Unitary Democracy?

So after the announcement of cancelled elections earlier in March it now seems that there is no democratic component in the establishment of the West Northants and North Northants Unitary Council. Conservative government and Conservative Councils think it's OK for you not to have a voice.

Across the country, a third of poorer families are missing out on free food vouchers - In Northamptonshire nearly half are doing so.

Women who are at least 10 weeks pregnant or who have a child under the age of four can get vouchers worth £3.10 a week to spend on fruit, vegetables milk and other foods at participating stores. Any woman who receives benefits such as income support or jobseeker’s allowance, or who lives in a home where someone does can make a claim for the vouchers.

The vouchers were brought in UK-wide in 2006 by Labour in an effort to improve the diets of poorer families and narrow the nutritional gap between rich and poor. However, the scheme is poorly promoted and so lots of families are missing out.

There is plenty of research to show the benefits of the scheme in not only addressing food poverty but also helping develop good eating habits in young children whose families get the vouchers and improving the health of pregnant women and new mothers.

The scheme is a national one, but families in our county are missing out a lot more than other parts of the country and there are several reasons for this.

With spending on public health in the county in turmoil following the double bankruptcy of the Conservative County council and with audit questions on the use of public health funds in the Council there simply has not been the leadership in the County to address the low take up as a priority. We have a Tory council, busy raising Council tax to the maximum and balancing budgets to address structural deficits but without the time or consideration to see how the lives of the poorest families in our county can be improved at little cost to the council.

In addition to this, little is done to ensure a choice of retailers willing to accept the vouchers. There is an online process of registering as a retailer in order that they can claim back the money. In Tower Hamlets, the local council is promoting local market stalls as retailers accepting vouchers stating that the food is cheaper and fresher than in supermarkets. In this way the Council is not only promoting access to free nutritious food to low income families but is also promoting local businesses and entrepreneurs in the town. 

In some parts of the town (Kingsley front) the only retailers that accept the vouchers are ones that have closed down. With assistance from the Kingsley Park and Links View Residents Association a number of independent retailers in the area have been approached to encourage them to register to the scheme.

County Council Cutting Transport Services for Children with Learning Disabilities

I was approached by a parent of a girl with learning disabilities who had been advised that his daughter had been chosen for change in the transport service to school. The child attended the Beehive Centre and currently has a school bus pick her up from home and drop her back at home at the end of the day. The new proposal seeks to pick children up for a point that may be a mile away. Initially the proposal identified children in year 7 who had only just started school and some wheelchair user children. These actions led many parents to believe that no proper individual assessment of children's needs had taken place for the scheme.

The proposal is to implement this by 4th November at a point when pick up and drop off will be heading to darkness. This rushed timescale creates real difficulties for parents who have to work really hard to try and get some of these very vulnerable children into a change of routine.

I am arging all parents who are in this situation to make a request for reasonable adjustments. You can do so using a template email here. This will preserve rights under the Equality Act. Reasonable adjustments do not have to be considered if they have not been requested. If they have been requested, those making the decisions are obliged  to consider them and would need to evidence that process used to make the decision as to why the request has been grated or refused in the event of any challenge.

If you haven't done so already please sign this petition to try and get the council to reconsider this plan.

Children's Service's in Northamptonshire inadequate OFSTED grading

The Council’s inadequate grading of it’s children’s services by OFSTED is deeply disappointing primarily for those that use the service but also for those that work so very hard in extremely challenging working conditions in the service. Northamptonshire County Council runs one of the most expensive children’s services departments in the country and is currently heading to a £6.3 million overspend in that single department. With some sections running at extremely high levels of agency workers, (particularly the section that it responsible for initial responses to those citizens needing childrens services called the First Response Teams). These teams are running between 60 -88% agency staff, some with no permanent social workers. This together with a failure to achieve savings by recruiting social workers from overseas or to get agency workers to convert to full time social workers results in not only inadequate but very costly services. The Council is being told that the route for a stable and well skilled workforce is by acquiring something nebulously termed a “Career Pathway”. This is entirely uncosted and doesn’t seem to address the fact that the council does not pay as much or offer similar or better terms and conditions. It seems strange that the Career pathway is not juxtaposed as a strategy to returning to national pay, terms and conditions for staff as an alternative approach. This would not be something that difficult to cost, so why not?

