Fair Trade - its time for Bolsover!

I have failed to get Cllr Watts leader of Bolsover DC, to express any enthusiasm for adopting the living wage so I thought I have a go at asking him to consider oppressed workers in other countries and commit the District to becoming a Fair Trade area. Here's a draft resolution I could ask him to endorse at the December council meeting - let me know if you have any comments on it.

Bolsover District Council aims to be recognised by its residents and business community, its suppliers and employees and other local authorities as a Council that actively supports and promotes the concept of Fairtrade – ensuring that producers from all countries get a fair price for their goods and labour.

The Council resolves to:

• Review the Council's own purchasing policies to ensure that the Council purchases Fairtrade where possible.
• Offer Fairtrade tea/coffee at Council meetings and in its offices and restaurants where these are currently provided.
• Work with local Fairtrade Network in its work of achieving Fairtrade County status by nominating a Council member / officer to liaise with the Steering Group on a regular basis.
• Promote awareness of Fairtrade issues, and make publicity and educational information available to local people concerning the worldwide impact of unfair trade and the opportunities that Fairtrade provides to promote sustainable development.
• Promote Fairtrade issues and practices amongst local business, and commercial and other organisations.

The pre-contemplative stage

Change is never easy, many never get to smell the coffee.

At yesterday's council meeting the member allowance scheme was on the agenda, but the Chairman didn't want to have any discussion about it and when I dared to suggest that Cllr Watts record of claiming some of the highest travelling and subsistence allowances of any District Councillor in Derbyshire wasn't the best qualification for the role of presiding over other member's expenses they moved rapidly to the vote.

So for those who are able to get over the pre-contemplative stage and want to make the world of local government a better place here were my proposals:

1.   Remove all references to the Leader or Deputy Leader giving approvals for meal or hotel expenditure and replace them with the Chief Executive an independent, and accountable, officer.

2.   Reinstate maximum claims for meals and hotels, we cannot afford, and the public will not tolerate a 60% increase in these costs.

3.   For travelling costs state that where there is a public transport alternative Councillors the scheme should require it to be used.

4.   State that the Council will never pay for spouses, partners or friends whether the cost are subsequently reimbursed or not. They should be met from the basic member’s allowances, after all they are large enough!

5.   Where Council members take positions of responsibility with external organisations such as the ICA then the acceptance of such a position should be on the condition that organisation bearing the associated costs of travel and subsistence not the tax-payers of Bolsover.

 

It is hard to comprehend why such sensible proposals should get such a hostile response, unless that is, there is something to hide.

Still small voice of calm

 

 

 

Here's what Bolosver Council own plannikng policy officer has to say on their proposals to build a supermarket on a public park.

 

They wouldn't listen to me, they wouldn't listen to residents, will they listen to him? I expect not, but I think it is now dawning on them that a Government appointed planning inspector will.

 

 

Impact on Open Space provision

A substantial part of the proposed development site is currently designated as

public open space on the adopted Local Plan Proposals Map.

Local Plan Policy CLT 6 (Existing Outdoor playing Space and Amenity Open

Space) will only allow development on open spaces as shown on the

proposals map in the following circumstances:

·

Replacement open space is provided

·

A facility of equivalent community benefit is provided

·

The development results on an overall improvement or enhancement

of the existing facility for the benefit of the local community.

This proposal does not meet any of these criteria. Firstly, no replacement

open space is being provided for the loss of most of the existing area (a net

loss of around 1 ha). Secondly, a facility of equivalent community benefit is

not being provided. Thirdly, although the applicant intends to enhance that

part of the green space known as Stretton Memorial Garden, this would not

represent an overall enhancement of the whole green space.

With regard to Paragraph 74 of the NPPF a similar, yet differently worded

policy needs to be met, as follows:

“Existing open space, sports and recreational buildings and land, including

playing fields, should not be built on unless:

·

an assessment has been undertaken which has clearly shown the

open space, buildings or land to be surplus to requirements; or

·

the loss resulting from the proposed development would be replaced

by equivalent or better provision in terms of quantity and quality in a

suitable location; or

·

the development is for alternative sports and recreational provision, the

needs for which clearly outweigh the loss.”

In respect of the first requirement neither the applicant or the Council has

undertaken an assessment of open spaces that clearly shows which open

spaces are surplus to requirements. The Council has, however, undertaken a

quantitative analysis of open space that found that Bolsover Town has 2.66

ha of formal green space per 1,000 population which meets the minimum

standard set in the Green Space Strategy (2012) of 2.4 ha per 1,000

population

The area of amenity open space at Sherwood Lodge grounds is 1.22 ha.

From the plans submitted, only two areas of 0.28 ha and 0.21 ha would be

large enough to be counted in the green space totals (a minimum site area of

0.1 ha is required to count as green space). Therefore, only 0.49 ha would

remain including the Memorial Garden, representing a net green space loss of

0.73 ha.

The loss of 0.73 ha of amenity green space at Sherwood Lodge, would mean

that Bolsover Town has enough green space as a settlement to meet the

minimum Formal Open Space standard. However, this fact on its own is not

sufficient to indicate that the Sherwood Lodge grounds, or any other green

space in Bolsover is surplus to requirements. Such an assessment must be

informed by the current and potential uses of the green space, its location in

relation to residential areas and to other green space provision in the

 

immediate locality or neighbourhood. None of these considerations suggest

that the green space is surplus to requirements. In addition, Sherwood Lodge

grounds received a quality standard of 68% when it was surveyed by Leisure

Services in August 2006. It could not therefore be argued that the quality of

open space is so poor that the space does not provide any useful green

space function.

