.8m. Our question is:

4. Given the above levels of reserves would you agree that it would not be unreasonable for the council to use, say, £2m a year for the next three years, from the County Fund Balances to help support the revenue budget.

Projected Outturn for 2009/10
We have reviewed the first quarter’s budget monitoring report and we believe the council is projected to under spend by £2.4m in 2009/10. Our questions are:

5. Are we correct that the first quarter’s monitoring report does indeed predict an under spend of £2.4m?

6. Do you have more up to date figures for the projected outturn for 2009/10, if so what is it?

7. Do you accept that any surplus on the 2009/10 budget that is transferred to the County Fund Balances could be used to support future revenue budgets?

We note that the projected outturn referred to above was made before the outcome of the 2009/10 NJC pay award which according to the Council will result in a further saving of £1.7m. Our question is:

8. Do you agree that the council has saved £1.7m as outlined above?

We note that the 2009/10 budget includes a £3m provision for ‘contingencies.’ Our question is:

9. What is the projected spend on this contingencies sum?

10. If it is not all spent, does the council accept some of it could be used to support the revenue budget in 2010/11?

Application of the Formula Grant
We understand there is a damping mechanism that applies to central government formula grant that means that the council currently is subject to a “ceiling” which limits the size of the grant payable to the council. We also note that damping mechanism is to be gradually phased out meaning the council should expect growth in formula grant of in excess of £15m in the coming years. However, we note the council has predicted a reduction in the formula grant. Our question is:

11. Do you agree that if the damping mechanism is gradually reduced then the council could expect a growth in formula grant of in excess of £15m in the coming years?

Impact of a Future Conservative Government
We would refer you to the policy statement below contained on page 16 in the Conservative Party document Control Shift – Returning Power to Local Communities; Conservative Party (17 February 2009) (attached):
“………That is why we have announced that, in the first two years of a Conservative government, councils will also have the ability to contract with central government to freeze council tax. Those councils that take up the contract will have to undertake to hold the rate of rise in council tax to 2.5 per cent or less; and central government will correspondingly undertake to make a payment equal to 2.5 per cent of that council’s council tax – so that bills can be frozen in each such council for the two year period.”

Our questions are:

12. Does the council agree that this additional central government grant would amount to an additional £7.5m in the budget for both 2011/12 and 2012/13?

13. Why has the council not taken into account this potential additional grant income in its financial plan for the years 2011/12 and 2012/13?

We will be advising our members that we have raised these questions with the council and we undertake to share any response from the council with them.

More cuts announced - this time in Newark

Newark and Sherwood District Council have just announced they will be cutting £4m over the next few years. An extract of from their website says:

"As part of the budget preparations for 2010/11, the council is looking at making savings of around six per cent. On a net budget of £18million, this is a saving, in one year, of more than £1million. In the next three to four years we will have to shave another £4million off our budget."

Shaving £4m from a budget of £18m means cuts of nearly 25% - there is no doubt everyone will feel the impact of these cuts. On top of these cuts, residents of Newark and Sherwood will also have to deal with the impact of the proposed £33m cuts announced by Nottinghamshire County Council.

More short sighted cuts from a council who took the irresponsible decision to freeze council tax for this financial year.

Northamptonshire County Council announce £100m cuts over 4 years

Another Conservative council in the East Midlands has announced savage cuts. Northamptonshire County Council have said they will be cutting £100m over the next 4 years. This is the largest budget cut announced in the past few months. This looks like another Conservative attempt to bring in David Cameron's "small state."

The "small state" may be a nice soundbite, but the reality is it means cuts in public services that impact on the most vulnerable in our society.

The local UNISON branch will be mounting a vigorous campaign against these unjust cuts.

Letter to David Cameron about Conservative Councils' Inconsistency on Budgets

Pete Challis, a National Officer in the Local Government Service Group has identified that many Conservative Councils have been planning their budgets in a manner inconsistent with national Conservative party policy. In the East Midlands, Notts County Council (who are making £33m of savage cuts) is one of these councils.

So this week, the East Midlands region wrote to David Cameron seeking clarification on Conservative party policy. An extract of the letter is below.

Letter to David Cameron, Leader of the Conservative Party:

The majority of councils we deal with are Conservative controlled and it has become apparent there are differing approaches to medium term financial planning, especially with respect to projected future formula grant funding in the financial years 2011/12 and 2012/13.