After last months cabinet, Councillor heard from discussions with council staff and council commissioners that there were four new senior management posts being created in Childrens Services. This was not in the budget passed in the spring and it is unclear whether this is in the £6.3 million overspend. The OFSTED report is being presented to cabinet with one of the briefest papers I have ever seen also including a hazy statement under consultation and scrutiny:

“ This report will be reviewed through this structure as appropriately determined. “

There is no clarity as to the plan to improvement and no statement of the four new senior management positions on £100,000 a year and their role to taking the council to a better Children’s Service department.

Although in a previous Overview and Scrutiny meeting, the existing Director of Children’s Services has stated unequivocally that she accepts the findings of the OFSTED report, there is still a sense that this statement is not owned by the department as a whole. Three days before the OFSTED report was published at a time when senior officers would have had some idea of the impending OFSTED decision, I attended a Corporate Parenting Board meeting. At the meeting there were a number of slick presentations and some very gritty input from care leavers living in new supported accommodation in Northampton assisting them to move on to independence. However, one of the most shocking things in the report is the practise of the department in placing some of those in local authority care in “unregulated placements that are unsafe and unsuitable”. Some of my constituents have asked whether this practice has increased in the move to “Next Generation Council” ways of working. I have asked questions on this but have been unable to get an answer to date. It is also still unclear why this particular fact has not in the past few months been brought to the Corporate Parenting Board, particularly in the light of a dedicated Children’s Scrutiny Committee being abolished last year. Portfolio holder, Fiona Baker admitted that the Corporate Parenting Board should have coonsidered  this but were not provided with the opportunity to do so.

This time two years ago, the highly critical LGA peer review of Northamptoshire County Council was published. Although it was distributed to Councillors there was no content in the covering paper expressing an analysis of the report or a strategy of dealing with the findings. This was highlighted in  the spring 2018 Government Inspectors report by Max Caller report. After the report was published there was much baring of the administration’s soul about lessons being learnt. Yet here we ware again with a independent highly critical report, not given the consideration it deserves and not giving Councillors the detail to effectively contribute to the governance literally is a matter or life and death to some of our most vulnerable children.

It seems that Councillors (or maybe it is just opposition councillors) are being kept at arms length. Sad when there is so much more we could contribute.

If you want a change in the way things are done and a better Northamptonshire, for the many not the few, take a look at this and consider donating.

Northamptonshire County Council cabinet - July 2019

Over the last few months there have been considerable changes in the Northamptonshire County Council. As with the rest of life this is a mixture of positives and negatives.

Shortly after the implementation of the first section 114 (effective declaration of bankruptcy), Council meeting ceased to be webcast. This has now be re-instated and makes decision making considerable more transparent. The Council's scrutiny committees, which were aligned with the Council’s directorates, were scrapped to have one single overview and scrutiny committee in the autumn. On the positive side, for the first time in fourteen years, (since the administration took control) the chair and one of the vice chair positions were given to opposition councillors. At the beginning of the year, the administration decided that the only councillors that could speak at cabinet would be portfolio holders, the leader and one speaker from each political group. This has the impact of making it quite difficult for back bench councillors to get their voice heard. As a mitigation to this, councillors are now allowed to put questions to portfolio holders on the content of the cabinet papers. These are generally responded to on the day of cabinet, very shortly before the cabinet meetings,  and neither the questions nor the answers are published.

For the cabinet due to take place on Tuesday 9th July, I have submitted the following questions:

1.

I am concerned about the Council’s compliance with the equality act in respect of paying due regard to equality when making decisions.

For this cabinet not one cabinet paper has been equality impact assessed despite two key decisions being made. The administration has repeatedly stressed that it is committed to ensuring that the practice of the Council is of a high standard and delivering good results for all Northamptonshire’s communities. However, I am concerned that there is not transparency in decision making and the way that this impacts the diversity in local communities.

