This is happening because the Town Council has been keen to continue services that are being cut by Hampshire County Council.
Youth Services are the prime example, where the newly formed Hedge End, West End and Botley Youth Partnership takes on a role that was previously provided by the County Council with Hedge End Town Council now funding a significant portion of the additional costs of providing that service locally. For instance the Town Council is currently in the process of recruiting a Youth Team Leader, for which the cost of advertising the position has already cost us an additional £960.48. That persons salary will in future be coming out the Hedge End component of your Council tax, rather than the County Councils.
But will you be seeing a reduction in Hampshire component of your Council Tax...?
No. There's extra cost at Town level which we will eventually have to pay for, but taxpayers will not see a reduction in the charges levied by Hampshire County Council. Service provision is being localised, which might prove to be better, but in a way that creates inflationary pressure on the Hedge End component your Council Tax bill.
Town Councillors have also voted recently, to pay themselves expenses for any Town Council business that is conducted outside of the boundaries of Hedge End. It was argued that it was right to pay the Councillors bus-fare to attend meetings in the Civic Offices, which is fair enough, but now that the Town Council has got such an arrangement in place it could in theory be used to fund expenses paid trips to Mockmuhl in Southern Germany, to discuss twinning arrangements.
The Councillors claim that those foreign trips will be self-funded, but they have clearly left themselves the room to argue that these twinning trips are "Town Council business". What do you think will happen, if we take our eye off the ball and fail to scrutinise the activities of our Town Council...?
Our Councillors have also been very generous with our money recently, funding new signs for the St Johns Ambulance building (shouldn't St Johns Ambulance HQ fund that?), donating £300 to the Hedge End new Music Makers so that they can hire a hall and professional pianist to hold a concert (but what about revenue from Ticket sales?) and donating £500 to the Asian Welfare and Cultural Association to help fund the Mela in Eastleigh this Summer (but you've already contributed towards that event via the Borough component of your Council Tax).
Now I currently have to work for a whole month every year, just to pay my Council Tax. I'm sure I'm not the only person locally in that situation. For me, that crosses the line in the sand where the level of local taxation is too high.
So I think that Hedge End Town Council needs to be a little tougher on what it agrees to take-on and support, and we need more people who are prepared to question such expenditure on the committees that take these decisions.
Thank you for reading
Ray Turner
http://www.facebook.com/hedgeendindependents
2 comments:
You have every right to question and challenge the Town Council's expenditure. That is one reason why it is good to bring spending on (eg) youth services to the most accountable level of local government.
Also, HETC have done this, and kept next year's Council Tax precept the same as last year's. This was done by cutting back on other areas of the budget.
I see that next month's Finance committee will be asked to provide £500 towards jubilee celebrations. This was not budgeted for when 201222/13 expenditure was planned. Do you think we should agree this additional spending?
Good question Keith. Thanks.
I've got less of a problem with the Diamond Jubilee expenditure, because it is such a rare event. Once in a lifetime.
It is also more in keeping with the principle behind Section 137 of the Local Government & Housing Act, 1972 which "allows local authorities to spend a limited amount on activities they were not otherwise empowered to do, but which they considered to be in the interests of their area or its inhabitants, and which would produce a benefit commensurate with the expenditure involved."
That fits the Diamond Jubilee celebrations to a T actually, much better than the three items the were actually funded under Section 137, that I listed above...
Post a Comment
Comments are reactively moderated on this blog. You are allowed to disagree, but please be civilised...!