With regard to the second point the applicant argues (at page 28 of the P and

R statement) that a commuted sum could be provided to improve the quality

of the Memorial Garden “as an alternative location for open space and

recreation for town centre users”. I am not quite sure what is being argued

here. In my view whilst such a proposal would help to mitigate the loss of

open space, it would not replace the loss.

The proposal does not meet the third point because it does not propose

alternative sports and recreational provision.

The Green Space Strategy includes a policy that states that all residents of a

town should be within 400 metres of a formal or semi-natural green space

which is larger than 0.5 ha. The Sherwood Lodge green space constitutes

such a space. However, loss of this space would not result in any new

pockets of inaccessibility within Bolsover when judged against the above

standard. This is mainly due to the proximity of Dykes Field and Hornscroft

Park."

He goes on to conclude that the development breaches both local and national planning policies.

 

 

 

Is Bolsover on your sat-nav Ed?

Never one to miss a band wagon Ed Milliband has jumped on-board the idea of a living wage. He didn’t say much about it whilst in Government but he says his party is totally committed to it now and has threatened to name and shame any Council that doesn’t implement it.

Green controlled Brighton has nothing to fear from that because it’s been our party policy for years. Over a year ago I asked Eion Watts, the Leader of Labour controlled Bolsover whether he was committed to it and he said he liked the idea but it was impossible in Bolsover cos of the cost and equal pay legislation which required him to maintain all differentials!!. He was wrong on both counts of course, as his Leader is now telling him and countless other Councils are showing.

I feel a bit sorry for Ed it must be hard to lead such a party of nimbys but as the District Auditor will tell him it’ll take more than a little naming and shaming to get Elion to see the light. It also occurred to me that if its costs so much to pay people just £7.20 an hour we must have a lot of staff on poverty wages, a fine advertisement for socialism.

Waking up to the bedroom tax

It's taking a little longer to let tenants know in Bolsover, but word is getting round that from April 2013 there will be some dramatic, and highly damaging, changes for Council tenants on housing benefit.

Across the country a few of us are trying to stand up for the victims of this draconian policy. In spite of what the coalition says the victims will be the children not the parents. However Councils can do something and its important they do what they can. Here's a piece setting out some of the issues and our demands - it's work in progress so let me know if you have anything to add:

 

The bedroom tax will hurt our children.

In April some 660,000 families living in Council or housing association houses and claiming housing benefit will have that benefit cut if they are deemed to have too many bedrooms. Of course the politicians who voted for this don’t just have an extra few bedrooms, they get a whole flat in London paid for by the tax-payer, but that’s another story.  Forcing families into smaller properties will ruin the life prospects of many children and increase the risks to them it is both an inequitable and a dangerous development. Here are just some of the consequences:

·         Children of different sexes under 10 and the same sex under 16 are expected to share a room. However there is no definition or allowance given for the size of that bedroom. It means a house with a tiny single bedroom and one double bedroom would be “big enough” for a couple with two daughters aged 15 and 8, whilst next door a couple with just one toddler won’t have their benefit cut even if they have two  double bedrooms.

·         Where parents have shared responsibilities for a child only the one that gets the child benefit can count that child toward their bedroom entitlement. When the child visits he or she will have to sleep on the sofa, and if there’s more the one child they had better buy a tent.

·         Bizarrely foster children don’t count in the calculation of the number of bedrooms the family needs even though Council invariably require each foster child to have their own bedrooms. On the other hand if you have a lodger you will be entitled to an extra bedroom!

·         There’s no chance of tenants affected by these change being able to downsize, there simply isn’t enough smaller social housing units available. Instead they will be encouraged to take a lodger. Here’s what the case review on baby P said about lodgers “One of the most dangerous of these situations is where an anti-social man who is unrelated to the children joins the household” (Para 2.7.8). Is it worth the risk?  

·         The shortage of adapted properties means that families with disabled members frequently have to take whatever they are offered. However if it has more bedrooms than they are assessed as needing the will lose benefit, even if there is no other property available. There is no exemption for the disabled.

·         The proposals are inherently anti-family. A couple with two children under 10 in a three bedroom house will lose benefits, but their neighbour who may be a single parent  with two children of the same age and a “lodger” won’t. Indeed the lodger can pay up to £20 a week without any loss of benefit. What reason is there for couples to stay together if thye are better off living apart?

·         Councils who have introduced pro-family allocation policies like not placing young children in high rise blocks will find it impossible to maintain them in the face of the demand from tenats for down-sizing.

·         Because the regulations take no account of local housing need they will result in larger social house becoming unlettable in areas such as Northern Ireland and parts of North England where demand is low.

What can be done?

The Coalition Government have forced this through, over-turning every amendment made by the Lords. However Councils and Housing Associations can act to protect children from the most dangerous elements of this dreadful policy and we are calling on them to sign the following pledge:

 

1.   To collect data on the impact of these proposals on the lives of children in their area.

2.   To give the highest priority possible to families who need to move houses as a result of these measures.

3.   To review the Councils own assessment of the number of bedrooms in each property and to refuse to recognise as a bedroom any room below 6.5 sq metres (the minimum bedroom size for a multi-occupied house)

4.   Not to evict any tenant who gets into rent arrears as a direct result of this legislation.

5.   In recognition of the Baby P serious case review to fund and execute CRB checks on prospective lodgers for any family affected by these regulations.

6.   To consider using the pupil premium of £600 per head to enable families losing benefit to pay for an extra bedroom to be kept so that children have somewhere quiet to do their homework.

