WCBC Wasting Money

Home Forums Wrexham.com Forums Wrexham Forum WCBC Wasting Money

  • Author
    Posts
  • #66518

    wxm
    Participant

    The Budget publishes the following:

    Our Vision –
    “The Council as a strong community leader”

    Our Purpose –
    “To ensure Wrexham and its people are supported to fulfil their potential and propser”

    These being followed by stated guiding principles and values.

    #66519

    wxm
    Participant

    The budget sets out the following themes in overlapping circles:

    People
    Economy
    Place

    The test surely is does the community have strong leadership (providing a vision for the future, and making the difficult decisions of today), and does it fulfil its purpose of supporting the people of Wrexham to fulfil their potential & prosper.

    Some starting observations:

    – Spend can be reduced modestly (5%), and often those reductions are found in efficiency in process, technological and social improvements, and have little effect on the overall aim. Severe spending reductions in established structures (15%) can have fundamental impacts. Testing each expenditure in Wrexham, what would the impact be on the community and “purpose” if spending was cut 5%, or 15%?

    – The largest budget line is “schools” (£76,730,326). (As an aside observation some schools have repetitively been in special measures). Can the single biggest budget line be spent better or differently?

    – In a total spend of £227m, over half of this is spent on housing, education, and social care. Do these budgets need to be controlled by the Council?

    – Finance, Corporate & Customer Services, and General expenditure amounts to £36,726,547. Is this the cost to run the Council for general purposes? Is this money well spent? Could this expenditure be halved? If education, health and housing is taken from the budget (standard operating practices often managed by trusts elsewhere); it is costing £37m a year to spend £71m?

    #66501

    BenjaminM
    Participant

    Yet another interminable table that people who have that particular bent, are well able to view without incessant reproduction on this forum.
    What amazes me is that although they are promulgated with numerous observations and questions, I find it very difficult to find a post where a workable solution is proffered by the contributor.
    Sometimes! I think that a real life Norris from Coronation St has suddenly appeared on the scene, who loves nothing more than gather info and gossip, then disseminate it to foment dissent, for whatever purpose.
    Another contributor questions why we should be paying an additional 3.5% this next financial year for less services. The answer is simple. Because of the reduced income received from National and Welsh Governments. The contributor also fails to put this figure into the wider context of Wales where Cardiff and Pembroke have announced a 5% increase in their Community Charge, with more likely to follow. Rather than decrying WCBC for a 3.5% increase, they should be applauded for their prudence.

    #66520

    wxm
    Participant

    @benjaminm 11868 wrote:


    What amazes me is that although they are promulgated with numerous observations and questions, I find it very difficult to find a post where a workable solution is proffered by the contributor.

    The Council states the purpose of this process “to ensure Wrexham and it’s people are supported to fulfil their potential and prosper”. The conjoined themes of People, Economy and Place are cited as central to achieve this.

    The four observations and questions seek to find out if more money can be put back into residents pockets (part of the prosperity subject), to challenge the large budget line of schools & education to see if it can be done better to assist people fulfil their potential, and to question does such a large administrative structure (represented here by money) serve the public best, or could it be done better and more fruitfully.

    #66502

    BenjaminM
    Participant

    @wxm 11869 wrote:

    The Council states the purpose of this process “to ensure Wrexham and it’s people are supported to fulfil their potential and prosper”. The conjoined themes of People, Economy and Place are cited as central to achieve this.

    The four observations and questions seek to find out if more money can be put back into residents pockets (part of the prosperity subject), to challenge the large budget line of schools & education to see if it can be done better to assist people fulfil their potential, and to question does such a large administrative structure (represented here by money) serve the public best, or could it be done better and more fruitfully.

    Another selective response that neither addresses the points raised or indeed adds anything further to the debate.
    Incidentally, I was not specifically referring to the four observations made, but more generally to the other 40+ other observations that you have made where you have said virtually the same thing, repeatedly.
    Can’t you just allow people to make up their own minds without the incessant bombardment of figures, as meaningless on their own, as they are selective?
    I fail to see how this is furthering you Don Quixotical cause.
    Or perhaps maybe, I have got it wrong. Did I hear you say ‘again’?

    #66498
    Alunh
    Alunh
    Participant

    @benjaminm 11868 wrote:

    Yet another interminable table that people who have that particular bent, are well able to view without incessant reproduction on this forum.
    What amazes me is that although they are promulgated with numerous observations and questions, I find it very difficult to find a post where a workable solution is proffered by the contributor.
    Sometimes! I think that a real life Norris from Coronation St has suddenly appeared on the scene, who loves nothing more than gather info and gossip, then disseminate it to foment dissent, for whatever purpose.
    Another contributor questions why we should be paying an additional 3.5% this next financial year for less services. The answer is simple. Because of the reduced income received from National and Welsh Governments. The contributor also fails to put this figure into the wider context of Wales where Cardiff and Pembroke have announced a 5% increase in their Community Charge, with more likely to follow. Rather than decrying WCBC for a 3.5% increase, they should be applauded for their prudence.

