Poole council leader vows: I won't resign (From Bournemouth Echo)
When news happens text pix and video to 80360. Start your message with BE then leave a space.
Poole council leader vows: I won't resign
8:18am Wednesday 27th February 2013 in News By Diana Henderson
Poole residents will not be facing a council tax rise this year after Liberal Democrats and Poole People councillors combined to outvote the Conservatives.
They crushed the administration’s proposal for a 1.95 per cent council tax increase and the only rise residents will face is the fire and police precept - £8.51 a year on a Band D property.
In a highly charged meeting of Borough of Poole last night, in which all 42 councillors took their seats, council leader Cllr Elaine Atkinson warned of an “abyss” to be faced in future years, but pledged to carry on after losing by two votes.
“I’m leader of this council and I propose to stay,” she said. “I still haven’t worked out how we are going to fill that £14-16million gap. I am sure we will all work together to find a way to fill it.”
Despite an impassioned plea for councillors to be “leaders” and dire warnings that the council could face bankruptcy by 2015/16, her amendment to spend £500,000 of specific earmarked reserve to invest in growth, provided it was match funded, was voted down.
Cllr Phil Eades, Liberal Democrat said this was an 11th hour proposal which they had no chance to evaluate. “The funding is from a specific reserve of just over £1m whose express purpose is to support the medium term financial plan. This doesn’t support it in any way,” he said.
Lib Dem financial spokesman, Cllr David Brown put forward an alternative budget for a zero tax rise, with savings in senior management and cabinet member’s allowances and the £1m earmarked reserve used across three years.
Cllr Mark Howell, leader of Poole People, said there were more efficiencies and savings that could be made along with a radical overhaul of management. “We have a responsibility to taxpayers in Poole to make these changes before asking them to pay more council tax,” he said.
But chief executive John McBride warned: “The focus is on a short term discussion about balancing next year’s budget. Nobody has commented on the £13m we have to find in the following two years.”
Comments(52)
Carolyn43
says...
8:40am Wed 27 Feb 13
Time_Traveller
says...
8:43am Wed 27 Feb 13
Celestine71
says...
8:51am Wed 27 Feb 13
Time_Traveller
says...
8:58am Wed 27 Feb 13
Celestine71 wrote:The loss of vote doesn't necessarily mean we will lose services - if the Council decided to use up some of their multi-million pound pot of money stashed away, a loss of services *could* be avoided.
And so, when services are continued to be cut because there is no money, in fact less, who will the residents of the Borough be blaming then?? People get real! Managers make the decisions and they sure as hell aren't going to do themselves out of jobs are they, despite massive evidence of the Borough being top heavy - especially in Social Sevices. So we either pay more, or lose Services. This vote means a loss of Services. Unless someone does some serious managerial clean up work and that just ain't gunna happen!
After all, what are they stashing it away for exactly? If they hadn't noticed it is a rainy day NOW and they need to cut their coat according to their cloth by trimming down so many executive jobs from the top and so many councillors. Why does each Ward need TWO?
They will of course cut services and blame each other for not agreeing to the increase, but it is high time they realised that they cannot keep expecting their electorate to keep stumping up money they simply don't have.
The only cuts needed are in the number of pointless and faceless job positions within the Old Boy Network that *is* Poole Borough Council .....
Carolyn43
says...
9:17am Wed 27 Feb 13
.......
Many wards have three councillors.
Meerkat22
says...
9:22am Wed 27 Feb 13
Here is an idea, get rid of some of the fat cat wages earned by most management in the council!! Stop spending money in areas that don't need it!!
Branksome Boy
says...
9:34am Wed 27 Feb 13
sea poole
says...
9:44am Wed 27 Feb 13
0,000 in the following two years? Remind me- how much have we in the reserves 'coffers?' Oh, yes, £21,000,000 and it would still leave us with £7m+ in reserves...and I'm sure that our Chancellor will have our economy booming by then. Problem solved...
BIGTONE
says...
10:08am Wed 27 Feb 13
She wants to cream the taxpayer for years to come......
The Cerne Giant
says...
10:09am Wed 27 Feb 13
It does strike me that their are an abundance of Echo readers who would make perfect councillors . . . . .
justme20092009
says...
10:25am Wed 27 Feb 13
Baywolf
says...
10:33am Wed 27 Feb 13
justme20092009
says...
10:47am Wed 27 Feb 13
live-and-let-live
says...
10:48am Wed 27 Feb 13
jobsworthwatch wrote:no it isnt a vote of no confidence.
This is the equivalent of a vote of 'no confidence. Call an election immediately!
no, we dont want an election.
s-pb2
says...
10:50am Wed 27 Feb 13
Molecatcher
says...
