Sponsored by
£20m to be saved - but no facilities will be lost
FRESH FINANCIAL PRESSURES ... Coun Ed Malcolm.
A SENIOR politician in charge of making £20m of budget savings at South Tyneside Council believes the authority can emerge “leaner but stronger”.
Coun Ed Malcolm also gave assurances that no borough community facility would be axed – and that frontline services would be protected over the next year.
Savings are to be achieved through a series of service reviews across all departments and by developing “new and more efficient” working.
No area is too small or too large for the savings review – from the closure of mobile toilets to sending less waste to expensive landfill sites.
Coun Malcolm, who was putting a series of recommendations before the council’s decision-making cabinet today, admitted that more council workers would need to go.
It comes as the axe is set to fall on a number of senior management posts.
But Coun Malcolm, the council’s lead member for resources and innovation, says the authority is committed to avoiding compulsory redundancies while pushing ahead with a series of regeneration projects.
Meanwhile, the cabinet was being asked to endorse a freeze in council tax for the next year, and an average £5.80 increase in rents.
Coun Malcolm also dismissed the notion that the council is “cash-strapped”, saying: “I want to put that to bed once and for all.
“We are still a multi-million-pound organisation.
“Yes, there is a shortage of cash and these are challenging times, but we will still be spending £150m over the next two years.”
He highlighted investment in several projects, including a major new solar-efficient housing development in Reed Street, South Shields, and the Green Incubator office development in Laygate, a new community school and swimming pool in Jarrow and the “imminent” redevelopment of Hebburn Town Centre.
Coun Malcolm said: “This is a budget for challenging times, but we have no plans to close children’s centres, no plans to close leisure centres, community centres, youth clubs or schools.”
Although closures may not be on the agenda, the public will see some changes, including reduced opening hours at libraries and increased charges for pest control.
The council is also pushing on with the creation of ‘community hubs’, where several council and health services are housed under one roof.
Coun Malcolm added: “This is a budget for changing times, but we will protect frontline services and ensure no facilities are taken away from the public.
“We will continue to work with our partners, with other councils and with the voluntary sector.”
Twitter: @shieldsGazPaul
Email to a friend
Print this page- Transfer Rumours May 22: Newcastle United, Sunderland, Tottenham, Arsenal, Manchester City, Chelsea, Barcelona, Wigan, QPR, West Ham and Blackpool
- Transfer Rumours May 12: Sunderland, Newcastle, Chelsea, West Ham, Liverpool, Blackpool, Reading, Tottenham, West Brom
- Newcastle United weigh up bids for defensive duo
- Transfer Rumours update May 22: Sunderland, Newcastle United, Liverpool, West Ham United, Manchester City, Arsenal, Tottenham and QPR.
- Transfer Rumours May 12: Sunderland, Newcastle, Chelsea, West Ham, Liverpool, Blackpool, Reading
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Jarrow
Tuesday 22 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 8 C to 22 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Sunny spells
Temperature: 10 C to 17 C
Wind Speed: 8 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 20 comments to this article
Page 1 of 2
hayley4315
Monday, February 20, 2012 at 02:55 PMPending Moderation
wasthatthatguy
Sunday, February 19, 2012 at 11:57 PMThe facilities won't be lost. They'll just be doing less facilitating.
bewilderedonlooker
Friday, February 17, 2012 at 09:36 AMYes thats one option but you'd need a lot of reservoirs to store the required amount of water and for some reason people object to these being built! (usualy townies and holiday home owners) There are some engineers in Germany looking at storing energy in the form of compressed air in old gas fields (fewer NIMBY objectors to this one if it works), others are looking to creat a synthetic fuel, both of these will take years to perfect.
BoldonLad
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 09:43 PMFirst, can I say, we are way off topic here, the article is about (commendable) savings of £20million, without losing any services. But, turning to the side show of solar panels. I am with you wavydavy, people need to realise that government (local or national) do not have any money, they only have what they take from us in taxes. On the subject of "trying to come up with ways of storing energy from wind and solar that dont involve expensive batteries but these solutions are a long way off", surely this technology exists already. Hydro electric power (mostly in Scotland in a UK context), is used to effectively store power by pumping water to a elevation, and then releasing it through a turbine in a controlled manner to produce electricity "on tap" as it where. It is not my field of expertise, but, why can that method not be used to solve the problem of unpredictable wind and solar output?
Wavydavy
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 03:56 PMSo we agree, there is no financial gain to these systems so going back to my original comment. why waste money on the nice to haves, when we are in the financial toilet? regardless of where the finance comes from (central or local government) when will people get their heads around the fact that the money comes from tax payers, local and national.
bewilderedonlooker
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 02:21 PMDont take me as a fan of PV I'm not, I have an environmental background but think PV is not the solution for us, PV its great on calculators, in space and in more southern skies where days are long enough in the winter for it to contribute to the energy demand at peak times (early morning and early evening). But it can never be a base load supplier in the UK same as wind power cant both are to unreliable, we need power sources we can control or at least predict. I know there are scientists out there trying to come up with ways of storing energy from wind and solar that dont involve expensive batteries but these solutions are a long way off.
bewilderedonlooker
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 02:06 PMWavydavy - the domestic systems that are being fitted are grid connected with no batteries, only a simple DC-AC converter wich they recomend is checked once every 5 years. New houses dont have them because the builders dont see a profit in them as Brits have a negative view of them! Go to Germany or else where in europe and you'll find most new houses have Solar pannels or other renewable power generation, and factories wise go to China there are loads of factories there producing the things, they are both the biggest producer and bigest consumer of PV pannels. I agree that they are too expensive and the pay back time without the governemnts constantly tinkered with feed-in tarif system is way too long. I personaly would fit solar thermal instead of PV (there are some realy good chinease systems that work well even in winter and on cloudy days), the pay back period is much shorter.
Wavydavy
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 12:55 PMApologies, like to keep my facts right. should read 30-35 years!!
Wavydavy
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 12:53 PMIf solar is such a good idea, why doesn't everyone have it? Why are there not factories springing up everywhere manufacturing it? Why do new build houses not have it. The system of solar panels does need a lot of maintenance. There are a lot of batteries and inverters involved. Batteries only last a couple of years and need replaced, not a very "green" option. The panels themselves need regular cleaning otherwise efficiency is lost. Light does work, I accept, however, its not as efficient as sunlight. The cost to output ratio is off balance, that's why nobody has them or makes them as a going, profitable business. The quality of the panel determines it's lifetime and the cost of a good one is high and the payback doesn't happen for 3035 years. Its like the political bull about electric cars, there is a national power shortage as demand grows against capacity output. Electricity production is inefficient, transmission lines make it less efficient and then it goes into batteries which are expensive to produce, heavy to transport around, don't last that long and horrendous to dispose of.................fantasy land by politicians to appease the environmentalists. I am still waving.................
gypsey91
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 10:51 AMthere are cut backs all over social services. for seniors. and disabled and carers. and job losses all over. why this smoke screen mr malcome once again truth hidden behind other news.
bewilderedonlooker
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 09:51 AMWaveydavy - what are you on about?? Cobbler is right, the funding for the solar housing project is from central government, all they actualy need is light to work (the pannels used in the UK actualy produce more power in over cast than in the intens sun you'd get in the Caribbean), they are expensive to make and fit but maintenance is minimal and nobody actualy knows haw long they will last, the concensus is over 20 years probably alot longer.
East Boldon Lad
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 08:57 AMNeighbouring council began cost cutting exercises 2 years before Con Dem(n) coalition got into power, result vital,hardpressed ,statutory frontline teams now operating with 50% of previous staff levels with no prospect of recruiting trainees, or newly qualified, young staff. Problem is that it is easy to snipe from the trenches, but hardworking LGOs are having to deal with a public, who have so many misconceptions about the pressures on LA staff. Frontline services can be "protected", but they will be staffed by the proverbial "one person and a dog" and both will be getting older, stressed, and chronically overworked.
Cobbler
Thursday, February 16, 2012 at 08:40 AMi think the solar energy funding came from central government? You don't need "sun" to power solar cells. You just need light. Panels are virtually maintenance free. The life of a panel has not been properly determined, but 10 to 30 years has been put forward. I would stick to waving.
Scritti Politti
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 08:15 PM2) Efficiency savings and spending reviews, councilspeak for putting up prices and sacking people.
janna37
Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 08:02 PMBy the way Mr Malcolm, You could save £28,488.00 per year by stopping that LIEBOUR pamphlet that litters every hallway in South tyneside, promoting how well ( haha, ha ha ha, ha ha ha ha ha) you and your paracites have performed with our money throughout the year. Jarrow John
Page 1 of 2
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.