Do cabinet members agree or disagree with this? If they disagree can they advise how they are paying due regard to equality in their decision making?

2. 

There has been a drastic change to the senior management structure of the organisation and a massive reduction in specialists in the authority over the course of the administration’s tenure. These posts would have critically provided support to this kind of analysis to assist cabinet members in taking decisions. I put it that the administration is not paying due regard to equality and this is in breach of legislative requirements.

Do cabinet members agree or disagree with this? Can cabinet member advise how they are getting advice on the equality impact on key decisions and advise how that is documented?

3.

On the establishment of minor works budget for maintained schools, Over the last few years staff have raising in the CCNF concern about the information available relating to asbestos in schools. From the information given by officers event within local authority supported schools there is no clear picture as to the need for action on Asbestos in schools. This is of sufficient priority that not one but all the unions have voiced concern about this. Given this maybe the nature of the activity undertaken it would be salient to ensure that there was an analysis to ensure that decisions about what to under take and where were informed by an Equality Impact Assessment.

Given that this is a key decisions I believe to demonstrate due regard to equality and EqIA is necessary.

 Do cabinet members agree or disagree with this? Can cabinet member advise how they are getting advice on the equality impact on key decisions and advise how that is documented?

4. Corporate Performance Report 2018-19 quarter 4

I express concern about the increase in permanent exclusions

Can the cabinet member provide an analysis of the age/gender/race/disability/SEND breakdown of this? It  has not been supplied in previous requests.

I express concern about the increase in electively home educated children

Can the cabinet member provide an analysis of the age/gender/race/disability/SEND breakdown of this? It  has not been supplied in previous requests.

I express concern about Delayed Transfers of Care (DTOC)

Can the cabinet member provide an analysis of the age/gender/race/disability breakdown of this?

I express concern about the reduction in referrals to Children’s Social Care and reductions in rate of child protection plans

What action is the cabinet member undertaking to address the causes of this?

UPDATE

No response was received before the meeting although one cabinet member (Cllr Fiona Baker - Childrens services portfolio holder) did assure me that she would email a lengthy response. 

You can view the Cabinet meeting here.

Members of the Public Expressing Opinions - Protest or abuse

“... the Tory county council has been fanatical about cuts, privatisation & outsourcing for some years”

This is Tony Banks. As a member of the public he registered to speak at the Budget setting Council meeting on Thursday 21st February. He had to do this two days in advance and attend the Council meeting until he was called. You can see the meeting here.  Tony can been seen making his statement here. 

At 10.50 of the first film, the Council chairman specifically states that that he wants "people to be able to make their points freely without any disruption from anyone else". But in spite of the Chairman’s request, Tony was interrupted by the Tory Leader of the Council, Cllr Matt Golby, who objected to him using the words "Zealot" and "Fantasist".  

After the meeting, Tony said “I used the word zealots for the reason that the Tory county council has been fanatical about cuts, privatisation & outsourcing for some years. Zealots are fanatical & the Tories were fanatical .They would not listen, to opponents or unions. When Osborne/Cameron announced Austerity, not only did they jump but they asked -how high can we jump? They tore up national union agreements despite warnings that a staff retention crisis would occur as a result.”

Since I started a Twitter poll on the merits or otherwise of Cllr Golby's actions, a number of Conservative Councillors have cited Tony's actions as "disruptive" and "abuse".

Here are some of the responses from other members of the public:

"Like it or not.. whatever words he uses.. he’s right on the nail.. and that’s why they’re angry.."

                                                                                                                      @RikPerry5311

"lt beats me why the sudden sensitivity. The word zealot as verbal abuse when local Tories support policies, cuts and Universal Credit while people are literally starving, homeless and being driven to suicide? If that isn't the fanaticism of zealots I don't know what is. "

                                                                                                                    @Kazimierz66

As I understand the comments were not aimed at individuals. If he had said "this government" instead of "Tory" it would have meant exactly the same, but you absolutely could not be accusing him of abuse.  Check yourselves on the words you use against those that disagree with you.