11:21am Wed 27 Feb 13
Cllr Atkinson, just do the decent thing and resign. What is it about you politicians?...
Pah! Yes, I am sure they will find more imaginative ways of getting your hard-earned... Watch out folks...
speedy231278
says...
11:29am Wed 27 Feb 13
BmthNewshound
says...
11:47am Wed 27 Feb 13
.
Now that money is tight the chickens are coming home to roost and the failings of councils to manage themselves in a proper manner are being laid bare.
.
I think that Elaine Atkinsons proposal for a modest increase increase was the right thing to do. Even with this below inflation increase significant savings would still have to be made. If you factor in inflation freezing council tax actually mean reducing it in real terms which can only mean bigger increases in the future. Council reserves and reducing headcount will help in the short term. By refusing to face up to the financial realities councillors are only creating problems for future years.
s-pb2
says...
11:52am Wed 27 Feb 13
BmthNewshound wrote:The irony is amongst all of this is that the social care departments are generally understaffed, with workers having ridiculously high and ever increasing workloads. I agree that Cllr Atkinson's proposal was the right one.
The real problem is that our council chambers of full of councillors who lack the skills and experience to perform the jobs they are elected to do. Over the years they have sat back allowing councils to increase headcount to mask incompetent management. They have allowed the creation of "non-jobs" to help council officers build their own little empires. For years councils have operated behind a curtain of secrecy. Restructuring the council to make it more efficient and reducing headcount may be the right thing to do, but it is expensive to implement
.
Now that money is tight the chickens are coming home to roost and the failings of councils to manage themselves in a proper manner are being laid bare.
.
I think that Elaine Atkinsons proposal for a modest increase increase was the right thing to do. Even with this below inflation increase significant savings would still have to be made. If you factor in inflation freezing council tax actually mean reducing it in real terms which can only mean bigger increases in the future. Council reserves and reducing headcount will help in the short term. By refusing to face up to the financial realities councillors are only creating problems for future years.
rayc
says...
11:55am Wed 27 Feb 13
muscliffman
says...
11:59am Wed 27 Feb 13
Firstly with their current reserves that seems to be an impossible position.
Secondly, what if they did? Bankruptcy for an individual or Corporate body wipes the slate clean. Debts are written off, end of. Pick yourself up, or form a new Company providing you have not broken the rules, and start afresh.
Translated into a Council legal entity situation this would surely also clear all employment contracts/obligation
s and crucially the massive pensions burden and allow for a fresh and efficient new start. All the fat-cats out in one easy go.
Maybe the way to go, bankrupt Poole, Bournemouth and Christchurch Councils and start again with a new financially clean 'City' authority. Bet they will like that idea in their civic ivory towers!!
harrythered
says...
12:00pm Wed 27 Feb 13
BmthNewshound wrote:What a contradiction. You say that there are non jobs, little empires and increased headcount then you say the budget should go up. Why? Get to grips with and get rid of the non jobs and little empires - JUST DO IT NOW! Oh and merge Bournemouth Poole and Christchurch Councils - that should save a few more million.
The real problem is that our council chambers of full of councillors who lack the skills and experience to perform the jobs they are elected to do. Over the years they have sat back allowing councils to increase headcount to mask incompetent management. They have allowed the creation of "non-jobs" to help council officers build their own little empires. For years councils have operated behind a curtain of secrecy. Restructuring the council to make it more efficient and reducing headcount may be the right thing to do, but it is expensive to implement
.
Now that money is tight the chickens are coming home to roost and the failings of councils to manage themselves in a proper manner are being laid bare.
.
I think that Elaine Atkinsons proposal for a modest increase increase was the right thing to do. Even with this below inflation increase significant savings would still have to be made. If you factor in inflation freezing council tax actually mean reducing it in real terms which can only mean bigger increases in the future. Council reserves and reducing headcount will help in the short term. By refusing to face up to the financial realities councillors are only creating problems for future years.
Well done to all the Councillors who voted against the increase.
Hessenford
says...
12:11pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Gordon Cann
says...
12:15pm Wed 27 Feb 13
dorsetred
says...
12:17pm Wed 27 Feb 13
boblister
says...
12:20pm Wed 27 Feb 13
I could provide £150,000 extra per year by adding 100 more Beach Huts and £60,000 instantly by converting the poor performing income Short Term Rental Huts to Annual rental.
Short term rental could be serviced from the Annual Tenants.
Ebb Tide
says...
12:56pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Surely not ! We must see what happens next and then next, to check that our elected representatives are really starting to 'control' (not manage !) the vast machine that is intended to serve us all.
Everybody in public service, wants to know that their efforts are meaningful and valuable to society and not just part of a misguided 'ego trip' being taken by a few.
joncon
says...
1:01pm Wed 27 Feb 13
chiefwolf2
says...
