LAs in fact should be congratulated for managing such a stark reduction in their funding and for not letting this affect services so far.

No, try again (if anything that shows quite the opposite) and for help on that, the quote from the NAO is very clear.

Good luck BTW, because you won’t find an answer!

And comparatives?

I’ve not read the rest of the thread either, but here is my opinion:

As galling as it sounds, we need to make big cuts somewhere. Everyone knows that the state pension is unsustainable in it’s current form – why not bin that, with some sort of safety net in place for poorer pensioners so they’re not out on the street?

Alternatively, it will be benefits that’ll be cut, fwics.

Hmm – Council Cuts.
Good. It might make them get off their backsides and give the Taxpayers good value for money.
I’ve had it from both sides – as a local Councillor, and a Contractor working for (multiple) Councils.
Efficiency is not a word that could be used for any of the Councils.
My Parish Council thought their current office was too small, so they out-voted me 17-1 and bought a former Police Station with 500k of borrowed money. Then they realised they could not afford to get the building completed, so only use the ground floor of a large building.
I could fill 3 pages of A4 on the corruption, backstabbing and sheer waste of moeny of this Parish Council.

As a Contractor, it is amazing how the Councils waste money. An example from this week – Council Tenant says light not working. Ok, I’ll fix it, or change it there and then. “No, go and see what is wrong, quote for it, then do it next week”
Why – I can fix it on the spot, £30 plus parts.
Council want to know what is wrong beforehand. So the price is now £60 plus parts.

2 days with a street lighting gang, checking street lights, I connect / disconnect if required. Leave the depot. Go to the cafe. Wait 2 hours, go to first site. Check it – all ok. The crew then decide it is close enough to dinner to have a break. So 2 hours are sat there. Over the day, including driving, it would not be far wrong to say they did 2 hours work. And you/me are paying them.

One thing that really annoys me is the County Council sending out their free magazine every quarter, basically detailing how good they are at everything. At a cost of £100k per issue. Why not put that online, then buy new school books with the saving?
But that would be too hard for the councillors to contemplate, there is probably someone down the line, related to a Councillor who prints the magazine.
Dont think I’m exaggerating, it happens.

Good luck BTW, because you won’t find an answer!

As usual any discussion with you is pointless as you work so hard to not say anything. No doubt you will put that down to my inferior intellect. Funny thing is with regatds to your quote above I have no idea what the question is, much less where I should go for answers!

If I haven’t said anything, why make assertions about what I have said? Very odd. Don’t do yourself down! Where have I said that services haven’t been cut? The whole thread.

Simples 😉

Hurtmore you are talking bobbins if you really think that cuts have not affected front line services, which is the impression you have given in this thread

That why I have quoted studies that show where the impact has been greatest! 😯

My main points are simple:

1. Much worse is coming in terms of cuts in funding. Hence, the need for sensible solutions, Fortunately a number of LAs have already shown considerable success here. Historically many have also managed well to maintain the quality of services despite substantial reductions in funding.

2. The two main parties are essentially lying about the future and being disingenuous when suggesting policies to deal with it. They should be held to account. Instead the focus is on countering the fringe, protest parties and their BS.

The poll in the Observer this morning has labour with a 7point lead. Given that Milliband is still as hopeless as ever, I think we can take it that people aren’t loving George’s proposals for public spending.

He’s always feted as a master political strategist, but I think he’s massively misjudged the public mood here.

2. The two main parties are essentially lying about the future and being disingenuous when suggesting policies to deal with it. They should be held to account. Instead the focus is on countering the fringe, protest parties and their BS.

This

But it’s not just the political parties to be fair, there is a very important and valid discussion that at some point needs to be had with the public at large, and that’s about the role of the state in society, at the moment the state spends about £8500 per head per annum, man woman and child – taxes don’t (and likely will never) begin to approach the potential of state expenditure to outgrow and outstrip income, there is always more that the state can do if we allow it to.

we have only seen a balanced budget on a handful of years in most of our lifetimes. Yes, one valid outcome of that discussion is continued increases in taxation, another is Halting the growth of the state, even rolling it back. Both are valid arguments and this is why the debate is so important.

Realistically however, the political left is currently divergent from the Labour Party, one is saying ‘no cuts’ the other is saying ‘some cuts’ but not telling us which (possibly for fear of losing support of the other half) – the place they are falling down is in being disingenuous about whether efficiencies can be made, as many people see inefficiencies with their own eyes, so when the political right is telling them that efficiencies could be made, and the state could be reigned in, and the left is saying it’s not true (rather than entering into the wider debate about the role of state in society) they are onto a no hoper. Of course the right is as guilty of misleading the public by trying to reign in the role and size of the state while claiming they are not.

The debate is much wider than just cuts, the left do nobody any favours by saying *all* cuts are mindless vandalism and that the current system is as efficient as it can ever get, the right no favours by saying you can always expect the same level of service or in making cuts across the board rather than picking an issue that they think the state has no role in delivering and killing funding entirely (eg the arts)

Personally I am more than happy to see the state come out of certain areas of life, but I think that in all areas the state is part of, it has a duty to be the exemplar in efficiency, rather than, as it has often but not always been, wasteful.