A new translation service

I'm offering the Leader a new translation service, here's a sample of it:

The Claim.

June: "Despite cuts to the government grants we are determined that front line services will not be affected as we do not feel it is fair that our residents should suffer or feel the pain through no fault of their own. The plans we have in place show we are planning for the future, that we are a responsible Council and that we can continue to deliver our services to meet the needs of our residents" Cllr Watts, Leader of Bolsover DC.

The reality.

August: Councillor's Basic Allowances in Bolsover found to be the highest of any District Council in the country (by some £2,700 a year)

September: The Council's fails its value for money assessment.

October: Labour members of the Council's Safe and Inclusive Scrutiny Committee vote (twice) to recommend the closure of all three of the Council's Community houses in spite of overwhelming representations from the residents who they claim to be protecting.

Suggested Translation.

Despite cuts to the government grants we are determined that our own allowances will not be affected as we do not feel it is fair that we should suffer or feel the pain through any fault of our own.The plans we have in place show we do not have a future; that we have been an irresponsbile Council; and that we will continue to cut our services to meet the needs of ourselves.

Two Inspectors call

Cllr Watts has got himself very excited about the work of the District Auditor, and with good reason, under his command the Council has fallen all the way from "Excellent" to below "adequate" according to the District Auditor's value for money assessment.

However the District Auditor is not the only vulture hovering over Bolsover DC, the Local Government Ombudsman has sent the Council a long and incisive list of questions regarding their decision to appropriate Sherwood Green for development. This could have even more serious financial implications of the Council because if the land was not appropriated properly the Council and the current application for registration as a village green succeeds there will be no supermarket but two Council HQs.

I think I first warned the Council about this nine months ago, they weren't listening then, I wonder if they are now, after all the Council can't fall any further...................can it?

One nation? You're having a laugh.

As Bolsover Council embarks on its big consultation over who will suffer most from Council tax benefit cuts, their own lavish refurbishment of Clowne Arc, (their new stately home and former college), continues unabated. Have a look if you're down that way; the number of skips and the frequency they are being emptied is testimony to the priorities of this Council, spending £5.8M (which is nearly £200 per household) looking after number one

At a Committee meeting on Tuesday only one member of the Labour group was willing to break ranks, and ruin his "career" prospects by voting with me to oppose the closure of all three Community houses in the District. The other Labour Councillors wouldn't even wait for the finance staff to tell them how much money they cost to run before rushing to close them. Community houses that hadn't been staffed properly (or indeed at all) were described as "underused", whilst other centres with a thriving mix of activities were labelled as "victims of their own success". Heads you lose, tails you don't win. Even when the Domestic Violence Worker told them that a Community House was the safest and most discreet place for women suffering domestic abuse they decided that she didn't know what she was talking about and voted to close it anyway.

What was it  the one nation Miliband said "Have you ever seen such an incompetent, hopeless, out of touch, U-turning, pledge-breaking, back-of-envelope writing, make-it-up-as-you-go-along, miserable shower than this". Well now you come to mention it Ed.............."YES"............. It's the Council where the members take the highest basic allowances of any District Council in the country and pay for it by closing public toilets and community houses; reducing opening hours of contact centres and selling off our green spaces for supermarkets, come up and have a look sometime.

...one for each tree Dennis

I don't think anyone in Bolsover doesn't have a chuckle or two over Dennis Skinner's antics in the House of Commons, it's just a pity we don't see any of that same passion here in his constituency. Yesterday someone told me they had written to our MP on a local issue only to receive a reply saying he wouldn't get involved because his job was 150 miles away in London!

As its a long way to London we thought we'd make it easy for him by sending him a postcard for every tree that will be cut down if Morrison's gets built - that's 130 in all. Thanks to the Co-op who kindly offered us space at the back of their store, local residents were only to happy to put their own designs on the cards and you can judge the results for yourself:

I'm sure it'll look lovely on his office wall and it'll remind him where Bolsover is!

All Animals are Equal

The Orwellianly named “Optimisation Developments Ltd” (who are actually a subsidiary of Morrison’s) has just submitted an updated assessment along with some pretty minor revisions to both development proposals for Bolsover. I don’t know if they ever bother to check what they write but they state:

•      “In summary, the proposal will result in the demolition of an ‘Undesignated Heritage Asset’ within the Conservation Area and the development of an area of Identified Open Space. However, this will not impact on the special character and appearance of the Conservation Area and it will not prejudice the overall provision of open space in the town.

It’s the old smoke and mirrors act; here’s a green space; here’s a development on it; and....... abracadabra....... here’s a town that has not lost any green space. (Pause for applause and swooning). Who are they trying to kid? Some Councillors may be taken in but if the Secretary of State gets to appoint an Inspector he, or she, will expect to see slightly better reasoning than this desperate attempt to magic away a fundamental breach of the National Planning Policy Framework.

More interestingly in their rush to justify the sacking, sorry, development of Bolsover, they let slip that they produced designs back in December 2011 which kept both the Green and Sherwood Lodge. Obvioulsy they weren’t going to do anything so foolish as to share them with the public.

And the reason why they concluded they had to tarmac the green and demolish the lodge?......As we have said all along without their precious petrol station the site would be uneconomic. Their justification for which is on a par with the one that my children used to use.......”Tesco’s have one at Clowne”. Apparently it’s not enough that the store will be bigger than all the independent shops put together, they want their petrol sales as well. Next they’ll be demanding that the traffic is diverted to pass through the store as seems to have happened in Clay Cross I notice. Is this the society you want to live in where all the shots are called by big business and the elected Councillors simply go along with them?

