Taken from Councillor Gareth Davies Blog
A further barrier to the delivery of incremental improvement in customer satisfaction and BVPI’s are the significant external challenges facing Streetcare. It does not make sense that our most significant external customer, Northumberland County Council, is unable to provide us with either budgets or a service level agreement six months into the financial year. Any targeting of service delivery for the next year must reflect the facts of our circumstances – NCC is proving increasingly unrealistic in its operations and its refusal to co-operate with both the council and the officers of Streetcare
Saturday, December 02, 2006
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Districts back creation of two unitary authorities
Just of the press Northumberland Today
Councils united in fight for two local bodies
DISTRICT councils in Northumberland are backing the creation of two unitary authorities in the county.
Tynedale Council this week joined Alnwick District Council, Berwick Borough Council and those in the south east of the county in calling for rural and urban authorities. The decision is in response to the Government’s White Paper on council reforms which gave authorities until
January 25 to come up with proposals to abolish the current system of district and county councils. If the proposal is accepted, one authority would serve rural Northumberland comprising the Alnwick, Berwick, Castle Morpeth and Tynedale districts and one would cover the Blyth and Wansbeck areas.
Coun Heather Cairns, leader of Alnwick District Council, said she was pleased that all district councils were united. She said: “Rural Northumberland needs a council that addresses the specific needs and priorities of its communities, it is important that decisions are made by local people with local knowledge.” However, the county council has already declared its preference for a single Northumberland authority. The Government has indicted that about eight counties’ submissions will be approved.
Councils united in fight for two local bodies
DISTRICT councils in Northumberland are backing the creation of two unitary authorities in the county.
Tynedale Council this week joined Alnwick District Council, Berwick Borough Council and those in the south east of the county in calling for rural and urban authorities. The decision is in response to the Government’s White Paper on council reforms which gave authorities until
January 25 to come up with proposals to abolish the current system of district and county councils. If the proposal is accepted, one authority would serve rural Northumberland comprising the Alnwick, Berwick, Castle Morpeth and Tynedale districts and one would cover the Blyth and Wansbeck areas.
Coun Heather Cairns, leader of Alnwick District Council, said she was pleased that all district councils were united. She said: “Rural Northumberland needs a council that addresses the specific needs and priorities of its communities, it is important that decisions are made by local people with local knowledge.” However, the county council has already declared its preference for a single Northumberland authority. The Government has indicted that about eight counties’ submissions will be approved.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Who love's Northumberland County Council not the District Councils in Tynedale,Castle Morpeth,Alnwick, Berwick,Blyth Valley and Wansbeck
Two tiers look set to win day
Nov 27 2006
By Hayley Beattie, The Journal
Councillors in Tynedale are set to add their backing to the creation of two unitary authorities in Northumberland in a shake-up of the current political system.
Tynedale Council is the last of the six district bodies to discuss the implications of the Government White Paper on local councils.
Councillors in Castle Morpeth, Alnwick, Berwick, Blyth Valley and Wansbeck have already come out in support of two unitary authorities which would split the county into rural and urban areas.
One would cover Blyth Valley and Wansbeck while the other would take in the rural districts, rather than the single "super council" favoured by Northumberland County Council's Labour leadership.
Tynedale councillors are expected to follow a recommendation to support the submission of a bid for a two-tier system at a special meeting of the council tomorrow night.
They are also expected to agree a contribution of £30,000, which each of the districts councils has agreed to give, to help pay for expert advice in preparing a joint submission to the Department for Communities and Local Government before the end of January.
Chief
Nov 27 2006
By Hayley Beattie, The Journal
Councillors in Tynedale are set to add their backing to the creation of two unitary authorities in Northumberland in a shake-up of the current political system.
Tynedale Council is the last of the six district bodies to discuss the implications of the Government White Paper on local councils.
Councillors in Castle Morpeth, Alnwick, Berwick, Blyth Valley and Wansbeck have already come out in support of two unitary authorities which would split the county into rural and urban areas.
One would cover Blyth Valley and Wansbeck while the other would take in the rural districts, rather than the single "super council" favoured by Northumberland County Council's Labour leadership.
Tynedale councillors are expected to follow a recommendation to support the submission of a bid for a two-tier system at a special meeting of the council tomorrow night.
They are also expected to agree a contribution of £30,000, which each of the districts councils has agreed to give, to help pay for expert advice in preparing a joint submission to the Department for Communities and Local Government before the end of January.
Chief
Monday, November 27, 2006
The County Council has been awarded level 1 poor performance
Why must the tax payers in Northumberland suffer this poor performance from Northumberland County Council ?
What was the Executive doing ?
Team of Elected members of Northumberland CountyCouncil
Leader Bill Brooks
Deputy Leader Peter Hillman
Executive J. Wrght A. Cutter, J. Smith I. Hayes, A.W. Reid, M.J. Scullion
The County Council had a significant and complex improvement agenda to deliver better value for money. It had been awarded level 1 (poor performance) in this area in its most recent corporate assessment by the Audit Commission.