1:14pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Ebb Tide
says...
1:16pm Wed 27 Feb 13
joncon wrote:Some of them find it quite illuminating and sets the letters they do receive in context !!
Stop moaning and write to your councillors about it. Posting comments here will have no effect
Branksome Boy
says...
1:47pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Baysider
says...
2:05pm Wed 27 Feb 13
One thing they have done really well is pushing the responsibility for cuts to our public services onto local authorities and then standing back with thier arms folded saying it's nothing to do with them and there's plenty of mugs on hee today who have fallen for it yet again.
As for all this nonsense about 'top heavy' overstaffing, get real, this result means further cuts to YOUR services which WILL effect you or yours sooner rather than later.
sea poole
says...
2:13pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Dr Strangelove
says...
2:26pm Wed 27 Feb 13
sea poole wrote:Not much chance of a booming economy for years osbournes policies have made things worce than they would have been if Alastair darling had been chancellor.
Have to find £13,000,000-£14,00
0,000 in the following two years? Remind me- how much have we in the reserves 'coffers?' Oh, yes, £21,000,000 and it would still leave us with £7m+ in reserves...and I'm sure that our Chancellor will have our economy booming by then. Problem solved...
skydriver
says...
2:28pm Wed 27 Feb 13
MJD
says...
2:32pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Good to see the Poole Peoples party and Liberals working together.
Idea5any1?
says...
2:52pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Borough of Poole might be having problems this week but it seems they are not the only ones, Dorset County Council was taken to task at the weekend about the waste of public money spent lighting the car park at Queen Elizabeth's School Wimborne, (see Saturday's echo)
BmthNewshound
says...
2:57pm Wed 27 Feb 13
harrythered wrote:A zero or below inflation increase means that in real terms the value of the council tax collected is going down. Reducing headcount is the right thing to do but that costs money - redundancies don't come cheap and the public sector redundancy payments are generally more generous than the minimum allowed under employment legislation. The councils will have agreements with unions which will mean redundancies will be a long drawn out process which means they just can't do it now.
BmthNewshound wrote:What a contradiction. You say that there are non jobs, little empires and increased headcount then you say the budget should go up. Why? Get to grips with and get rid of the non jobs and little empires - JUST DO IT NOW! Oh and merge Bournemouth Poole and Christchurch Councils - that should save a few more million.
The real problem is that our council chambers of full of councillors who lack the skills and experience to perform the jobs they are elected to do. Over the years they have sat back allowing councils to increase headcount to mask incompetent management. They have allowed the creation of "non-jobs" to help council officers build their own little empires. For years councils have operated behind a curtain of secrecy. Restructuring the council to make it more efficient and reducing headcount may be the right thing to do, but it is expensive to implement
.
Now that money is tight the chickens are coming home to roost and the failings of councils to manage themselves in a proper manner are being laid bare.
.
I think that Elaine Atkinsons proposal for a modest increase increase was the right thing to do. Even with this below inflation increase significant savings would still have to be made. If you factor in inflation freezing council tax actually mean reducing it in real terms which can only mean bigger increases in the future. Council reserves and reducing headcount will help in the short term. By refusing to face up to the financial realities councillors are only creating problems for future years.
Well done to all the Councillors who voted against the increase.
.
On the merger of Bournemouth, Poole and Christchurch - I'm all for the merger of Bournemouth and Poole, Christchurch is slowing merging with East Dorset so should be left to get on with it. If Bournemouth & Poole merged it would save £millions but there are too many councillors with their noses in the trough for that to happen.
BmthNewshound
says...
3:01pm Wed 27 Feb 13
s-pb2 wrote:The problem is that the services looking after the most vulnerable in our society are not "sexy" and have become cinderela services compared to the ugly sister vanity projects.
BmthNewshound wrote:The irony is amongst all of this is that the social care departments are generally understaffed, with workers having ridiculously high and ever increasing workloads. I agree that Cllr Atkinson's proposal was the right one.
The real problem is that our council chambers of full of councillors who lack the skills and experience to perform the jobs they are elected to do. Over the years they have sat back allowing councils to increase headcount to mask incompetent management. They have allowed the creation of "non-jobs" to help council officers build their own little empires. For years councils have operated behind a curtain of secrecy. Restructuring the council to make it more efficient and reducing headcount may be the right thing to do, but it is expensive to implement
.
Now that money is tight the chickens are coming home to roost and the failings of councils to manage themselves in a proper manner are being laid bare.
.
I think that Elaine Atkinsons proposal for a modest increase increase was the right thing to do. Even with this below inflation increase significant savings would still have to be made. If you factor in inflation freezing council tax actually mean reducing it in real terms which can only mean bigger increases in the future. Council reserves and reducing headcount will help in the short term. By refusing to face up to the financial realities councillors are only creating problems for future years.