However they have cleared up one little fact for us how many trees would be lost. And I’m the first to admit I got it wrong. Counting all the little circles on their map I made it 100 trees......in fact now they have been asked outright they have been forced to come clean and admit its 130. By a strange coincidence if the Caroline Spellman the former Minister is right every tree in an urban area confers £38,000 of economic and social benefits  http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2012/jun/15/caroline-spelman-interview-green-growing-rio20?newsfeed=true It means that far from investing in the town they are not only taking out a million pounds a year if profit for their City shareholders, and the felling of 130 trees will at a stroke take another £5Million in benefit.

As for the other minor amendments it’s a little like being told, we’re going to shoot you, but we’ve heard that you don’t feel very good about it so we thought we’d consult you over the design of the gun we’re going to use. It makes very little difference

At the end of the day just like the banks Morrison’s are simply trying to make as much money as they can and to tilt the pitch completely in their direction. The purpose of an elected Council is to balance their interests with those of the residents and traders in the town and to avoid all the problems that occurred with the banks from being replayed here in Bolsover. However for some people, as Orwell observed, “To see what is in front of one’s nose needs a constant struggle.”

and it'll rain for 40 days and 40 nights....

Sometimes you can’t make it up. Bolsover Council have decided that the best name for their new posh pad in Clowne is the “Arc”. Unfortunately they haven’t quite got the spelling right but it’s a wonderful metaphor. Whilst the historic Sherwood lodge and green is buried under tons of tarmac and car exhausts the Labour Councillors batten down the hatches of their shiny new vessel in Clowne. Just like the original ark it’s even got three floors, but there seems some doubt whether it will have room for all God’s creatures. We hear that the Housing team may be left at the Riverside and that Environmental Health will be desk-sharing. At least residents will be relieved to hear that Labour Councillors will have their own office and won’t have to breathe the same air as Councillors from other parties. See even a recession has a silver lining.

Meanwhile as the Executive choose their flock wallpaper (that’s a joke by the way) they wave a cheerie Xmas goodbye to the hard-working staff in the cafe at Sherwood Lodge and residents are just waking up to find out that their Community Houses will be closed. The public toilets went last year, along with Saturday openings of the Contact centres, so what will come next year? I’d like to think that with the most savage benefit cuts the country has ever seen kicking in from April Councillors will start thinking whether they deserve a basic allowance that’s over £2,700 a year more than any other District Council in the country. Oh look I just saw another pig fly.

"Take a slice of your town centre, add it to our profit ledger"

Says is all really - from an excellent CD called Supermarket (of course) from Neil Phillips.

It prompted me to calculate just how much filthy lucre Morrison's will be hoovering up from the residents of Bolsover and passing over to support the exorbitant lifestyles of their executives and shareholders.

Although their profits are dipping Morrison's still made some £450M on sales of £8.9bn which is about 5%. Derbyshire County Council calculate the turnover from the store in Bolsover would be £21M a year.

That means that over £1M will be going from families in Bolsover straight back as profit to shareholders and investors in the City of London. This is what they mean by an "investment". Contrast this with the local shops they will put out of business when the vast majority of any profit they make is kept locally.

It used to be the Conservatives who supported market economics and the Labour party who supported co-operatives and social ownership. But it seems that Blue Labour in Bolsover is as enthralled by big business as George Osbourne in London. Good job there is still one party offering a genuine alternative to the Coalition.

Pig in a Poke

Pig in a Poke

I hear that the emails have started to light up between Morrison’s, Sharp Communications (sic) and Bolsover DC. Back in the spring when they concocted the scheme behind very thick, and much closed, doors it all seemed so easy.  Sharp Communications were “tasked” with getting the Civic Society on-board and sweet talked them in an exclusive preview to which everyone else (especially myself!) was barred.  They probably got the idea from the Council themselves who even one year later have not released any details of the process that led to the selection of Morrison’s in the first place or of the other offers made.

 However it hasn’t quite gone according to plan. In spite of the soft sell the Civic Society have objected to both scheme calling them unacceptable. Someone else who hasn’t learnt her lines is Joan Dixon the Labour County Councillor who by co-incidence works for an organisation that the Bolsover Councillor Leader Eion Watts Chairs. She has panned the designs as “brutalism” and “needless modern” and raised concern over the traffic impacts, it would be interesting to be a fly on the wall of her office. Meanwhile the Town Council have opposed the Middle Street office scheme intended to relocate the contact office and  Police; English Heritage have objected to the loss of the Green and Lodge; County highways have taken issue with the traffic report and requested further meetings and their archaeologist says that the applications have not been accompanied by the necessary archaeological reports!! All this wasn’t in the script.

But someone loves the Council, there is one solitary letter of support on the Council’s planning web-site. But it looks rather pathetic alongside the 80 plus letters of objection. It makes you wonder what Sharp Communications have been doing, but the real reason is that you can only sell a pig in a poke if the buyer is too scared to look in the bag.

It would be nice to report that Bolsover Labour Cabinet have come to their senses but they continue to throw good money after bad and have just deepened their financial hole by letting a contract to re-furbish the Council’s new white elephant, Clowne Campus. They haven’t even stopped to consider that in the post-Olympics euphoria the idea that the Council could asset-strip this site as well by selling for development the surrounding playing fields is becoming increasingly less tenable by the minute.

The good work in saving costs by sharing services with its neighbour in North Derbyshire has been undone at a single stroke by spending nearly £6M to buy and refurbishing Clowned Campus creating the farce of a Council with two HQs in Bolsover and man of its senior staff working based for long periods of time at a third office in Chesterfield or indeed the fourth depot and office at Doe Lea.

