Single Integrated Plan – Is It ‘Incredibly Readable’ ?
-
Posts
-
We were asked at the start of this thread, what we thought of the Single Integrated Plan. I’m sure the opinion & evidence gathered shows that the Plan does NOT address community needs as such a Plan should.
It should set out what the vision & desire of the community is, and then the INTEGRATED services that will be provided by all the public services collectively, the process led by the Council as the democratically elected body. The services need to particularly address the shortfalls or our particular community issues, and CHAMPION what is best for our communities.
Specific problems have been raised, that this Plan should address. We are asked to comment on spending & budget options. BUT what is being done with a Single Integrated Plan to combine where possible the resource of the public services to find savings? This is an important part of the budgeting process. What is our community vision for the education and future of our children for the next 20yrs – those who are entering education at 7 and 11 yrs of age and are starting to form opinions about their future. How are we caring for those who paid taxes for us all for the last 50 yrs. How are be giving the vulnerable in society our best?
Do we have road and rail links and a state of mind that allow us to be competitive in industry. Can any of our community go to our libraries and public places and feel inspired and safe?
The DEVOLUTION commission debate in Wales highlights that things need to be joined up better across Wales governance, not just locally.
But while that debate is going on, WREXHAM needs a proper SINGLE INTEGRATED PLAN that properly reflects its whole budget and responsibilities.
These are the objectives set out in the Single Integrated Plan:
@wxm 4673 wrote:
The priorities ask for (a) independent, healthy & active place to live, (b) strong, resilient & responsible economy, and (c) place that is safe, and everyone feels included.
As the Council have published one, when will we get a “fit for purpose” and realistic plan, that meets community needs, and means that the money that is spent every day on public services, is spent better and more effectively.
The SIP appears to be a plan for the moulding of the community to ensure the council’s ongoing monolithic existence, rather than an identification of the needs of the community.
TL;DR – It’s for the council, not the people it serves.
This thread had some good and very valid debate and was last contributed to in June. It was triggered by the need for a single plan, and other critical subjects have been under debate including the County budget, and priorities identified by the community eg job opportunities and good levels of earnings.
What we do now, will be the future, such as the building of Eagles Meadow and the retail situation we have today. The prison will define Wrexham, and if we have a plan for it to be a part of the economy it will form a part of who we are, if we do not, it will become the headline purpose of the town for the future. The industry that we attract now will define the earnings in 15 years time.
While we have seen bad and good for the economic outlook of Wrexham over the last year, we desperately need one plan that deals with community well-being (libraries, community centres, education, care), the economy, interface with health & hospitals, quality recreation time, the future.
It still appears that the outline plan stands and the delivery plan doesn’t. An outline plan in business will write down things like ‘optimising profitability’, gaining market share’, and so on. Usually, the outline plan is so obvious that it is a waste of time even stating it. It is true that there may be debate over the broad aims of a community and I’m sure that Wrexham is no different. Despite this, it is usually the case that communities can forge a consensus around certain ideas (Good Schools, Good Hospitals, Good planning, Good policing, etc). The difficult part is usually achieving the aims, however variable, and I suspect that Wrexham has a real problem on its hands here.
It might be helpful if the broad basis of a SIP was laid out with the relevant categories identified and the current state of play brought up to date.
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