5.13 The Financial Governance report January 2006 reported that the County Council’s overall performance did not match the level of spend. Further work was needed to develop a shared approach to securing value for money with all stakeholders and to strengthen benchmarking activity so as to enable robust challenge and comparison of quality and costs. Some social care expenditure had been re-allocated to enable new models of support or capacity to be stretched. For example £1.5 million had been allocated to support the rollout of START teams across the county.
5.14 The County Council had been working for some time on developing alternative uses for the resources tied up in its residential care homes. A Best Value Review of Older People’s Services was initially undertaken in 2001. In the intervening years there has been a range of options proposed. All the homes required a significant level of new investment, both to carry out essential maintenance work and to improve the living environments so that they met the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes.
5.15 Some difficult decisions had yet to be taken with regard to the future role and function of some County Council run residential and day care services. Information was still being gathered on the future costs and capital investment requirements, and in some cases this required higher levels of investment than originally estimated. For example, the planned capital developments at one site to develop respite care, intermediate and day care as well as offices for front line staff were projected to cost up to £1.68 million at the end of March 2006, when a decision was taken to go ahead with this scheme. The original submission of the modernisation programme to the Cabinet in August 2005 stated capital costs would be minimal, and the options initially circulated for public consultation were based on this assumption. Part way through the consultation, update documents had to be circulated correcting the statement about costs. The discrepancy in investment requirements was said to be due to an insufficient appreciation by officers of the Commission for Social Care Inspection's regulatory requirements around the new development that would require more exacting standards to be met.
What was the Executive doing ?
Team of Elected members of Northumberland CountyCouncil
Leader Bill Brooks
Deputy Leader Peter Hillman
Executive J. Wrght A. Cutter, J. Smith I. Hayes, A.W. Reid, M.J. Scullion
The County Council had a significant and complex improvement agenda to deliver better value for money. It had been awarded level 1 (poor performance) in this area in its most recent corporate assessment by the Audit Commission.
This a council that wishes to run services for all of in the if we have one council for all of Northumberland
It had a relatively high rate of Council Tax, was slow to challenge in house high cost services, had above average investment in services to older people coupled with high thresholds for access to services. The adult social care budget had been further increased by 5.9 per cent in cash terms at the start of the current financial year. Targets for 2005-06 to reduce supported admissions to residential and nursing homes and to increase the numbers of older people helped to live at home had not been achieved. Taken together, this data prompts serious questions.5.13 The Financial Governance report January 2006 reported that the County Council’s overall performance did not match the level of spend. Further work was needed to develop a shared approach to securing value for money with all stakeholders and to strengthen benchmarking activity so as to enable robust challenge and comparison of quality and costs. Some social care expenditure had been re-allocated to enable new models of support or capacity to be stretched. For example £1.5 million had been allocated to support the rollout of START teams across the county.
5.14 The County Council had been working for some time on developing alternative uses for the resources tied up in its residential care homes. A Best Value Review of Older People’s Services was initially undertaken in 2001. In the intervening years there has been a range of options proposed. All the homes required a significant level of new investment, both to carry out essential maintenance work and to improve the living environments so that they met the National Minimum Standards for Care Homes.
5.15 Some difficult decisions had yet to be taken with regard to the future role and function of some County Council run residential and day care services. Information was still being gathered on the future costs and capital investment requirements, and in some cases this required higher levels of investment than originally estimated. For example, the planned capital developments at one site to develop respite care, intermediate and day care as well as offices for front line staff were projected to cost up to £1.68 million at the end of March 2006, when a decision was taken to go ahead with this scheme. The original submission of the modernisation programme to the Cabinet in August 2005 stated capital costs would be minimal, and the options initially circulated for public consultation were based on this assumption. Part way through the consultation, update documents had to be circulated correcting the statement about costs. The discrepancy in investment requirements was said to be due to an insufficient appreciation by officers of the Commission for Social Care Inspection's regulatory requirements around the new development that would require more exacting standards to be met.
Sunday, November 26, 2006
Mark Henderson censor websites we believe ?
JIm Wright and homophobia; an update
What have the Chinese government and Northumberland County Council got in common? They censor websites.Jim Wright has emailed me; his email said Gareth,Thanks for the link-alas or fortunately I cannot access blog pages!!!JIM.
It was on October 18 2004 that I first became aware of this tendency amongst Northumberland County Council to censor anything it can't control on the web.
Nothing changes apparently.I'm willing to bet though that the expensive councillor websites that the county council sponsor through NorthumberlandLife aren't blocked by the council's network though.
What have the Chinese government and Northumberland County Council got in common? They censor websites.Jim Wright has emailed me; his email said Gareth,Thanks for the link-alas or fortunately I cannot access blog pages!!!JIM.
It was on October 18 2004 that I first became aware of this tendency amongst Northumberland County Council to censor anything it can't control on the web.
Nothing changes apparently.I'm willing to bet though that the expensive councillor websites that the county council sponsor through NorthumberlandLife aren't blocked by the council's network though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)