Almost makes you feel sorry for them, but this tragedy is all of their own making.

Facing the music

Firstly I’d like to thank everyone who took the time to come to Bolsover Council meeting last week to ask why Sherwood Green and Lodge has been chosen as the site for a new superstore. I had hoped that the members of the Planning Committee would also want to hear from local traders and residents but instead they chose to walk out of the meeting claiming that even hearing the questions would expose the Council to a legal challenge for predetermination.

The strange thing is that these same Councillors had just received training and should have understood the difference between an open and a closed mind. As Section 25 of the new Localism Act says “A decision-maker is not to be taken to have had, or to have appeared to have had, a closed mind when making the decision just because the decision-maker had previously done anything that directly or indirectly indicated what view the decision-maker took, or would or might take, in relation to a matter”.

There is no excuse for their actions. The law has made it very clear, they could, and should, have stayed and thus kept their mind open to what local people said. Their behaviour was not only discourteous but showed a lack of commitment to being “in touch” with the public.

 

The Pain is only just beginning

It's like the calm before the storm. But although it's not getting a lot of news coverage the Welfare Reform proposal will start to bite from 1st April and Councils like Bolsover need to start taking action now if their fine words about protecting communities are to be realised in practice.

Here's a question I've tabled for the Council meeting next Wednesday when we also have a lobby in opposition to the Morrisons scheme:

"In just 8 months time the most devastating attack on the poorest people in our lifetime will begin when social housing tenants, deemed to be under-occupying, will have their housing benefits cut as the Coalition government takes £2bn in a year from those on Housing Benefit to fund its tax cuts for the rich.

1.       What is Bolsover Council doing now to identify and assist its tenant who, through no fault of their own, will find they need to move to a smaller property?

2.       Have the Council told them what is happening?

3.       Will these tenants be given top priority banding under the letting system? and

4.       Having saved over £1m in borrowing costs this year will the Council be willing to offer them some financial assistance to meet some of the costs of moving?"

Its in the Times

Here's my letter published in the Derbsyshire Times today

Last week’s letter writers gave a good insight into Bolsover’s dilemma.  Anne Wood wrote in support of a Morrison’s saying it would save her shopping bills whilst John Edwards wrote in opposition asking does anyone in Bolsover Council care about the obliteration of a fine Victorian building and public green?

The two views seem irreconcilable but they are not. Bolsover Council can satisfy both parties. If the petrol station was ditched and a smaller store positioned closer to Town End Road we could keep both the Lodge and the Green intact. Instead of treating our heritage as simply an asset to be exploited, such an approach would balance the need for development with the desire for conservation appeasing both. It could, and should, have been set down by the Council over a year ago in a Planning Brief for the site which would have considered everyone’s view.  Instead we have now learnt that the Council made a deal with Morrison’s behind closed doors where the size of the store, the need for a petrol filling station and the purchase price were all agreed long before bodies such as English Heritage, let alone the wider public, were consulted.

The consequences of this blinkered approach have been spelt out on your letter pages over the past weeks. It is a sad case of missed opportunities which has meant that many other ideas have not been explored. For example a retained Lodge would make a great Contact Centre avoiding the need to rip-up Market Street car park, and Morrison’s could have gone into partnership with the existing filling station rather than building a new one. Without the clarity that a planning brief provides it is also very difficult to see how the Council got the best price out of the prospective developers.

Fortunately there is just about still time for Bolsover Councillors to stop stoking the fire they have built before they themselves get burnt.  Anyone who takes a dispassionate look at the scheme soon draws the inevitable conclusion that it simply cannot overcome the planning, legal and financial hurdles it faces. If the Council blunders on it will be left  looking like “Two Jags Prescott” struggling with managing not one, but two, over-sized HQs in Bolsover and Clowne. The idea that in the middle of the deepest recession we have known they can simply rent out all this excess accommodation is as much a fantasy as the hope that they will sacrifice some of their own excessive basic allowances to make good the short-fall.

Up till now the public have spoken but we have heard very little from the elected representatives on Bolsover DC.  I think now would be a good time for them all to share their thoughts with your readers.

Doing all we can (but don't look to hard)

There's obviously a shortage of news in Bolsover as the latest "In-touch" screams once again that the Council is "doing all it can" to make savings. Including, it seems, recycling their own headlines. Obviously they don't fall into the trap of saying "we are all in this together" because that would mean explaining why they ignored the independent panels advice to cut the Councillor's basic allowances.

I thought I'd test the proof of this particularly pudding by looking at some of the biggest cost items. How much savings have they made in managing Council homes and collecting rubbish? Bear with me the figures may not be appetising but they aren't hard to digest.

Back in 2010/11 before the cuts programme started the cost of managing Council homes was £7.56 per week or £393 per year (I don't think this includes repairs). Now the Council has improved its efficiency the costs have of course gone down??????..... No. Actually they've gone up to £9.17 and for the next two years they are "targeted" to increase to £9.50 then £9.80. That means by 2013/14 the costs will have risen by nearly 30% in 4 years, perhaps now you can see why they had to foist a 9% rent increase onto tenants and seek to blame it on the government.

Perhaps the news on refuse will be better?  After all that investment in new bins and the savings with fortnightly collections. Well indeed as a result of this the costs were targeted to fall by about 4.6% from a target of £49.78 per property in 2010/11 to £47.48 in 2011/12. Oh if only wishes could come true.......In reality I'm afraid the costs in 2010/11 were £46.48 and in 2011/12 they also went up, not down, by 4.3% to £48.50 busting their own target.

