Responses to Budget Development 2015/16-2018/19 Consultation DisclaimerThe Council is not responsible and accepts no liability for any comments that are contained within this document that are made by third parties as a result of the consultation exercise, nor for any actions taken on the basis of the information provided herein. Any views or opinions contained within this document are solely those of the third parties and do not represent those of the Council.Every effort has been made to ensure that any personal data contained within these responses has been redacted. Ref: Response 1 Dear Mr Pevez, As a member of the labour party i was absolutely disgusted to hear the councils proposal to introduce parking charges for blue badge holders such as myself. We pay £10 for our blue badges where in the rest of Staffordshire they are free so we are already paying for parking are we not? If this charge is introduced then it can only be detrimental to local business, who in there right mind would pay to park in such as Hanley when across the border in Newcastle under Lyme all the parking on council owned car parks is free for blue badge holders, this includes the Midway car park which is multi story similar to the Johns street car park which i refuse to use because i would have to pay for it. There are no prizes for guessing where i shall shop if this measure is introduced. The conservative and lying democrat coalition has deliberately targeted the disabled and long term sick don’t you do it as well. As for other cuts as in school crossing patrols who will accept responsibility for injuries our deaths to our children? These cuts must be debated at a city wide level not just between a few councillor,s, as a council tax payer i have a voice and so does everyone else so don’t introduce anything without a full and proper public consultation as it appears that a lot of voters are going to vote UKIP because they fell that the traditional party's don’t listen. May I also bring to your attention that as a council tenant i find that some of the service's offered by Kier are excellent, my wife and i were very impressed with the time it has taken to resolve the rising damp issue in our living room, unfortunately the same does not apply to our front and rear door. We have mould growing on and around our front door that is now progressing up the stairs, the rear door is very difficult to open on due to ingress of water and the leaking through the panels , both doors have been planed to make them easier to open but alas the rear one in particular is beyond repair. we wish to redecorate the landing and kitchen areas but until these doors are replaced it is a complete waste of money, i am therefore begging you to look into this for us. As a severe asthmatic (nebuliser controlled) you must be acutely aware of the detrimental effect that the mould and other allergens that are associated with it have on my health and wellbeing. 2 It is important to acknowledge the vital role Public Protection plays, in ensuring the city is a safe place in which to live and work, a theme which your report already acknowledges as key. The department protects the vulnerable with regards to consumer safety and door step crime, it creates a fair and level playing field for the city’s legitimate businesses. It ensures all consumer goods are safe and not incorrectly described, that premises are both a hygienic and safe environment in which to work and sell goods, in particular food. There is often the public misconception that what they purchase is correct and safe and as a consequence Public Protection services are often not mentioned specifically, in the surveys distributed, as a priority. Whilst they would immediately notice a bin no longer collected, they would not in the first instance, be aware if we no longer inspected businesses to ensure they complied with consumer law. I’m sure if they were to realise our service keeps many people safe, they would list us a priority function. 3 Hello I am deeply concerned about the proposed cutbacks to the CAMHS services. I have had support from the CAMHS team at Blurton for several years for my 3 children who suffer from autism. Their support has been (literally for my younger child) a life saver and I would hate to think of my children not having the continued and in particular consitent support from the team. We are currently on a several month waiting list for my 14 year old son for CBT therapy and making cutbacks will only lengthen this stressful waiting time. A vulnerable child without appropriate help is a strain on the whole family, especially families like my own where several members need support. The result can then be more support needed from services in the long run, cancelling out savings made to the council. Could I ask you to reconsider these changes and think of the inevitable fall out it will cause. Thankyou 4 I wanted to ensure that I raised an issue with the reduction of the number of FTE Social Workers within the CAMHS service. Having worked with a number of different social workers within the CAMHS service I am able to see the value of having these individuals in each team. Having part of a Social Worker would make it difficult to communicate effectively; attendance at meetings would be nigh impossible; seeing advice and consultancy from these knowledgeable individuals would not happen due to the demands on their time as a result of being part time. Working outside of the CAMHS service, and having to liaise with social workers within Pods can be fraught with difficulties. Keeping social care within CAMHS ensures joined up working, and ultimately, ensures that the Young people and families that we are working with, experience the best care pathway possible. Responses to Budget Development 2015/16-2018/19 Consultation 5 Please provide a break down of the cost pressures and the total spend per department or work area where they have occurred per year But as the headline titles differ each consultation, please provide as closecomparable breakdown as you record it, perhaps like this year grants, recycling contamination , Capital, financing charges, legalreq. social care,DHN, looked after children, learning disabilities. national pay award Budget 2015 cost pressures of £9.3m and increasing demand for services from residents of £6.3m Cost pressures - £5.1m e.g. in year changes in grants, recycling contamination , Capital financing charges Growth - £1.7m legalreq. social care,DHN, Demographic - £4.3m looked after children, learning disabilities. Contractual inflation and Employee Adjustments - £4.5m e.g. national pay award Budget 2014 expenditure pressures of £9m, including contractual increments, terms and conditions and superannuation liabilities (£3m); contractual commitments and inflation (£3m); demographic and service demand pressures (£3m). Ie so for each year 2010 to 2014 the total cost of looked after children per year, plus the cost pressure included in that years budget, and indicate if the cost pressure in budget is an increase or a carry forward overspend from previous year 2010 to 2014 the total cost of looked after Capital financing charges, plus the cost pressure included in that years budget, and indicate if the cost pressure in budget is an increase or a carry forward overspend from previous year Please advise if you are unable to answer as business as usual for the Budget Consultation 2015 as a FOI will then be submitted viawhatdotheyknow.com 6 As you will see from my details below, I am a member of staff of the Governance Section and I am a solicitor in what was called Legal Services. I have looked at the Budget Development Proposals, in particular Reference RES01 on page 15 of the Consultation Document and I may be affected by the proposals regarding Transformation Saving – Professional Services. Am I correct in thinking that the letters “TBD” in the column headed “Net Staff Decrease” on page 15 stand for “To Be Determined”? If I am correct I have not been given enough information to properly respond to the consultation process as I do not know how many Occupied FTE posts or Vacant FTE posts the proposal will affect. Because of this lack of important information the consultation process on this particular element of the saving proposals may be flawed. Could you confirm how many Occupied FTE and Vacant FTE posts will be affected by the saving proposal set out in Reference RES01 on page 15 of the Consultation Document so that I can make an informed response to the proposal? I look forward to hearing from you. 7 Environmental Crime Unit Fenton East Area residents wish to feedback that further cuts to the ECU service would be a bad move there is a lot of issues re fly tipping, littering services in the area and is needed now more than ever. This point of contact is vital for customers and organisations. Requested Outcome: To maintain and build on the relationship with the environmental crime unit. 8 I am emailing with regard to the budget consultation 2015-16 and the associated proposal to cease provision of school crossing patrols. As you are aware Caroline, we have liaised very closely with you this term regarding the absolute need to have school crossing patrols, given the volume of traffic on Sunnyside Avenue and the recent issues with the new crossing put in place on Victoria Road.