We note that the Conservative Party made the policy statement below, which is on page 16 in the Conservative Party document Control Shift – Returning Power to Local Communities; Conservative Party (17 February 2009)):

“………That is why we have announced that, in the first two years of a Conservative government, councils will also have the ability to contract with central government to freeze council tax. Those councils that take up the contract will have to undertake to hold the rate of rise in council tax to 2.5 per cent or less; and central government will correspondingly undertake to make a payment equal to 2.5 per cent of that council’s council tax – so that bills can be frozen in each such council for the two year period.”

Many Conservative councils are freezing Council Tax over the next three years and some are including in their medium term financial plans the additional payment outlined above. However, there are some Conservative councils, such as Nottinghamshire County Council who are not making any provision for this additional income in 2011/12 and 2012/13.

Given this we have two specific questions:

1. Is it your intention that a future Conservative government will implement the policy outlined above?

2. If the answer to 1 above, is yes, then do you believe that councils such as Nottinghamshire County should include this additional income in their financial plans for 2011/12 and 2012/13?

There is clearly an inconsistent approach on this matter by Conservative councils in this region and it would be helpful to have clarification from your office.

Although the letter refers to Notts County Council, there are many other Conservative councils in the reigon (the rest of the country) that are freezing council tax but have not taken into account this extra government grant (or "cash back" as the Lincolnshire County UNISON branch call it).

When we get a reply from Mr Cameron we will post it up on the blog.

Lincolnshire County UNISON ask some tough questions about the budget

The Linclonshire County UNISON branch recently had a branch committee where two senior finance managers attended to explain the financial situation at the council. Knowing they were coming the branch prepared a number of very interesting questions. The branch had many questions and 16 of key ones are outlined below. Page numbers refer to the 2008/09 Statement of Accounts 2008/09, available on the County Council website here.

Congratulations to the Lincolnshire County branch who have shown they are not prepared to accept cuts without asking some very searching questions of their council. They have performed a public service on behalf the people of Lincolnshire ensuring the report is put under proper scrutiny.

Reserves

1. General reserves increased by £2m in 08/09 (p20). Was this planned, or a budget underspend, and what are the future expectations for reserves.

2. Earmarked reserves stand at £60m (p55). What is represented by the major additions during 08/09, Other Services (up from £3.5m to £11.2m) and Waste Disposal (up from £6.2m to £14.1)?

3. When is the protocol for each earmarked reserve reviewed, and can we be supplied with copies?

4. Are there any earmarked capital reserves that can now be “unearmarked” due to changed plans and priorities? If so, are there any other earmarked capital reserves that are using revenue funds that could be released by transferring the now freed up capital reserves?

Pay

5. The Council is revising its provision for pay inflation in 09/10 down from 2.5% to 0.0%. What will be the budgetary implications of any nationally agreed pay awards next year?

6. Figures for salaries over £50,000 (p30) show an increase from 112 to 162 (excluding schools), or 43%. Is it realistic to accept that level of increase in one year and propose a pay freeze in another?

Consultants and Agency Staff

7. Figures given in response to Unison’s FOI request show a spend in 08/09 of £788,000 on consultants and £3.8m on agency staff. These figures are low in comparison to other authorities – what definition has the county council used, in particular for “consultants”?

8. Are elements of commissioned services that are actually consultancy captured under the correct heading – eg Mouchel consultancy time paid above the core contract?

9. Can the council break down the agency worker and consultant costs in to those incurred on the capital and revue accounts?

10. Can LCC differentiate between its permanent and non-permanent staffing costs, breaking the latter down into agency, fixed-term and consultant?

11. What are the instances of consultants replacing established posts over a period of continuous time, eg Diversity Manager?

12. What approval is required by the Resourcing Board for the engagement of consultants.

Issues for the 2010/2011 budget

13. Implications of 0.0% inflation assumption: are there contracts which have different inflationary increases built in?

14. Capital programme: is any direct contribution from revenue expected, other than debt charges? In respect of these, will refinancing be examined to release revenue benefits?

15. What impact will proposals for residential care of older people have on the budget?

16. Council tax: will the Council provide models showing the implications of different Council Tax increases on services? Suggest at 1%, 2% and 3% council tax increase. Increases in council tax to be shown as an increase per week to each band of household.