Now perhaps we can start to see why they see Morrisons as a guardian angel. Unfortunately by the time they realise it is a mirage the financial hole will be quite a bit deeper and that will affect every resident of Bolsover District which is why it is an issue to Whitwell as much as to Bolsover town.

A plea for sanity

It’s taken a long time but finally Bolsover Council has told the public what it is doing with some of its money at least.

The Council minutes for the 25^th April 2012 have only just become available and state that the overall expenditure requirement for Clowne Campus is £5.884m and the cost of the mini-hub in Bolsover are put at £2.433m making a total of £8.3m if everything goes according to plan. The minutes don’t tell us what they hope to sell Sherwood Lodge to Morrison’s for but with opposition from the public, traders and organisations in the town growing rapidly, they may get a lots less than they think for it. In the meantime they are funding this entire pipe-dream by borrowing money.

 

Can we trust the Council with this mega-deal? Well in all honesty it hasn’t got a good reputation. Last year the External Auditors told the Council that they had “fundamental errors” in reconciling income and expenditure and “Significant governance weakness in contract arrangements”. Even a Council with the very best financial controls would know that in major developments, especially in a Conservation area, can easily have over-runs of 25% or more. On this basis Bolsover DC would need to be getting well over £10M from Sherwood Lodge just to balance the books.

 

The truth is that the whole deal doesn’t stack financially, environmentally, socially or for the economic health of Bolsover. The public of Bolsover want to keep Sherwood Green as a park and the traders of Bolsover certainly don’t want to lose Middle Street car park. Currently Morrison’s haven’t even applied for planning permission for Sherwood Lodge and the prospects of its being granted are rapidly disappearing over the horizon.

 

By failing to consult the pubic properly, the Council has got this badly wrong. It has rushed to the very edge of a financial cliff and is teetering n the brink. There is however still time for them to wake-up smell the coffee and put a stop to the whole calamitous exercise. They can then do what every other Council has done and start the savings exercise by implementing the findings of their own independent panel on member’s remuneration (which would save over £400,000) and then come out of their ivory tower and work with the public to make Bolsover better again.

Cluck, cluck

What happens when a Council, assessed by its own auditors as having had an “inconsistent and unsatisfactory approach to performance management” for several years, tries to cut corners?

We all know that times are tough but when last year I challenged the Labour leadership of Bolsover to accept independent advice and save over £400,000 by reducing their basic allowances I was ignored. Instead they made what they like to call “efficiency savings” by declaring a number of posts in the cleansing, grounds maintenance and housing repairs services redundant. Revealing that Labour Bolsover is similar to Coalition Britain in that whilst we may be “all in this together” some are more “in it” than others.

This year the chickens have come home to roost and residents can see for themselves how “efficient” the Council’s cuts have been. However looking at the length of the Council’s grass at the Jubilee street party in our village however we won’t be able to see any chickens at all. And it’s the same story right across the District of Bolsover. I’m told that one excuse is that it’s rained a lot this year. I think it also rained last year before Bolsover cut its Grounds Maintenance staff.

Long grass is unsightly but other cuts are more dangerous. Just two months ago the Council’s internal auditors looked at the arrangements for ensuring all Council homes with gas appliances have their statutory annual service. They found the service wanting giving it the lowest categorisation of “unsatisfactory” which means it has major risks” requiring “fundamental improvements”. Here’s a flavour of what they found:

“A sample of servicing records for thirty properties was examined. In eleven instances servicing took place over twelve months after the previous service, all were less than a month overdue.  It was explained that the delay in servicing was due to the length of time taken to replace an engineer who left the Council.”

So be warned when they tell you that their “efficiency savings” can cut front-line jobs without affecting services, or that they can make oodles of cash from property deals, if you look up the sky is black with chickens coming over the “horizon” already.

People Power

Residents of Whitwell, Hodthorpe, Belph and Creswell  have another to celebrate this weekend as Alkane have withdrawn their application for an mega anaerobic digester on the edge of the village. 

I don't think anyone who has followed the twists and turns of this sage since the application was submitted nearly two years ago would doubt that the single biggest factor in achieving this brilliant outcome was the campaigning zeal of the public pressure group Whitwell Against Alkane. They have shown that ordinary people running a well organised and mobilised campaign can defeat even the vested interest of a large and wealthy private company. The writing is now on the wall for any Council that does not have public support for its actions. 

Many people said that Whitwell Against Alkane were wasting their time but it can never be a waste of time to stand-up for what you believe in. It now seems that it was Alkane were not only wasting their money but tarnishing the reputation of a technology which can make an important contribution to prevenitng climate chnage if it is deployed in the right place. That is on the farm where the waste is produced not 40 miles away, hopefully Alkane now understand this.

It hasn't gone away

I occasionally wonder what future generations will think of the values and choices of our daily lives when they are coping with the world we will leave them. Whilst we've shut our eyes and ears, global carbon emissions have kept of rising as you can see in the latest report from the International Energy Agency http://uk.reuters.com/article/2012/05/24/co2-iea-idUKL5E8GO6B520120524

Not widely reported in our papers, but like the rat caught in the trap we haven't even noticed the door limiting increases to 2 percent slamming shut. A 6 degree rise seems unimaginable, it is unimaginable, but that is the trajectory we are all now on.

However radical action on cutting carbon no longer seems to be trendy for international, national or even local governments it impairs growth we are told. So the answer to our grandchildren seems to be sorry we knew what we were doing but saving you from the full force of unchecked climate change catastrophe just seemed a little dull so we went shopping instead.

