“I worry that many of the cuts seem to be centred around getting rid of front line staff, the ones that actually deliver services and have hands on knowledge and skills, whilst the fat cat middle management get reprieved”
TALKING POINT! T
Laurence Gale MSc is worried about the future of our parks and gardens ...
he next few years are certainly going to be testing for many local authorities as they strive to slash their budgets to meet the Coalition Government’s spending review of last October. With many councils required
to make savings in excess of 25% to meet these imposed targets, it appears that front- line services, especially the parks departments, are going to bear the brunt of these cuts, with vastly reduced budgets. For example, in the north west, hard-hit Liverpool City Council has agreed a £6.1m cut in parks spending over the next two years. Manchester City Council plans to cut around £1.4m from its parks and ‘Streetscene’ budgets over the next two years in an effort to find total savings of £110m. In the Midlands, Birmingham City Council has agreed an annual parks spending cut of £180,000 until 2014, with a further £2m to be saved in the same period from a major contracts review. Parks and gardens in the east of England are also under threat. Norfolk County Council has proposed £8.7m of cuts to its environment and transport division in 2011-12, with 108 environment posts earmarked for redundancy.
This theme is country wide. Councils will be making dramatic choices on service provision, and I worry that many of the cuts seem to be centred around getting rid of front line staff, the ones that actually deliver services and have hands on knowledge and skills, whilst the fat cat middle management (the tick box brigade) get reprieved. Prime Minister, David
Cameron, is pushing for change in the way services are provided, with his ‘Big Society’ initiative being the catalyst for change. It is, perhaps, too early to say whether this Government will eventually succumb to a centralising agenda but, the irony is that, even if they don’t, local government may still
suffer a similar fate by seeing their powers given away to communities. We are faced with schools being run by parents, parks and housing estates by residents, care homes by relatives ... and councils left doing, well, not very much!
The Government indicates that the Big Society is ‘communities feeling empowered to solve problems in their neighbourhood’, having the power to influence topics that matter to them, with a more ‘local’ approach to social action and responsibility. My concern is how much of our parks services will be devolved into the community voluntary sector? From my experience of volunteer organisations, they are okay whilst committed individuals remain in place, however, once they leave or move out of the area, the service often ceases to function. For me, the only way to
ensure continuity of service provision is to set up a professionally run trust or organisation that can mentor volunteer activities and has the skills and relevant knowledge to manage external contractors to deliver services. We should not undervalue the benefits parks and gardens bring to our lives. For example, holiday resorts, such as Bournemouth and Great Yarmouth, have always prided themselves on the quality of their parks, and they are a huge contributing factor why holiday makers choose them as their destination. Imagine what might happen, in just a very short time, if their appearance, and that of the holiday maker, was to decline. The affect on council revenues would be serious.
On the following pages, we look at how one trust scheme is working well in Milton Keynes, and how the Government’s initiatives are affecting the way services are delivered to bowls clubs.
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148