                                                                                                                   @Impossible_elf

If I were to respond to your unpleasant and unfounded accusations, de facto attack lines for austerity apologists, I would no doubt be accused of abusive and bullying behaviour - a fall-back argument also used ad nauseam

                                                                                                                  @rustywheels

Other members of public have reminded me of the recent standards spat between now ex-councillor Heather Smith, Councillors Robin Brown and Jason Smithers. Cllr Smithers used such choice phrases as 

“This sucks Cllr Robin Brown you have been asleep at the controls. Your (sic) about as much use as a condom with a hole in it. #failedleadership” 

and 

“@LeaderNCC cllr Smith why don’t you just throw in the towel just go before you cause anymore damage to the reputation of the council. You and some members of your cabinet have failed. I hope that the SFO is brought in to investigate your conduct. #failedleadership”. 

The report that the Council considered on this can be viewed here.

Cllr Jason Smithers repeatedly "denied that the comments made were offensive" as can be seen in the standards report here.

As a result of the spat, all County Councillors have been required to attend refresher training on the "Code of Conduct" for councillors. At the training it was emphasised that the conduct of councillors "are expected to maintain higher level of conduct and responsibility than private citizens". 

However, it seems that the bar for members of the public is set at a much higher level than that some Tory Councillors set for themselves. 

You maybe asking yourself why do I think this is important? Well, there have been several measures that have been taken that have had the effect of discouraging the public from commenting on business. These have included the cessation (now reinstated) of the live streaming of Council meeting and the placing of members of the public outside of the Council chamber to view the live stream. 

The participation of the public in Council meetings adds a fresh perspective to decision making and statements like Tony's are the embodiment of practicing Article 10 of the Human Rights Act, 

"Everyone has the right to freedom of expression. This right shall include freedom to hold opinions and to receive and impart information and ideas without interference by public authority and regardless of frontiers."

I have written before on the poor record of Northamptonshire County Council in promoting involvement in the budget consultation, only setting one meeting open to the public on the budget as an afterthought when Labour Councillors drew this to the administration's attention.

If you are on twitter and would like to vote in my Twitter poll you can find it here

Anything Changed Yet? - Who Cares About The Public Voice?

A year ago, Max Caller, an Inspector from the government, was in Northamptonshire County Council examining current and historical documents concerning the council and talking to officers, councillors and other stakeholders. The inspection report he eventually published had a headline stating Northamptonshire Council Council had failed and the most quoted comment was that local government was about “doing the boring well”.

Revisiting it, it’s interesting to examine whether we’re making progress. The Caller report also stated that “The council’s approach comes across as sloppy, lacking in rigour and without challenge“. There was particular concern about the secrecy of the administration and the lack of information given to councillors event when they asked for it. Genuinely, the pace of change has meant that it’s really hard to keep up for those in the organisation, let alone the public.

It’s being eight years since Northamptonshire County Council has held a meeting to genuinely ask the public what they think of the budget proposals affecting their local services and spending their council tax money. After only fourteen people attended a meeting in Kettering, the then Tory leadership axed consultation as a waste of money.

In the 2013/14 budget consultation there were public sessions in advance of budget scrutiny workshops for Councillors on the key thematic areas of the budget. These continued in subsequent years but not this year. For the first time, there is no opportunity for the public to make their voice heard about the council’s budget plans.

There are other ways local people can express their views of course, but the process of having budget consultation meetings is about inclusion, engagement and above all transparency. The failure of Northamptonshire County Council to have any consultation events with the public is evidence that the “carry on regardless” attitude is still present with council tax payers treated as non-stakeholders event though they are paying for the services. Also, as consumers of those services, they are in a key position to challenge in a way that provides insight into how services might be more effectively run. There are positive reasons why challenge provides better services, better decision making and more valued services.

