Council budget slammed – by Lib Dems and union

WARRINGTON Borough Council approved a 4.98 per cent council tax increase – and immediately came under attack from the Liberal Democrats and the council workers’ union.

The Lib Dems condemned the budget as being little more than a “wish list” and Jason Horan, joint branch secretary of UNISON accused the council of a “complete lack of openness and transparency.”

The Lib Dem group voted against the budget, which included savings of nearly £9 million.

Group leader Cllr Bob Barr said: “Local Government finance is broken and it is no longer possible for authorities to deliver the services their residents need and expect.
“This is supposed to be a member driven council but not a single executive board member has accounted for the hard decisions that have had to be made, or have been passed to officers to make.

“Last year’s budget was long and opaque, at least this year’s is short but equally impenetrable.  The budget book has been delivered disgracefully late.

“You should tell the people of Warrington what they will lose and what you are doing to minimise the effects.  Have the guts to be held to account.”

Lib Dem finance spokesperson  Cllr Ian Marks added: “The Council has no option but to increase council tax by just under five per cent like nearly all other councils.  Three per cent of this is to pay for social care.  This is not enough to pay for the crisis, but all that is allowed without a referendum.  Consultation on the budget has been minimal but is especially important when tough decisions have to be made.

“We have asked questions about the proposed cuts in the budget.  Are they open, transparent and achievable?  Are they reasonable in terms of what the public would accept?  Have they been properly thought through and are there any unintended consequences?

“Last year’s cuts to the library service and charges for green waste collection certainly fail one or more of these tests.  This year we have cuts over the next four years described as ‘Demand management asset based approach to adult social care’ and ‘Business transformation to deliver a new operating model’ and ‘Waste treatment review’.  These may be worthy objectives but what do they mean?  What are the consequences for residents?  They are just part of a wish list.

“The huge sum for capital expenditure of nearly £1.2 billion concerns us.  We understand the need to be innovative but this is high risk and what if interest rates increase significantly?

“The proposal for the Redwood Challenger Bank worries us too. After all that Labour has said about the national consequences of the banking crash, it is strange they should take the risk of trying to raise revenue by setting up a bank with a major Tory donor.”

The council has agreed to look at investing £30m in the bank over the next three years, after approving an initial £10m in the first year.

UNISON’s Jason Horan said he sat in on the budget meeting in complete and utter disbelief when he heard finance chief Cllr Russ Bowden said there had been consultation with the trade unions.

He said “To inform  council members that consultation took place with the Trade Unions is totally untrue.
“Yes there have been around six meetings over several months with Cllr Bowden and Lynton Green, director of finance, but perhaps they need to learn what the definition of consultation is.

“ I would repeat that the Trade Unions have not had any detail of the budget proposals shared with us.  We have attended meetings but all we have is headlines which can be nothing more than a wish list. Other than this all we have is a blank piece of paper.  We have no idea of where 80 job losses will come from.”

He claimed the council was told the budget proposals had not yet been fully completed and once the full detail was known individual consultations would be undertaken.

“How can councillors approve budget proposals when it includes measures or cuts to services that are so far unknown?

UNISON is deeply concerned that now the budget has been approved there is little scope for councillors to challenge individual proposals once the actual detail of each is released by what can only be described as an officer-led council.”