Greenwash anyone?

You have to feel sorry for Bolosver Council’s PR team. Tasked with explaining to staff why the Council is moving to Clowne they recite the mantra that the Council faces cuts, something has to be done, and moving to Clowne is something, so we are going to do it. Never mind the other, easier, “somethings” such as cutting members allowances.

The second line of defence is the wonderland logic that says Sherwood Lodge is too big so the Council is moving to a site that is larger. I’m trying not to be disrespectful to the Council so I have nothing to say about this.

When both these justification fails the PR team get all eco-conscious and say the Council cares so much for the environment that they are moving to a building that is more energy efficient. Given that Bolsover’s current climate change strategy expired last year, their climate change office group has been suspended,  the Cabinet appears to have given up on providing PV panels on council houses and the Council thinks nothing of uprooting a few mature trees to make way for a Morrison’s filling station, this claim seemed to warrant closer inspection.

Fortunately all public sector buildings are required to declare their energy efficiency.  The Council’s current HQ, Sherwood Lodge, was grade G, the lowest grade possible, in 2009. In 2010 it improved so much it just squeezed into grade E, but in 2011 it fell back to grade F. Clowne Campus has two certificates one for the main building and the other for the engineering block. The former is grade C but the later shares the same energy efficiency as Sherwood Lodge, it is grade F, indeed its precise rating is worse that of Sherwood Lodge.

Given that the Council was able to improve from grade G to grade E in just one year it would surely be more environmentally sustainable to have continued to invest in energy efficiency in Sherwood Lodge and let someone else, another college perhaps? use the main site at Clowne.

Follow the money

It used to be said that only three people ever understood how Council housing was funded and one of them was dead. But it matters to tenants, enormously.

One of the "bright ideas" of the last Labour Government was to get Council's to borrow a shed load of money to keep the rents from the Council houses that everyone thought they already owned. In the case of Bolsover the amount needed to be borrowed is some £94M. Unsurprisingly when the coalition took over they rather liked this idea as it raised a big wedge of money so it has already been implemented.

So when Bolsover Council officers drew-up the Housing budget and rent increase in early March they had to guess how much it would cost them to borrow £94M later that month. They took a prudent view and one of the consequences was a huge average increase of over 9% in the rent which was then approved by the Labour controlled Council.

At the April Council meeting I asked them what the difference was between the budgeted cost for borrowing in early March and the actual costs in late March and what the rent increase would have been if they had got the guess right. The answer was that the rent increase could have been 6% instead of 9% as the cost of borrowing had been £1.4M below the budget provision.

The next obvious step is to pay this money back to the tenants it was taken from..........but don't hold your breadth.

Sunset over the Horizon

Bolsover's Councils project horizon under which they want to demolish their 18 year old building and sell it, along with the surrounding parkland (see below), and a Victorian house to Morrison's has suddenly hit the buffers.

Firstly the Council passed a new planning strategy for open space this morning which says that Bolsover doesn't have enough parks and open spaces - so good argument for keeping the ones we've got.

Secondly the campaign to register the green under the Commons Act has got off to a great start with "Keep Calm" posters starting to appear all over Bolsover and evidence forms already being submitted. You can gert yours from the Castle Sweet Shop in Cavendish Walk

Follow this blog for more news and keep believing in tomorrow!

If your think Morissons will bring real jobs to Bolsover then read this.

Here's an illuminating article from the Scotsman courtesy of a twitter from a (but maybe not the) Dennis Skinner.  If you are going to the consultation next week ask them how they can justify having 10% of all the apprentces in the Country.

Published on Monday 2 April 2012 12:02

"NEARLY four in 10 of the workforce of major supermarket chain Morrisons are now classed as apprentices, it is claimed today.

More than 10 per cent of all apprenticeships created in England last year were with the chain, according to tonight’s BBC Panorama.

The programme carries criticism of the retail apprenticeship, saying that last year it took an average of just six months to complete.

Charlie Mullins, founder of independent plumbing company Pimlico Plumbers, employs 18 apprentices out of a staff of 200, and their training takes a minimum of three years.
He said of short retail apprenticeships: “I think all they’re really doing is undervaluing the word apprentice, and they’ve really just seen a loophole in the system that they can claim money on it.”
Nick Linford, editor of the publication FE Week, said: “We’ve seen record growth in apprenticeships. Big headline numbers look great on paper but scratch under the surface and maybe we shouldn’t be calling them all apprenticeships.”

Elmfield Training, the private company that accredits Morrisons’ apprentices, has a government contract worth £37 million, Panorama said.

Norman Pickavance, group HR director at Morrisons, defended the high number of apprentices, telling the programme: “Forty per cent of people are trying to get a basic qualification. People who leave school without a qualification often feel that they don’t have access and don’t see the kind of skilled jobs or managerial positions as something they can aspire to.”

Shhhhh, it's a consultation

Rumour has it that the next Morissons consultation is on Friday the 27th and Saturday 28th of April in the Assembly Rooms. However with just ten days to go there's nowt on the BDC web-site. Some people say that the Council simply doesn't want people to know what's going on, may-be they think no-one will notice.

Red Tories , Blue Labour and the Supermarkets

Not had much time to blog recently - been busy helping Dave Wells who's standing for the Green Party in Belper. He fighting a Tory Council who want to inflict a massive supermarker onto a unique and characterful town. Of course nothing like that would happen in Labour controlled Bolsover.............(sometimes you just can't tell the difference).