However, above all, the public should have a right to comment about local services as it is morally the correct thing to do. This has been raised by the Labour group with senior officers. When commissioners came to discuss the budget with the Labour group I questioned whether there would be consultation meetings and was assured that, consultation meetings would take place. Labour’s Cllr Mick Scrimshaw as Chair of the new over-arching Overview and Scrutiny Committee has sought that there is at least one meeting that the public will be allowed to address on 23^rd January. This meeting will take place at the end of the scrutiny process, where the committees response will be finalised, and there will be a recap on the individual meetings councillors will have had. Although Labour are not in control of the Council they have recognised and acted on this glaring omission. It’s unsurprising that the Tory administration don’t see the need for people to have their say. Acting, as usual, for the few not the many.

Number 19 bus returns on 20th January 2019

After a massive campaign by the Chronicle and Echo, the number 19 bus will be re-instated with a half hourly service. The challenge now is to ensure that it is sustainable and the best way of doing this is to make sure it is used. A key group of people who can make this a success are older people with bus passes. Even though the trip doesn't cost the individual anything, the bus provider gets paid by the County Council for each journey undertaken.

You can see the new timetable here.

Make the workers pay

It’s all about managing resources. Something that Northamptonshire County Council have been struggling with for quite some time. Decisions about the problems it has faced have been impeded by the lack of transparency and the failure to involve both councillors and the public in understanding issues and proposed solutions. I have written more about this here. One of NCC’s many areas of mismanagement concerns decisions about the council workforce. Over the last few weeks it has emerged that 2015 seems to have been a critical year for Northamptonshire County Council. The Chief Finance Officer had written to the Council's political leadership stating an intention of issuing a section 114 notice effectively declaring the Council bankrupt. 

In 2015, with the whole country in the midst of the fifth year of austerity, within the Northamptonshire bubble the section 114 was never implemented. This was despite all of the then cabinet, including the current leader of the authority, Cllr Matt Golby, being aware of the statutory duty of the Chief Finance Officer to invoke it. Whilst the council didn’t go bankrupt, the butterfly-effect of its decisions fell heavy on the rest of Council resources. As a consequence, cuts to budgets had a dramatic impact on users of the county council’s services. It had an even starker impact on staff working for the county council. It was at this time that deliberate decisions were taken to make all staff pay for the privilege of working for the authority. The county council needed the dosh but, with an election looming, was unwilling to increase council tax and cut services dramatically.  So the staff had to make the sacrifice which included being taken out of nationally negotiated pay terms and conditions. This meant that if they could switch job to one in Bedford, Leicester, Rugby or Market Harborough they instantly had a better deal than any on offer in Northampton. Other changes included not paying staff for the first day they were off sick which had a bigger impact on part-time staff than anyone else. The way this was implemented was also brutal, with staff being effectively sacked and re hired on the new terms and conditions. 

The effects of this on the council’s ability to undertake its responsibilities to look after vulnerable people cannot be overstated. It is now extremely difficult to recruit for essential roles, such as social workers and some of the strategies designed to convert agency workers to being on the council’s books have massively backfired. Half of the social workers recruited by Northants County Council last year have already left. So, massive expenditure by NCC has failed to deliver the kind of services vulnerable local people deserve and have paid Council taxes for. The concept of conservative financial competence is dead in the water in Northamptonshire. 

A better  way of delivering essential public services is possible but honesty in local government governance is required for this to happen. It is possible to have properly funded and responsibly managed  local government but this needs to start with transparency about how the council will balance its books and openness about where any axe to services will fall. Only by doing this can we understand the funding gap from central government. Over a month after the second section 114 notice was published we’re still no clearer about this.

Openess and Transparency - Doing Democracy Well

It seems like Northamptonshire County Council has been facing stick forever. After the recent Judicial review victory by Library campaigners, it’s worth stating that the stick seems well justified. Most criticisms have focussed on the the deterioration in services but there have also been failures in the organisational culture, as anyone whose had any kind of engagement with the Council may have noticed. As an opposition councillor it is extremely hard to influence budget decisions and this is why my immediate focus will be on the organisational culture.

Here’s some statements made by others about this.

In the Local Government Authority (LGA) Peer Review;

“Decisions taken by the Cabinet need greater transparency. Council members and scrutiny chairs need access to more information. There was a desire expressed from some cabinet members for greater discussion and challenge across portfolios. However, where challenge has been provided, for example from the Audit Committee, that has not been welcomed.”

