Stockton Council approves council tax hike

Stockton Council last night approved its budget for 2013/14 agreeing in the process to a referendum dodging 1.9% increase in council tax.

An alternative budget proposal from the Conservative group of councillors which would have seen council tax levels for 2013/14 frozen was regrettably, but nevertheless predictably, defeated. Interestingly, even though the Lib Dem and Ingleby Barwick Independent (IBIS) councillors voted with Labour to increase residents' council tax bills not one councillor from IBIS contributed to the debate nor even attempted to justify their voting for the hike.

Put in a national context, even amongst those other councils who have also opted to increase their council tax rates, the average rise was just 0.8%. In a local context, neighbouring Hambleton and Durham councils are yet again freezing their rates.

In the Stockton Council's press release early this morning, the Leader of the Council, Bob Cook, said, "we simply cannot afford the additional £2million cost that the [council tax] freeze would have over the next three years."

What councillor Cook neglected to include in his press release was the fact that the Labour / IBIS coalition cabinet did manage to find an additional £4.7million to throw at the council's Stockton High Street vanity project. You will, of course, draw your own conclusions as to what this says about Labour's priorities.

As a result of Stockton Council's program of efficiency, improvement and transformation (EIT) reviews - launched under the then leadership of Conservative councillor Ken Lupton - the council has been able to absorb some £31 million in savings already, with scant impact on services. The council is now a much leaner, more efficient body following the EIT initiative.

However, the difficult questions the council now faces are not simply ones of further reductions in funding, but rather questions of political courage.

When it comes to making further efficiencies, the low hanging fruits have already been plucked. The potential areas from where further savings can be found are not as immediately apparent as they once were. Much more creative thinking and, yes, tough decisions, are needed.

Last night the council found itself at a crossroads (or more accurately, a T-junction).

One path was undoubtedly more challenging to tread, with obstacles to be tackled head on and overcome, this being the path to a council living within its means and not passing an ever-growing buck to the taxpayer.

The second path was a much less daunting prospect, smoothed as it was by the ever-diminishing content of taxpayers' wallets. There is no need to live within your means whilst on this path; you simply increase your means to match how you live.

Faced with choosing the path of financial prudence, of doing right by the taxpayer, councillors from Labour, Liberal Democrats and IBIS instead joined forces to choose the path of cowardice and easy decisions.

An unnamed councillor who voted for last night's budget

But then again, what's new?

Yarm parking tax promises chaos...

Last Thursday, Stockton Council's Labour / Ingleby Barwick 'independents' coalition agreed to push ahead with their ill-conceived plans to impose their unwanted parking tax in Yarm.

Stockton Council would have us believe that they are doing this for the benefit of Yarm, both by addressing the congestion problems through Yarm High Street and by boosting visitor numbers thereby benefitting trade.  Yes, you read that right - Stockton Council believe that by taxing visitors to the town, more will want to come. Presumably in the same way as increasing rail fares persuades more of us to travel by train...

At least one Labour politician was sufficiently honest/careless to announce the real reason for the Council's plans...

But all this has been said before.  Were the risks to businesses on the High Street not sufficiently obvious as to constitute common sense, the press coverage has been considerable.

One area that has been less well publicised is the effect that the parking tax will have on residents living in the streets and wynds in close proximity to the High Street.

Whilst the eye was inevitably drawn to the paragraphs relating directly to charging in the report presented to cabinet last Thursday, there is one towards the end of the report which merits closer scrutiny:

"There will be a need to bring forward a range of parking restrictions to address existing indiscriminate parking and to manage the inevitable displacement that will occur as a result of introducing charging".

In other words, at the same time as implementing their parking tax Stockton Council intend to take Yarm back to the future with the reintroduction of their 2010/11 plans to swathe large parts of the town with double yellow lines and other parking restrictions, particularly along West Street.

There is no denying that there is ostensibly a need for some additional restrictions along West Street - anybody familiar with the area will be aware of the selfish and downright dangerous actions of some motorists, particularly those parking under the viaduct at the Bentley Wynd end of West Street - but only a fool would neither anticipate nor fear the promised proposals being virtually a carbon copy of the plans kicked into the long grass by the Council in 2011.

Not only will we see the "inevitable displacement" of vehicles as a direct consequence of the parking tax (and not just from the High Street - charging is also intended for the two SBC car parks, at The Old Market and Castle Dyke Wynd), but if the promised parking restrictions prove to be as draconian as intended previously, further displacement of vehicles from West Street, Bridge Street, and others is guaranteed.

There is only one word to describe the cumulative impact of these hair-brained proposals - chaos.

Yarm Town Council will inevitably lead the way in co-ordinating the protests at these proposals, as done so admirably by Councillor Jason Hadlow in the run-up to 2011's successful Appeals & Complaints Committee meeting.

However, without elections to the Borough Council due within a matter of weeks of the anticipated meetings this time around to focus the minds of Labour councillors (as in 2011), I fear the worst.

Searching scrutiny?

Last week saw Stockton Borough Council's Annual Meeting which agreed, amongst other things, appointments to the various council scrutiny / select committees.

Scrutiny is a vital principle of democracy.  It is the process by which the council's decisions, policies and performance are examined closely to ensure the services provided are done so as efficiently and effectively as possible.  The importance of the searching scrutiny of decisions before they come into effect cannot be understated.

In recent years (whilst Conservative led) the council strived to ensure that the chair of each select committee was appointed from a different political group to that of the cabinet member holding the corresponding portfolio.  This resulted in an highly robust and effective scrutiny process, with material improvements to policies recommended (and accepted) across all areas of council business.  It was therefore with great trepidation that I sat and watched the Labour group, in one of its first actions since forming a coalition administration with IBIS, move away from this successful model of corporate governance in favour of appointing the vast majority of the chairs and vice-chairs from within its own ranks.

Why Labour decided to do this, with no ostensible benefit other than to the Labour & IBIS members now pocketing the special allowances that come with their appointments, is genuinely puzzling.  It's all the more puzzling to see a number of important posts handed to individuals newly elected to the council just two weeks earlier who have no prior experience of sitting on a scrutiny committee, let alone chairing one, whatsoever.  I for one would love to hear the rationale behind these appointments, but I doubt I ever will.

Political pointscoring

I hear that it will be announced tomorrow that Labour, who fell 2 seats short of an overall majority on Stockton Borough Council, will form a council in coalition with IBIS.

It goes without saying that, for all our sakes, I wish the new council and its cabinet well.  That said it is extremely disappointing, however, that the Labour group flatly refused to consider continuing what had been a relatively successful power-sharing arrangement with the Conservative group (which culminated in Stockton being named 'Council of the Year' in 2010), not because the Labour group thought that an agreement with IBIS was in the best interests of the borough, but because of their objection to government policies.  One can only smile at the hypocrisy of the Labour group then opting to instead work with IBIS given Labour's objections to free schools, such as the one IBIS hope to secure!

It remains to be seen what impact a Labour - IBIS run council will have on Yarm and Kirklevington, but given Labour's track record of only spending money where it enjoys support and the extremely parochial attitude of the IBIS councillors these are likely to be challenging times.