Last time I checked my calendar said April - so Morisson's seem to be finding it difficult to come up with more reasons. With no date even set for their second consultation it's not surprising rumours are swirling around. To paraphrase Churchill - we're not even at the end of the beginning on this one :)

 Duncan

Unfair, Unaffordable and Unnecessary

The implications of Bolsover's dreadful decision to put Council rents up by an average of 9% and warden charges by up to 26% are starting to become all to clear. Cameron has eagerly announced new right to buy discounts of up to 75% meaning that it won't be long before many tenants find it cheaper to buy than rent. And with properties being given away like this they'll be no money to build any more houses and less coming in in rent to service the £94 million loan the Council will be saddled with.

The only fair and affordable strategy is to keep rents down, whether the Government like it or not (what's it got to do with them anyway??) That way money continues to flow into local shops and the costs to us all in paying for tenants on benefits is minimised. So its good news that the petition to get Bolsover to re-think their decision is now up and running in shops on the many estates across the District. If you want a copy of the petition or the poster drop me an email on kerr.duncan@hotmail.co.uk. Later on we will be holding the first meeting with the Campaign to Defend Council Housing so watch the blog for further details.

Duncan

Things can only get better

Bolsover's new recycling service has settled down well and the Council can take some credit for it. I say "some" because the service was one of the worst in the country. This chart http://www.resource.uk.com/article/Latest/Waste_Collection_Authority_Performance_chart
published in January shows Bolsover 232nd of 235 authorities.

Hopefully Bolsover will now be climbing the table but a lot of work is needed to match the best Councils in the country. The staff trying to lead on this won’t be encouraged by the news that the Council's Climate Change group has, I hear, been suspended.

One rule for you......

I understand that following my blog revealing Bolsover Council's decision to splash the cash on a new civic car for the Chairman it has now been decided that other Councillors can book the car to attend their meetings as well.

Curiously the idea of providing pool cars is nearly what I proposed at a recent Council meeting when it was rejected out of hand. I say "nearly", because I proposed a fleet of high efficiency, low emission cars that could be used by staff not one 7 seat luxury car for Councillors. Spot the difference?

I'll keep working on it.....

Getting things right

Congratulations to the Economic Development staff at Bolsover for getting the Council highly commended by the Local Government Chronicle. There are some excellent initiatives here such as the apprenticeship scheme I have commented on earlier. And of course if we saved money in some other areas, that don't deliver outcomes for the community, the Council and its residents could do even better.

More smoke and mirrors

Important news from the Campaign to Defend Council Housing it seems that the much vaunted self financing of Council housing is another sham, with national government continuing to take hundreds of millions from Council tenants whilst weakening their security of tenure. Here's what they say:

Rent and Right to Buy policies threat to tenants

New right to buy discounts will not lead to one for one replacement of council homes sold. Only extra sales above current predictions will be replaced. This ensures Government continue to get their 'cut': a further £498 million by 2015 robbed from council housing. And new homes will be at up to 80% market rents, with fixed-term tenancies - not the secure, genuinely affordable and accountable homes desperately needed by the nearly 5 million people on council waiting lists.High council rent increases this year will be followed by further big rises over the next three years, if current targets are imposed. These would mean 36% rent rises over five years, well above the 22% inflation predicted. With a new round of privatisation also threatened, tenants, with trade unions and councillors, are stepping up campaigning against these attacks, and for investment in council housing.Tenants will join trade unions, MPs and councillors to protest at the Housing Minister's HQ in London from 8am on 28 March to demand investment in council housing with really-affordable rents and secure tenancies.

It's a Ford.

Demonstrating a complete lack of sensitivity for staff feelings, in the same month that Labour Councillors pushed through a major cut in staff mileage rates and refused point-blank to consider operating a cheaper pool car system, Bolsover Council took delivery of a brand new Civic car.

To rub salt into the wound its parked right outside the main entrance where it doesn’t exactly convey an image of frugalness. With emissions well into band F it isn’t going to trouble the Green Car top ten either. Of course it is splendidly equipped with all mod cons including, bizarrely, tinted windows!

I know the Queen has one but does the Chairman of Bolsover need a dedicated car and chauffeur to boot? All Councillors can claim a mileage allowance so why can’t the Chairman, or Chairwoman for that matter, drive themselves to their functions? When youth services are being slashed, staff transferred to shared service units, pay increases suspended and Council housing rents going up by 9% surely it’s time to show some restraint.

I’m told that back in July a member of staff said that a cost of £25K (plus running costs) for this car was out of touch with the views of staff and the public and difficult to justify when severe cuts were being made and jobs at risk. Back then the Council said they had “no idea” where the figure of £25K could have come from so couldn’t comment on it! They then explained that whilst there hadn't been a dedicated civic car in the past it was needed now because the car shared by the Chairman with the courier was no longer needed as that service was being cut.

I don’t know how much the Council paid for this car but according to Ford's web-site the rrp is £22,792 in the showroom with VAT making it £27,560 on the road. When you add in tax, maintenance, cleaning and the chauffeur it would seem to wipe out much of the saving made by terminating the courier.

Who made this decision? – In truth I don’t know. It certainly didn’t come to Full Council. It may have gone to a Cabinet as a confidential item but they don't let me see all of them. This morning I just picked-up a copy of “In-Touch”, the Council’s glossy sent to all residents. Ahh I thought it might be in there...... perhaps alongside an apology for both the rent increase and the recent auditor's letter but those pages must have fallen out of my copy so until they print all the news about Bolsover I'll keep tapping away at my blog.