Thursday’s meeting of the Council to set the budget for the coming year saw the Independent Alliance present an amendment to the budget which would have meant no increase in the Council Tax for this year. The reduction in costs that it proposed centred around such things as reducing the cost of consultants, removing special responsibility allowances for councillors, cutting back on conferences and stopping first class rail travel. 

Cllr Jane Branley moved the amendment and as usual she was interrupted, belittled, barracked and generally abused. So much so that the paltry three minutes she had to move this important amendment were cut short and she was unable to make all the points necessary. 

Below is the text of the speech that Cllr Jane Branley was not allowed to make; 

“Members and officers do not need to be reminded that this current government bears the responsibility of the current financial crisis that this country now faces and the subsequent squeeze on public spending. This will result in the loss of jobs and reduction in services. What we have seen to date from other political parties does not encourage confidence in their ability to have either predicted the financial crash or to come up with solutions to contend with it. 

What this means to the people of South Tyneside is the reduction in services delivered to them and the reduction in the number of people employed by the Council to deliver those services. Let us not be under any illusion that this budget does mean a reduction in services. To name but a few;

reduction in waste & street cleansing service
withdrawal of lunch time school crossing patrols
reduction in the home care service
reduction in green waste collection
closure of the women’s gym at Temple Park 

Then there are the reductions which come under the disguise of reviews or rationalisation or reconfiguration; 

libraries
community centres
youth services
leisure centres
grounds maintenance
adult social care  

What ever you call it – reduction, review, rationalisation, reconfiguration, restructuring, utilisation or plain cancellation - this all means that what the Council Tax payer has now it will not have in the future and believe me the areas I have quoted are only the tip of the iceberg. 

If that was not bad enough the Labour Group are also proposing that we should charge people more for some of the services they receive and put council house rents up by 2.9%. Thank you once again Labour Government that bastion of support for its core voters here in South Tyneside. 

Then on top of all this we have the added indignity and burden on the Council Tax payer of an increase in the tax itself. We think this is a step too far and our proposals, while acknowledging we are all going to get less in the form of services no matter what happens, is an attempt to stop further financial pressures being put upon the people of the borough. 

Let’s look to begin with special responsibility allowances. What the tax payer of this borough does not realise is that the £310,000 this costs is collected by 37 members of this Council who on top of their £7,226 basic allowance are bagging anything from £26,496 (Cllr Iain Malcolm, leader of the Council) to £2,409 (vice-chair of the Human Resources committee a ‘Real’ Independent).

Then of course their are the cabinet members who mange to snaffle a cool £9,635 for their onerous duties. Well none of them can be that onerous can they as they can be done whilst carrying out a full time job as something as lofty as a managing director. I suggest that the forgoing of these allowances will show the people of South Tyneside that their representatives are prepared to share the pain of reduced services and increased costs by forgoing these allowances and settling for a mere £7,226 - more than the old age pension. 

Another hefty cost to the tax payer is that of consultants’ fees. We are proposing a cut of £664,000. It is our opinion that we are often being asked to pay twice for the expertise of professionals. We have highly paid senior officers in this authority, appointed because they are experts in their field yet we constantly have to seek out others to advise us on what to do. Are our officers incapable of giving us this advice or are we simply seeking to avoid the necessity of making hard decisions in house. Well we can soon find out by removing the spend upon external consultants. 

This is a genuine attempt to reduce some of the pain the people of South Tyneside will feel when they experience the loss of services, the reduction of staff who are likely to be residents of this borough, the increase in charges all on top of the other financial pressures experienced in this time of recession. The weekly increases may only range from 45 pence to 135 pence per week, that is easily met if you have an income of at least £7,226 on top of any earned income, pension or benefit most councillors in this chamber have, but for many of our residents it is 45 to 135 pence too far. 

I call upon members to accept this amendment and carry the pain of the necessity to cut costs themselves rather than inflict this pain upon the people of South Tyneside.” 

Cllr Iain Malcolm, the Labour leader of the council then stood up and in his usual patronising and arrogant style declared the amendment to be ‘illegal’. Bearing in mind that the Independent Alliance had worked with officers of the Council to present this amendment and had checked every proposal out both financially and legally this was a ludicrous statement. When the solicitor to the council was asked to make a ruling as to whether it was ‘illegal’ or not he would only say that it could be discussed as an amendment! 

Cllr Iain Malcolm had deliberately used this tactic as an attempt to besmirch once again the validity of what the Independent Alliance was trying to do. We await with interest the reporting of this in the Shields Gazette we are confident that Cllr Iain Malcolm will be given his now customary full page to peddle his spin – unedited of course.

It came as no surprise that the other ‘opposition’ members on the Council (Conservative, Liberal Democrats, Progressives and other Independents) did not support the amendment. Hardly surprising when many of them are the benficaries of Cllr Iain Malcolm’s genoristy when it comes to handing out special responsibility allowances. It would have been a bit like turkey’s voting for Christmas! 

Our work in throughout the borough – when we talk directly to the people - clearly indicates that one of your priorities is to reduce the council tax burden and although Thursday’s amendment was lost, the Independent Alliance will continue to work hard to ensure that the council tax payer’s perspective is always presented in the council chamber.

Share