(Financial Peer Review - Northamptonshire County Council, Dates: 12th – 14th September 2017, Feedback Report)

Max Caller (the Government appointed Commissioner) in his report stated,

“the approach adopted made it very difficult for any backbench councillor to establish what was going on and the absence of effective controls made the job of budget management an exercise”. (2.12)

“Even if there was a concern about the publishing of confidential information, most authorities have protocols and practices which make it possible for key information to be shared and protect the authority. To refuse it outright is just wrong.” (3.82)

“challenge and criticism was to be discouraged as senior members and officers knew best.”

“The council did not respond well, or in many cases even react, to external and internal criticism. Individual councillors appear to have been denied answers to questions that were entirely legitimate to ask and scrutiny arrangements were constrained by what was felt the executive would allow. When external agencies reported adverse findings these were not reported with an analysis of the issues and either a justification or an action led response to a relevant decision taking body. At its most extreme, the two KPMG ISA 260 reports, stating an adverse opinion on Value For Money matters were just reported to the Audit Committee without comment and the unprecedented KPMG Advisory Notice issued under the 2014 Act was reported to full council without any officer covering report giving advice on what the response was recommended to be.”

Since my first Council meeting, on 1^st August, I’ve noticed a distinct shift in dealing with the public in County Council meetings. I’ve regularly attended Council meetings, as a member of the public, often registering to speak. Even when not registered to speak, as a member of the public I was able to sit in the public gallery and watch proceedings. But, since 1^st August, members of the public who haven’t registered to speak at least two days before the Council meeting, are ushered into a side room where they can only view one camera angle from the Council chamber and thus unable to see all the speakers. This additional resource comes without council papers (which were previously available) but with a security guard. 

The creation of this distance from the public shows the Council failing in it’s requirement for transparency at the very time that it is most needed. Without transparency, there is less likely to be confidence in the decisions taken by the administration. It also indicates the Council’s wish for distance between decision making and the community. The Chair of the Council has on at least two occasions stated that members of the public who heckle in public would not be given the right to speak at Council again.

At a time when communities, families and staff are promised swingeing cuts and massive job losses, the Council’s Chairman requires decorum to continue above all else. This approach denies the reality of the pain being felt in the County. It denies the passion that local people have about their public services and denies the life and death nature of some of the decisions being taken in the Council. Hearing the views of members of the public who often give a context to how decisions made or about to be made would impact on their communities, is an important element in local democracy. But we are now seeing an erosion to these rights. The three minute limit is often reduced to two, which makes it more difficult to make a point.

Prior to February of this year Council meetings were webcast, so anyone across the world could see what was happening and the decisions being taken. But the contract was allowed to run out and because most meetings happen during the day it’s now impossible for the majority of the public to view what goes on. More evidence that the Council wants decisions taken out of sight and out of mind of the public.

So, whilst the people of Northampton can still express their views directly to the Council it is no longer possible to sit in the public gallery unless you have registered to speak (remember to register two days in advance).  And for those who choose to speak they would like you be polite, stick to your two minutes and go away and don’t expect anyone not able to be present to hear what you have to say.  Yet another example of the dysfunctional organisational culture at the heart of this Conservative administration.

County Council Cuts

Northampton communities are getting to grips with the shock and awe cost saving ideas from Northamptonshire County Council. After twelve years of Conservative control and over seven years of Tory and Lib Dem government austerity, council services that have survived are already cut to the bone.

There is understandable outrage about the effect these new proposals will have on library services but other proposed cuts will also have a sizeable impact on local communities.

One of the cuts that hasn't had a lot of exposure, is the proposed 42% reduction to the Trading Standards budget. Trading Standards staff play a vital role in protecting the public and their work covers a wide area:

• Fraud (such things as rogue trading)
• Age-restricted sales
• Animal Health and Welfare
• Consumer &  Business Advice
• Environmental Controls
• Consumer Product Safety
• Fair Trading (including weights and measures, descriptions, pricing, consumer credit, etc.)
• Food, Health and Agricultural Standards
• Licensing and Registration

Their recent successes in Northamptonshire include:

• getting compensation for a bride who had her wedding day ruined by a catering firm that included nuts in her wedding cake, despite her telling them that she had a nut allergy. You can read more here. 

