Public tells council to save - and spend - money on transport
Council chiefs have been given potentially mixed messages in a consultation exercise on public spending in Bath.
More than 100 people have submitted their thoughts to Bath and North East Somerset Council as the authority prepares to set its budget for the next financial year.
-
The council is expecting to have to make £30 million of savings in the next three years and has already come up with a raft of measures including the closure of some public toilets and the introduction of charges for touring exhibitions at the Victoria Art Gallery.
Asked what should the council do less of, the most popular suggestion was a reduction in “expensive highways/infrastructure projects”, which may have reflected concern over the cost of the Bath Transportation Package.
Business Cards From Only £10.95 Delivered www.myprint-247.co.uk
View detailsOur heavyweight cards have FREE UV silk coating, FREE next day delivery & VAT included. Choose from 1000's of pre-designed templates or upload your own artwork. Orders dispatched within 24hrs.
Terms: Visit our site for more products: Business Cards, Compliment Slips, Letterheads, Leaflets, Postcards, Posters & much more. All items are free next day delivery. www.myprint-247.co.uk
Contact: 01858 468192
Valid until: Friday, May 31 2013
But highways, cycle lanes, streets and public transport were also high on a list of services which people thought should be protected.
The highest priority for people taking part in the online and postal consultation was to protect the civic art gallery - which got more votes even than safeguarding services for children and young people.
The consultation ran during November, December and January.
The results will be discussed by a council watchdog panel next Monday.
The resources scrutiny panel will be told that plans to dramatically reduce the number of council meetings had been revised amid fears that councillors would lose all power to scrutinise decisions.
17 Comments
View all
by emily_bath
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 5:06PM
“Thank you 'cllrben', I'm still not voting for you though.
The Lib Dems should have kept their election promises on tuition fees :)”
by lamail
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 4:56PM
“Thank god the lib/dems arent in the Government thats all I can say .. oh no hang on...”
by cllrben
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 4:51PM
“Hi Emily, I've just double checked. The council currently subsidises £300,000. What the budget says is that the subsidy will be halved over the next 3 years (£50k per year) and the VAG will have to review it's operating procedures with that in mind. Thats the budget line. I.e. the council 'corporately' has budgeted £250k for 13/14, £200k for 14/15, and £150k for 15/16 and at this stage is not intending to spend more than that.
One of the ways the bit of the council that runs the VAG are going to try bridging the gap is by charging for entry. I would suggest that like most budgets, it will be reviewed next year and if its clearly failing, there might be a rethink.
It's complex and ridiculous because the council isn't a single body really but many bodies glued together in some hideous Frankenstein monster, but I hope that answers your question?”
by emily_bath
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 4:05PM
“So 'cllrben', by introducing this charge, you hope to eliminate the £200,000 subsidy given to the gallery?
What happens if the new charge puts off so many people that the subsidy has to increase to, say, £250,000, or even £300,000. What then?”
by cllrben
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 1:47PM
“Hi 'brookwhelan' and 'emily_bath' I wasn't attacking residents, just pointing out the weakness in the consultation system. I'm afraid it is not a 'false choice ' either. The council has finite resources, so we have to make choices. The sad reality is that the Victoria Art Gallery makes a loss of over £200,000 per year, a loss that we subsidise. I appreciate the need to make art available to the wider public, and that's why it's only special exhibitions that will be charged and the normal discounts will apply.”
by BrookWhelan
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 12:36PM
“Hi 'CllrBen', whilst I support the sentiment that protecting the most vulnerable should be the top priority, the Victoria Art Gallery proposal will mean that Bath residents will effectively be paying twice to go into the gallery.
We will be paying through our council tax, and then again in the entrance fee. I also agree with Emily Jones that this proposal will have a detrimental impact on lower-income people who may feel unable to visit this gallery in future.
It is an unfair and false choice to say that if these charges are not introduced then vulnerable residents will suffer. I do not believe it is right to attack residents for campaigning to protect a valued cultural asset.”
by emily_bath
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 12:21PM
“Cllr Ben Stevens, you miss the point about the Victoria Art Gallery.
Firstly, all other museums and galleries are free for Bath residents...
Secondly, by charging people to go into the Victoria Art Gallery, you are having a disproportionate impact on the poor, which you almost have us believe that you care about.”
by 1MVBR
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 11:05AM
“"It is appalling that people are more concerned about the art gallery than essential safeguarding services for children and families"
Well, it would be if it were true. The reason the art gallery was the subject of so many objections is that there is a proposal to charge for entry to certain exhibitions, where previously no such charge was made. So far as I am aware, there is no proposal to cut safeguarding services for children and families, many of which are statutory and could not be cut even if the council wanted to (which they don't). Hence few comments on safeguarding in response to the proposed budget.
Thank goodness knee-jerkers like JayneRD don't decide where lottery money gets spent - they'd siphon it all off for education and health, leaving our rich culture and heritage to wither on the vine.”
by Dave_Weston
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 10:56AM
“http://tinyurl.com/b7n4m26 Hmmm why doesn't it like the weblink for the budget documents then?”
by Dave_Weston
Tuesday, February 05 2013, 10:55AM
“Oh look, this is how seriously they take the consultation results - some clown has made a word cloud out of them. Bless! null
Isn't it pretty! The best part is that when they send this to print as a copy per councillor it will cost extra for the colour printing!”