Democracy should be for the voters about choice, when there
is no difference between the two main parties in a council or in Westminster then
where is the choice for voters? There is an old saying about Westminster politics
that if both side of the house agree on something then it’s probably the wrong
idea. This equally applies to local politics, if the party seeking office
intends to do exactly the same as those that are in power then what is the
point? Dan Jarvis MP has been making all the right noises on libraries, yet
when he travels to Newcastle to speak to one of the worst councils for proposed
libraries cuts he has not a single negative think to say about the council and
their clearly dodgy statistics. Some people seem to be of the view (myself
included) that it’s just a tactic anyway to raise the profile of the ambitious
leader to help him in his next attempt to secure a safe seat. Dan has nothing
to say about the dodgy stats or the leader’s ambition, it’s the evil Tory cuts
to blame, nothing else. These are the same cuts that Labour in Government would have made,
despite what they say now. The banker’s bonus tax cannot pay for everything.
Closer to home in Swindon, the Conservatives are slashing
the opening hours of libraries, sacking the low paid library managers and
assistants, and protecting the bloated back office and service support and decimating the library service all to save a measly 99k. You would think the Labour party would have
at least a few different ideas, sadly not. They are planning on doing exactly
the same thing as the email below shows from a Labour spokesman to a local
campaigner:
“I've spoken with Jim
Grant and he's asked me to forward on the following information to you:
The cuts to the
library services are as a result of the cuts being made by the Coalition
government centrally which are supported by the Tory and Liberal Democrats
locally.
Were Labour in power
nationally or locally it is hoped we wouldn't have to make these cuts. However,
because of the financial constraints being imposed by central government local
government has to make very hard choices about how we spend what little money
we have.
Labour will be
amending the overall budget by finding additional savings in non essential
spending in order to preserve services which have a direct affect on the lives
of the vulnerable people of the town. This will not include opposing the cuts
to library services.
Labour's long term
plan for the library service is to ensure that libraries are contained within
community hubs, similar to the Old Town library moving into the Arts centre.
Unless this path is followed the future cuts to local government, supported by
the Tories and the Liberal Democrats, will inevitably mean permanent closure of
libraries in Swindon”
So the Swindon Labour position is: It’s the Tories fault,
along with the Lib Dems, if we were in power we hope we wouldn’t have to make
these cuts but since we have to we plan on making the same cuts to libraries as the party in power and if we don't co-locate and make savings, libraries will close.
The Borough does however have a chief exec
of a small borough council on a basic salary of £161k a year, more that the
prime minister who is on 142k, for more
like for like comparison Sir Jeremy Heywood , who is responsible for every
civil servant in the country is on 200k. Even after the cuts (and they have
made some) they still have 115 staff on over 50k a year, getting rid of two of the 115 staff would save the libraries from cuts, two back office officers are worth more than the library service it seems. Considering nearly all
council services are outsourced it seems odd they need so many well paid people
when the services have been contracted out. These are the people who the
councillors ask to make the cuts, they are hardly going to suggest chopping
themselves.
I’m sure if I looked at the >500 spending data there will
be plenty of stuff in there where efficiencies could be made. The sad thing is
the “opposition” don’t appear to be trying, they just want to have the power,
blame the other side and take no responsibility. They libraries don't have a direct affect on the vulnerable, they are wrong. Cut the libraries and what is lost to society
won’t appear on the annual balance sheet but when their power to transform
lives, raise aspirations and open up minds is lost then you will
certainly see it in years to come when more people don’t realise their
potential and have to rely on the state for their pensions and social care. All
parties bang on about aspiration and closing the gap between the rich and the
poor, sadly they don’t have the vision to see that libraries are one of the
best ways of doing this. And when it comes to choice, at the ballot box in
Swindon, it seems we don’t have any.
No comments:
Post a Comment