Council overspend

[Ghostrider]

From the above linked Shetland News article:

 

But councillor Barbara Cheyne wanted the figures to be shouted from the rooftops. “This is much reduced. I think the feel good factor should be advertised to the Shetland public as a whole,†she said.

 

I am seriously lost for words.... If the above is representative of the attitude of just one councillor, it's scandalous. How can the council ever hope to be cost efficient and prudent with opinions like this in it's ranks?!?

 

Maybe I missed something, but "we" are supposed to "feel good" because instead of going almost twice the distance over budget this year than last, (a "projected" overspend of £7 Million was predicted, although, by whom, when, or the probable error of that figure doesn't seem to be reported....a cynic might well find the word "propoganda" jumping to mind), they managed to restrict it to virtually the same overspend as the previous year. I can't speak for anyone else, but going in to the red at all rather pours icy water on any "feel good" factor round here, the number of Millions become rather irrelevant, when you consider that less than the tenth share of one of them is a whole lot more than pocket change, unless you're in the league of buying houses with your pocket change.

 

Reality check you people on the knowe between Market Street and the Hillhead, you want something to crow about (you'll hae t' compete wi da maws), and give "feel good" factor, cap the '06/'07 at '05/'06 actual numbers, and come back this time next year and tell me you've ended the year £4+ Million under that number, and I'll feel good and tell you "Weel dun".

[Ghostrider]

....I vote Virkie for capital of Shetland,...

 

Lemme flit first, da bit ah'm athin feels mair ahn mair laek Lerrik ivery dai, afore sumeen geens aboot makkin hit dat wye.

 

Is sun is du sees me tail pens winnin t' nordirt ower da Wart Hill, go fuhr im tho.

[BigMouth]

We ought to change the capital town again to rejuvinate somewhere else. Somewhere north of Lerwick. Start from scratch and do it properly. Not another Tingwall though - hideous hole that it is.

I nominate Hillswick, capital of the Republic of Northmavine.

 

 

Hills - where? Never heard of it

[shetlander]

Money makes the world go round.....The difficult thing for me is to decide is whether the money is being truly wasted. Maybe it could be better spent. Does all this money stay in Shetland? If it is mostly wages then it is probably boosting the economy. If it is being spent on the needy, the aged and education then it can't be all bad. If someone is siphoning it off unnecessarily then that should be investigated. Is someone saying that the budget set is right or wrong? It may be that a cut acroos the boards is simply not feasible. There's plenty signs of affluence around Shetland, new houses, roads, schools (too many?). Is it really that bad or is it the public perception thats bad. If the councillors got to grips with the issues instead of saying what they think their voters want to hear then we might get a reality check. I am wary for instance that certain businessess seem to get handouts from the charitable trust. If their business is so good , why do they need public money. Sometimes I think it would be better if we disposed of the reserve fund and didn't have the rest of the country thinking we're loaded. Dust aff da makkin machine etc...

 

I don’t think there’s any question that the millions which have been spent (wisely or otherwise) over the years hasn’t been of direct or indirect benefit to some individual, area or business but whether that’s been truly necessary, brought any good to the wider community or has represented good value for money (which are the important issues here) is certainly questionable in many cases. The inability of some councillors and folk to distinguish between that is, I think, the reason why the Council is having such difficulty in finding solutions to its spending problems.

 

The fact is this – the Council’s affluence over the years has enabled it to respond to almost every whim and sharg, resulting in the extensive and costly provision of luxury services we see today. Whilst that has (and continues to) benefit everyone in Shetland immensely, the flip side of the coin is that many people can no longer grasp the concept that the cost implications of delivering a given service now have to take precedence over the social/economic benefits they bring.

 

Basically, many folk in Shetland don’t know they’re living - the Council are forever being slated for wasting money and yes, the amount that has been foolheartedly thrown around over the years is considerable. But the quality of services the public in Shetland enjoy from free home helps and individual music tuition in schools to heavily subsidised leisure facility and ferry fare charges is highly unusual. There is room for cuts in almost all aspects of service delivery and folk are just going to have to get used to that.