• Prosecuting shopkeepers who sold cigarettes to underage children. You can read more here. 

• Taking dangerous skin creams off the shelves of shops. You can read more here. 

• Taking a trader to court who sold an un-roadworthy and dangerous car to a local teenager. They also supported the young person taking the trader to court to get their money back. You can read more here.

The details about the cuts are in the Equality Impact Assessment (EqIA) here. 

The EqIA gives a lot of detail about how older people and people with disabilities will be particularly adversely affected. This is a service which has protecting the public at it's heart. After the Grenfell tragedy, the mood of local people is to be more and more critical of the decades of deregulation and cost cutting that can link back to hazards, risks and health concerns. In addition to this, cost cutting will lead to an increase in sales of illegal tobacco and product testing is likely to reduce by over 50%. 

Northamptonshire’s investment in the skills and equipment to provide a local product testing service generated income to a cash-strapped council. It now seems that investment will be collateral damage in the cuts to a service which is vital to the well-being of Northamptonshire people.

So what can be done?

Please sign my petition against all Council budget cuts here.

Please support my campaign to become the prospective parliamentary Labour candidate for Northampton North. If you are a member of the Labour Party, let me know that you are supporting my campaign. If you are not a member of the Labour Party, join us here.

 Show original message

More Money on Services Needed by People in Northampton

Nick Spoors of the Chronicle and Echo has set up a petition calling on the government for a fairer allocation scheme to better reflect today’s population growth and levels of deprivation in Northamptonshire. You can see it here.

He highlights Surrey as better funded.  You may remember they benefitted from a sweetheart deal from the government to persuade their Tory controlled County Council not to hold a referendum to increase Council Tax.  Jeremy Corbyn confronted Prime Minister Theresa May in February with leaked text messages involving the leader of Surrey County Council that appeared to show negotiations over a deal. Read more about it here.

Northamptonshire has been underfunded according to a number of commentators for decades, so it’s interesting to explore why so many Tory council leaders and Tory MP’s are suddenly drawing attention to it now. Whilst in control the Conservative administration in the County and the Borough has successively failed to put up Council tax to pay for services, essentially awarding themselves less and less income to manage delivering essential public services. Despite Labour calls to press government for more cash for our increasing needs and increasing population, Tory Councillors have failed to act over a number of years. Instead they have sought miraculous panacea-like solutions that they have invested hand over fist into. One of the latest of these was an online portal on which they spent £1 million pounds but which has just been abandoned after just 5 years. 

The Tory County Council administration has failed to increase income either by raising Council Tax or asking Government for a better settlement, nor has it managed finances well. The investment of £54 million on new offices was something that even Tory controlled Daventry District Council pleaded with the county not to go ahead with. The building remains 30% empty. All of this while axing 30% of the council's spending on vital services.

For a number of years I have attended and spoken at County Council budget- setting meetings arguing about the human cost of cuts. Austerity, from the coalition government’s time to the present day, has been critiqued as a damaging response to our economic situation by the majority of academics in the field. The fact that it has no economic justification exposes its true purpose; it is an ideological attack on working people. 

Last month, a number of senior Tory politicians sought to change tack and, after all these years, requested more from government. Local MP Michael Ellis, as of 14th September, is yet to state his position.

Is Northamptonshire underfunded? Yes.

Should local people be asking for more investment into the area? Yes, but we want it so that all areas get fair funding with well managed, well funded services so that all those in our community that need support get it. If you want to do something practical towards this, yes sign the petition, but also join those of us in the Labour party campaigning for a better more hopeful tomorrow. For a government which rejects austerity in favour of building public services and funding them in a way that works for all of us.

If you agree with these views, please support my campaign to become the Labour Prospective Parliamentary candidate for Northampton North. Get in touch and let me know that you are supporting me.