    What amazes me Benjamin is that you appear fixated with the idea that some contributors are wasting the time of all readers by printing things which say nothing or do nothing……….and so on. This is not some sort of PHD workshop but a forum where people exchange thoughts, often totally irrelevant. Ultimately, whilst I suspect that all contributors love Wrexham, much of what they have to say is froth- mine included. Chill

    #66503

    BenjaminM
    Participant

    An expected chastisement from my wannabe nemesis although I do accept some of his text…. in part.
    I do not object to contributors expressing an opinion, relevant or not, but what does irritate me intensely, is when the same thing is said repeatedly in more or less the same words on numerous occasions.
    The average intelligence of contributors (judging by the lucidity and content of posts) is quite high. It does all of us a disservice when we are constantly bombarded by repetition after repetition of the same worn out mantra as if we had the collective intelligence of an amoeba.
    As I was always taught, one good morning in a day is enough for anybody.
    In your own business Alun, do you have to play a CD constantly before the words become familiar to you? I would like to think not.
    The analogy is there if it would only be recognised.

    #66521

    wxm
    Participant

    The Budget has been published for the first time since last Tuesday. This is the first occasion to comment on this Budget. The issues may be repetitive, but they have not been dealt with as yet. What action will full Council take next Tuesday? If full Council can “call in” the Plas Madoc decision; why can they not “call in” the full budget? Why has a 4.33% increase in housing rents been allowed, is this permitted in this decision being made by full Council on the full budget, what is the impact on members of the community? The issues raised in this thread – evidence has been set out that capital work has been done (roof solar panels installed), to be removed and the roof stripped and replaced and the solar panel work done for a second time. The point made by those who have raised this – who pays for this? Is it good governance? What are the scrutiny committees doing? What is the head of department doing? What is the effect on our children’s future & prosperity (especially through the spend on education)? What is the effect on our parents well being during retirement (especially in respect of how the monies are spent in the County, and the life style our retired parents are enabled to lead)?

    #66526

    Katia
    Participant

    Cardiff and Pembroke may well be increasing by 5%, that’s not to say Wrexham are particulary efficient by raising less.
    If we look a little closer to home Cheshire West & Chester Council have approved a 2 year freeze on council tax as they are ” conscious of the need to ensure increases in council tax do not increase financial pressures on local residents “.

    Comparing Band D rates Wrexham council state they are 13th lowest in England & Wales.
    Lets keep it so, or preferably aim to be lower still.

    Wrexham has many deprived areas where residents simply cannot afford ever increasing council tax.
    Every time you walk around the town it seems another business has closed often caused partly by high business rates.

    No mistake, Wrexham Council has a fiendishly difficult task balancing its budget, with ever decreasing sums from Central and Welsh Government.
    Mergers with neighbouring counties may help, but only if priority is given to a top down restructure not simply cutting the lowest paid service workers.

    The WAG itself is not beyond criticism, they cut the money to local councils, resulting in leisure facilities such as Plas Madoc being closed, whilst at the same time funding £170m Help2Buy shared equity loan scheme.
    This money alone is redirecting much needed social funding from such as Plas Madoc to allow private individuals to borrow up to £60k which they may or not repay, to buy a £300,000 private house.
    The WAG should not be on the hook for these loans but should instead concentrate on ensuring facilities which benefit the health of local communities remain open.

    I hope for a council tax freeze in Wrexham.

    #66538

    99DylanJones
    Participant

    The latest information obtained by the Save Plas Madoc Group shows the level of spending that goes on behind the golden doors of the Guildhall, what they have unearthed on their site http://savepllc,wordpress.com/scandal is nit just a scandal but maladministration. How can any officer or Council Member sign a contract that gives such large bonuses for the removal of services. There should be further investigation and officers and Members brought to account giving a full list of all of these contracts. £2 million spent on consultants- how much was bonuses– and are these on top of their £2 million fees.
    How many more excess expenditure items have there been- bring these under control and you start achieving some of the necessary cost savings (which previous writer has been looking for).

Content is user generated and is not moderated before posting. All content is viewed and used by you at your own risk and Wrexham.com does not warrant the accuracy or reliability of any of the information displayed. The views expressed on these Forums and social media are those of the individual contributors.
Complaint? Please use the report post tools or contact Wrexham.com .

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.