Wednesday 18 February 2009

Local Authority and Services for Disabled People

At this time of year, we see local authorities and companies alike start to announce their budgets for the forthcoming year. Whilst sometimes any reduction in spending can be quite minimal, it is in times of recession where these cuts make a real impact particularly on services.

It would seem that the standard for local authorities is to slash services whilst upping our council tax revenue. We often hear them bleating on about the demand on their revenue and how services need to be reviewed or cut to balance their books. Invariably the services affected are those for the most vulnerable within our society and therefore, disability services are always hit the hardest.

My own local authority, London Borough of Sutton, have already begun to enforce cuts. The most recent being to reduce transport services for disabled children. They stress that there is a need for costs to be re-assessed as the spend value for this service in 2005/2006 was £2.8 million but in 2008/2009 this will have increased to £4.3 million.

When looking at these figures, it is easy to say “wow that cost has increased” but we all need to look at the historical facts on local authority spending. Every year, we see huge reductions in services for the disabled and elderly. Do the local authorities see these groups as easy targets or do they look at their spending objectively?

Sorry to say but I feel it is the former.

Past spending by London Borough of Sutton include:-

£600,000 on a bus stop
£20,000 on two totem poles in a public park
• £4 million on building a “Sutton Life Centre” when no funds are available to run it

It would seem that objectivity does not come into it.

It is estimated that London Borough of Sutton has £5.5 million frozen in Icelandic accounts and an additional £11 million sitting in its purse for a rainy day. May I suggest they take a look out the window – the rain is torrential!

Instead of cutting services for disabled people, it may be the case that better money management is needed.

No comments: