Council budget cuts

[Stirrer]

^^

You didn't really answer the post you quoted me on.

 

How on earth do they win contracts when competing against private firms if they are as bad as you portray them to be ?

 

By using the cash cow of the Scord Quarry, with it's bitmac monopoly to subsidise the rest of its operations !

 

What they may gain on the bitmac rates they may lose on the earthworks rates you'd think. After all they are getting earthworks rates from sub contractors who are tendering as main contractors for the same contract. e.g. MKL, Tulloch's, Garriock Bros. etc.

Maybe it's better contract management ?

 

If these companies mentioned are tendering against the DLO, but the DLO 'win' the contract, then sub-contract the work back the losing firms, it would suggest something is amiss in the process.

 

Word on the street is that the DLO sell bitmac at vArying rates depending on the volume of material bought throughout the year. However the volumes are set to ensure that only the DLO can ever get the best rates.

[Frankie]

^^

 

Word on the street is......... .

 

Phew........I'm glad you said that. Means I can go to bed now.

[Fjool]

Any local authority has a duty to its tax payers to provide its services as cheaply and efffiently as possible.

 

The SIC are in place to provide services to the whole population of Shetland, not just to provide highly paid posts to a select few of the residents.

 

Err... efficiently, yes, but I'm not sure that 'cheapest' is automatically the best thing.

 

Anyway you missed my point really, which was that, compared to the alternatives, it is not necessarily more expensive to pay a person well and give them the best tools. Failure to do so might end up with a disillusioned worker who takes twice as long to do the job badly (or dangerously!). Not very cost effective.

[Stirrer]

Any local authority has a duty to its tax payers to provide its services as cheaply and efffiently as possible.

 

The SIC are in place to provide services to the whole population of Shetland, not just to provide highly paid posts to a select few of the residents.

 

Err... efficiently, yes, but I'm not sure that 'cheapest' is automatically the best thing.

 

Anyway you missed my point really, which was that, compared to the alternatives, it is not necessarily more expensive to pay a person well and give them the best tools. Failure to do so might end up with a disillusioned worker who takes twice as long to do the job badly (or dangerously!). Not very cost effective.

 

Worse still, you could 'pay a person well and give them the best tools..... who takes twice as long to do the job badly'

 

'Not very cost effective'

 

Just my point about the DLO !!!!

[Carlos]

^^

You didn't really answer the post you quoted me on.

 

How on earth do they win contracts when competing against private firms if they are as bad as you portray them to be ?

By using the cash cow of the Scord Quarry, with it's bitmac monopoly to subsidise the rest of its operations !

Wheras the other option would be to use the profits from the Scord to subsidise paying the same rates to private contractors?

At least any DLO profits go back to the council

[JohanofNess]

 

All I know is that the SIC DLO Maintenance section win their fair share of road improvement contracts when competing against private companies under compulsory competitive tendering. Their workmanship is excellent too. In my experience I have found that some of the larger mainland of Scotland based construction firms tended to win contracts with a low price then submit claims. I have not experienced that with SIC DLO yet.

 

I have to say that the work the SIC does with roads is pretty much second to none in Scotland, we do roads and our boys are good but the tarring work on Shetland is nigh on perfect, they should definitely get a pat on the back for it.

[JohanofNess]

If these companies mentioned are tendering against the DLO, but the DLO 'win' the contract, then sub-contract the work back the losing firms, it would suggest something is amiss in the process.

 

Well it depends if the firms who are sub contracting are asked to re tender after the DLO wins the contract, also the DLO could be winning the contract using sub contractors prices with the sub contractor also pricing on a main contract basis, we have done that with local authorities down here.

 

Word on the street is that the DLO sell bitmac at vArying rates depending on the volume of material bought throughout the year. However the volumes are set to ensure that only the DLO can ever get the best rates.

 

They would sell it at varying rates depending on volumes bought any quarry would, you wouldn't sell 10 tonnes at the same price as 500 tonnes volume through the plant = continuity= more efficiency = savings.

[Stirrer]

Maybe it's better contract management ?

 

Or maybe it is the fact that they do not have to make a 'real' profit i.e. a profit which allows for re-investment in plant, equipment and buildings.

 

I recall that in the paper, when they were reporting on the capital projects wish list, one item was the recovering of the old buildings at Gremista. The cost was hundreds of thousands of pounds.

 

Add to that the recent debate regarding vehicle replacement. The DLO get an annual handout from the SIC budget to replace vans, trucks etc.

 

Now in any normal constructions company, they undertake work of which part of any profit pays for the vans, plant, offices and workshops., either through direct purchase or bank loans.

 

The DLO are not run as a proper going concern, going on the basis that they need handouts from the big pot for normal maintenance and replacement of plant / vehicles. If these cost were factored into their tenders they would never win any contracts.

 

They should be disbanded, with the work easily transferred to the private sector, who in turn will increase staff numbers to replace the numbers lost at the DLO

[Twerto]

Sorry Stirrer I think you need to go and do a bit more research on your facts.

[Guest Anonymous]

[mod] Zzzzzzzzzzz [/mod]

[paulb]

being. rather stupid i don't get the councils refusal to pay for the use of the leisure centres. who pays them when they get into difficulties. is this not just a sneaky way of getting the charitable trust to support the education budget.

[MuckleJoannie]

The Charitable Trust has always been used to support council spending. Remember who the trustees are!

[Guest Anonymous]

Shetland Recreational Trust is facing a potential shortfall of £400,000 in next year’s budget if Shetland Islands Council decides it will not pay for schools’ use of leisure centres.

 

MMMMM seems the council is penalising the trust to claw back money that they 'flittered' away under the DC fiasco, was not that around the £400,000 mark which was written off......?

[Skunnered]

It's only right that the CT should pay for extra and additional facilities for the community that would not normally be provided by the Council, but they shouldn't be expected to pay for the Council's over-spending, waste, and general mismanagement of money.

 

That's why the CT needs to be a separate and independently managed entity (other thread).

[trowie246]

Could it be that by introducing charges for music tuition the SIC aren't thinking about raising revenue that way but are actually hoping they will lose some music instructors along the way? And therefore save some money?

 

Sandwick school has 9 different music instructors going into the school.

 

I would imagine (but could be completely wrong) that if people have to pay for music lessons they will encourage their children to go for the more common instruments ie piano, guitar and fiddle. And we don't know all the details of what the schools service are planning. Maybe they will be wanting less tutors to visit more schools.

 

One or two people have mentioned on here that savings can be made by closing rural schools. We don't know for sure if any savings can be made because the schools service won't give us the information because basically at this stage of the consultation they have not looked into the financial details themselves. There will be extra transport costs and this no longer comes out of the education budget but it will come out of the transport budget so it is still SIC money. When they shut the Quarff school they made no savings because basically they provided a new service for special needs so ended up spending money. Helen Budge has told headteachers of schools in Lerwick that their budgets will not increase until small schools are shut. So if they do that where are the savings?

 

As for the improvement in education if small schools are shut this is a complete load of nonsense and could infact be the complete opposite in light of the curriculum of excellence. The curriculum for excellence hold up things like outdoor learning as good practice and was highlighted recently in the outstanding HMi report that Fair Isle primary received recently. In smaller schools this is far easier to implement and in the Lerwick schools with classes of 25 bairns + I really struggle to see how this kind of learning can work in reality.

 

If Sandness and Skeld primary schools shut parents have the option to send their children to either Happyhansel or Aith JH. I have heard that the majority if not all of parents are choosing Aith. Hjatland housing are going to build 11 houses in Aith so with approx. 25 bairns coming into the primary department and the possibilty of families moving into the area is the primary dept at Aith going to be big enough? If it is not you are looking at significant expenditure from the capital programme for a new

build.

 

A few years ago the SIC decided the hostels were too expensive to run so they stopped the bairns on the Westside boarding in, they made Brae a High school and they increased the courses available in the JHS. Now they are talking about more or less getting rid of JHS. So it follows on that they will be needing a fairly substantial new hostel. Have the SIC thought about that? The answer is No because the chair of the Fair Isle parent council had to lobby councillors to get it put on an agenda for consideration. Are we going around in circles?

 

Lots of people have come up with ways to try and make savings and there are two things that stand out for me - start at the bottom with all the things that seem insignificant like paper and ink (since becoming chair of the parent council the amount of waste is apparant, I often get an e-mail followed up by a letter the next day) and work your way up. Do we really need ferry tickets with blue ferries printed on the back? Staffing levels and apparant over-staffing is the other point. Although it has been said on here that it is good for the economy to have people employed by the SIC it also has a down side. When my man left the fishing the easy option would have been to have tried for a job on the ferries. Instead he set up his own business and now employs 11 people.