 

When cuts are being discussed, its always easy to target staffing levels, other geographical areas or services we don’t benefit from but let’s face it – most of us know where sensible cuts are long overdue in the services we use too, even if we don’t say so in public. The bottom line is that everyone, wherever they stay, whatever age they are and whatever services they use, are going to have to show more of a willingness to bear the brunt of cuts and not to jump on the familiar media bandwagon denouncing officials and councillors and predicting doom and gloom if they are implemented. Given Shetland’s relative affluence in a Scottish context, will it really be that bad? I don’t think so.

 

I for one am seriously starting to doubt the ability of councillors to make difficult decisions about spending. Most of them now speak very sensibly about the need to make cuts but still shy away from actually doing anything to implement them. And are they truly representing the wider interests of their electorate when they vote against cuts or just siding with a very small but vocal minority?

[peeriesooky]

indeed, is it no their job tae mak da difiicult, but neccessary, decisions, no jist da easy or "popular" wans

[clanchief]

Quote "The fact is this – the Council’s affluence over the years has enabled it to

When cuts are being discussed, its always easy to target staffing levels, ........ am seriously starting to doubt the ability of councillors to make difficult decisions about spending. Most of them now speak very sensibly about the need to make cuts but still shy away from actually doing anything to implement them. And are they truly representing the wider interests of their electorate when they vote against cuts or just siding with a very small but vocal minority?"

 

 

An example of SIC rampant spending excess is the decision to create a new job for the current head of planning within the Development department, apparently because he just fancies doing something different after 30 years in planning! Get real.

[jz]

 

 

An example of SIC rampant spending excess is the decision to create a new job for the current head of planning within the Development department, apparently because he just fancies doing something different after 30 years in planning! Get real.

 

And does the SIC really need a "Assistant Chief Executive" - the council got by fine without one before. It's all jobs for the boys as usual.

[Rourkes Drift]

Lerwick is a horrible looking place. There's nothing much to see on the waterfront whatsoever... Getting fancy lights and stuff to light up some of the nicer looking buildings at night would be an improvement.

 

Jay Corrolla, if you were to compare Lerwick with Kirkwall, appart from the cathedral there, Lerwick is a much nicer looking town with a nicer harbrour front. (and thats not being biased!)[/url]

[Rourkes Drift]

What about putting those last two paragraphs the other way around! Apologies

[Njugle]

Lerwick is a horrible looking place. There's nothing much to see on the waterfront whatsoever... Getting fancy lights and stuff to light up some of the nicer looking buildings at night would be an improvement.

 

Jay Corrolla, if you were to compare Lerwick with Kirkwall, appart from the cathedral there, Lerwick is a much nicer looking town with a nicer harbrour front. (and thats not being biased!)

A bit like this you mean

[shy skylark]

clanchief wrote: "An example of SIC rampant spending excess is the decision to create a new job for the current head of planning within the Development department, apparently because he just fancies doing something different after 30 years in planning! Get real."

 

The real question is, did that person actually apply for the job? Was there a shortlist and an interview? or did he just get it because he is a good friend of someone on the top floor of town hall? What experience does he actually have in economic development ? or will he just learn on the job, at the expense of the public? We deserve better than that.

 

The same goes for the new "assistant chief executive". When was that advertised and fairly won in an open competition? How do we know he was the best candidate for the job? Did anybody else get a chance to apply for that job? No. Isn't that called nepotism?

 

As long as jobs are given to friends of someone who wants more power rather than to the best person for the job, the council will not manage to provide good value for money.

 

The taxpayer is paying for all these people who are going to learn as they go along. They will make expensive mistakes, because they're not up to the job that landed in their lap.

 

We deserve to get the best and most competent, who will be able to save money rather than waste it.