.
Councillors are more interested in bolstering their own ego's than concentrating on providing core council services.
apm1954
says...
3:10pm Wed 27 Feb 13
guisselle
says...
3:14pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Branksome Boy wrote:She seems to be indomitable a bit
Perhaps Councillor Atkinson would like to take a pay cut! No I didn't think so! She is an extremely pompous woman who has no thought for anyone but herself and should never have been given the job in the 1st place. I want to know how much the council reserves are? No one at the top table at the council seem to want to tell us!
scary really!
guisselle
says...
3:22pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Branksome Boy wrote:She seems to be indomitable a bit
Perhaps Councillor Atkinson would like to take a pay cut! No I didn't think so! She is an extremely pompous woman who has no thought for anyone but herself and should never have been given the job in the 1st place. I want to know how much the council reserves are? No one at the top table at the council seem to want to tell us!
scary really!
manyogie
says...
4:24pm Wed 27 Feb 13
harrythered
says...
5:08pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Baysider wrote:So you were quite happy with double inflation rises year after year were you and seeing no improvement in service to go with it. Just a job creation scheme. The sooner they get on with some real cutting the better.
Instead of blaming the council for trying to plug a serious shortfall in it's funding with an increase for the fiorst time in years yet still seriously below inflation why not blame those responsible for the shortfall in the first place i.e. George Osbourne, Eric Pickles, Danny Alexander and the rest of this incompetent bunch of losers currently running the country into the ground?
One thing they have done really well is pushing the responsibility for cuts to our public services onto local authorities and then standing back with thier arms folded saying it's nothing to do with them and there's plenty of mugs on hee today who have fallen for it yet again.
As for all this nonsense about 'top heavy' overstaffing, get real, this result means further cuts to YOUR services which WILL effect you or yours sooner rather than later.
ashleycross
says...
5:39pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Hobad1
says...
6:39pm Wed 27 Feb 13
miniminime
says...
8:56pm Wed 27 Feb 13
Carolyn43 wrote:Probably microchip our wheelie bins and make us pay for how much rubbish they collect !
They'll find other ways of making us pay, of that you can be certain.
s-pb2
says...
10:08pm Wed 27 Feb 13
BmthNewshound wrote:This is twice in a row ive agreed with you, whats the matter with me?
s-pb2 wrote:The problem is that the services looking after the most vulnerable in our society are not "sexy" and have become cinderela services compared to the ugly sister vanity projects.
BmthNewshound wrote:The irony is amongst all of this is that the social care departments are generally understaffed, with workers having ridiculously high and ever increasing workloads. I agree that Cllr Atkinson's proposal was the right one.
The real problem is that our council chambers of full of councillors who lack the skills and experience to perform the jobs they are elected to do. Over the years they have sat back allowing councils to increase headcount to mask incompetent management. They have allowed the creation of "non-jobs" to help council officers build their own little empires. For years councils have operated behind a curtain of secrecy. Restructuring the council to make it more efficient and reducing headcount may be the right thing to do, but it is expensive to implement
.
Now that money is tight the chickens are coming home to roost and the failings of councils to manage themselves in a proper manner are being laid bare.
.
I think that Elaine Atkinsons proposal for a modest increase increase was the right thing to do. Even with this below inflation increase significant savings would still have to be made. If you factor in inflation freezing council tax actually mean reducing it in real terms which can only mean bigger increases in the future. Council reserves and reducing headcount will help in the short term. By refusing to face up to the financial realities councillors are only creating problems for future years.
.
Councillors are more interested in bolstering their own ego's than concentrating on providing core council services.
Seriously though, your point is spot on. Its unlikely that most councillors even understand what social care do, yet social care takes such a huge chunk of the council tax.
awishes
says...
11:03pm Wed 27 Feb 13
trying to recoup some of the money that the Government have taken away from the Borough by reducing central grants during a period of inflation.
I agree that nobody likes to pay extra Council tax if they can help it so understand the motivation behind some of the comments on here but cannot understand the level of vitriol which is depressing. I do know personally some of the evil Poole public sector workers who are of course responsible for the collapse of the world economy. Mind you , if even more of them do get made redundant as advocated by several posters I'm cheered by the prospect of them obtaining alternative employment as teachers of basic spelling and grammar to Echo reading morons.
tbpoole
says...
7:54am Thu 28 Feb 13
Hobad1 wrote:...and the way she looks affects her ability how exactly? Do explain!
Councillor Elaine Atkinson is just the prettiest girl in the whole world.
portia6
says...
2:36am Sat 2 Mar 13
not only in politics but especially the
church.
jobsworthwatch says...
8:23am Wed 27 Feb 13