Agree on the wider debate ninfan, hence my early post

teamhurtmore – Member
There needs to be complete clarity on

1. What are the targets for the fiscal balance and level of public debt
2. What will be the relationship between tax increases and spending cuts to achieve this

Both parties have work to do to explain this in simple terms.
POSTED 2 DAYS AGO #

As this thread shows, it’s too easy to jump to conclusion about how different parties will and do deal with this. The reality is very different from the rhetoric. But ninfan, the Tories are as bad especially the tax cuts stuff. The maths doesn’t work and they know it. So if they want to claim tax cuts, they need to be honest about the other side of the equation. Otherwise they end up looking like Alex Salmond and we have all had enough of that!

There is some interesting work in this area including a review by the LSE which looks at London LAs under different party leadership, from which they conclude that

All the boroughs had made very substantial efforts to protect front line services whereverpossible and limit the impacts on residents with the greatest needs. The majority of savings had been made through ‘efficiencies’ – reducing costs without immediate impacts on service delivery

THM, I think one interesting example is DVLA

Pretty massive investment in computerisation, reorganisation and job losses, evil cuts, strikes etc.

Result however has been a 1/3 cut in the cost of driving licence to the public,

Of course similar savings in the cost of administering the road fund licence etc.

Road tax is just a huge lost opportunity. Scrap it. Add a penny to fuel duty. I don’t doubt there’s similar endless pointless and petty crap that can just be scrapped.

Where have I said that services haven’t been cut?

LAs in fact should be congratulated for managing such a stark reduction in their funding and for not letting this affect services so far.

I’m lost

Indeed…. should be an interesting reply. i reckon on woosh or somethign equally pervasive as an explanation.
TBH its becoming increasingly harder to tell what he means on here and what he does for sport/reaction.

PS I Just thought i would see what followed his “conclusion” and it agreed that cuts had happened to services as we had argued

• Councils have been making strenuous efforts to make large savings without cutting front line services, and to protect services for those who need them most. Most savings have come through efficiencies, the sorts of savings which Councils have argued are neither detrimental to, nor noticeable at, the frontline.
• However, Councils have, reluctantly, had to reduce their own role in the provision of discretionary services. More of these services are being delivered by voluntary and community sector partners, so the landscape of local service provision has seen some change
•A focus on the most in need, seen in greater targeting of services, could also further fuel rising demand, as lower level need goes unaddressed.
• Council officers and Members are concerned that the ‘limits of efficiency’ have been reached, and there is little scope for further large?scale savings without significant effects on frontline services.

I am going for “yawn” 😆

you are a wise man Pigface
I agree these “debates” are a bit yawny to be fair
We may as well go i dont like you or your politics and then all flounce off so i will lead the campaign

FLOUNCES

Phew.

AA as the reports cited suggest, quantity and quality are not the same things.

So the closed libraries havent been missed? I see.

So you ignored the quote that showed that you had indeed said the thing you denied saying in order to just play me
I hold you in much higher regard now and I am as hurt as am I surprised 😀

Re flounces 😛

Good job there are no professional scientists in the house.

AA, here’s another view

Several studies have explored these strategies since the cuts took hold in 2010/11. On the whole, somewhat surprisingly given the scale of the funding reductions, these have shown councils largely managing (by their own account) to balance budgets without major loss of frontline services nor serious impacts on service quality.

Quantity versus quality really isn’t that hard.

I’m sure theres a discussion in here somewhere.

THM, haven’t you previously argued that there haven’t actually been any major cuts yet? If you believe that then how can a study on the effects since 2010/11 show us anything useful?

major loss of frontline services

Would that be one of those caveats I was talking about earlier.

Good job there are no professional scientists in the house.

You have lost me again. Is this some kind of personal dig again?

Yes that would be one as would Largely managing and serious impact

Is this some kind of personal dig again?

Its vague but I think its aimed at me and not you
Of all the things I ever thought i would mention on STW or to THM a vague and imprecise insult was never amongst them

I’m sure theres a discussion in here somewhere.

Its not even close to one and no one is even trying.

grum – Member
THM, haven’t you previously argued that there haven’t actually been any major cuts yet? If you believe that then how can a study on the effects since 2010/11 show us anything useful?

Very significant cuts in funding – hence question about efficiencies and how LAs have reacted
Varied cuts in quantity of some services – especially those not directed at low income groups. Look where the real hits have come
Must independent studies conclude that overall quality of services has largely been maintained

So studies are indeed very useful including the LSE one that shows how LAs controlled by different parties have coped. Avoids the facile party political polarisation that can define these kinds of debates.

But the real issue remains – big further cuts are coming irrespective of who wins the election and we need to understand CLEARLY how each party is going to deliver them.