When there remains so much to be done in our city, and public services are key to achieving it, the Tory party lost all sense of proportion by equating a tax-cut to a bottle of champagne.
This year, Labour committed extra money to services supporting education and health; and community safety via the "Respect for Nottingham" campaign.
In calling for an annual reduction in Council tax of £44 for the owners of the most expensive properties in Nottingham (classified as band H),
the leader of Nottingham Tories justified her call by explaining the savings in tax might just enable owners of a band H property to afford a half-decent bottle of champagne.
- - - - -
The Tories are in a pickle over the level of Council tax.
They called for the Council to be capped.
When it happened, they then having found how small the cap was for.
So they came up with proposals for reducing the budget required this year in July, and expanded the demand in September.
And yet, they continually call for more spending on public services.
Meanwhile, in 3 full Council debates, they have now failed to come up with proposals to reduce Council tax increases to the level of inflation, which is what they're telling the public in leaflets they'd do if they were in power.
- - - - -
Questions for the Tories might include - 1. given their repeated and wide ranging calls for more services, where are the proposals to provide them? 2. given printed literature for the Tories in Nottingham saying they do not support Council tax increases above inflation, how come their proposals in the council chamber do not match their printed claims to the public? 3. if the Tories propose to reduce our tax base this year, what extra efficiency savings do they propose for next year, given many of their savings are one-offs? 4. How can they both claim to want to save swimming pools and not commit the finances necessary for the refurbishment programme, as underwritten by our prudential borrowing proposals? - - - - - The Tories also continue to equate money made available through the Local Transport plan process for imprvoing the city centre and spent already, with money they'd spend in the future on pavements outside of the city centre; money which can be stressed is already spent and could never have been negotiated for that purpose. - - - - - Some notes from the July debate -
We struck a balance on our budget ...
Significant savings to meet on-going costs ...
The new money was used to provide more more services, as directed by our strategic plan, and in part as directed by Gov't and in a response to the public's concerns picked up at the local elections, which were many.
And the money raised will be made to work.
Let's be clear. A Tory party that don't want to raise Council tax by 1% to enable a new development and a new vision for the Council's leisure centres, is a Tory Party who won't raise the tax by 1% in 2005/06 or 2006/07 either. There is no ambition for our leisure centres from the Tory party. They would merely allow them to [run into the ground].
Meanwhile, the capital programme is short of money and the cashflow is helping us to time the sale of land for maximum return.
We did take cognisance of the Govt's warnings on capping. Cllr. Cobb says we were warned. Yes, we were. But some councils were warned more than others. 65 Councils got a letter. We weren't. 40 were called to London to justify their changes. We weren't. We were told previous years would be taken into account, so when we weren't warned further, it all fitted. It made sense.
We might have more sympathy for the Tory party, if they didn't keep saying how even more needs to be spent.
They still have an element of 'tax and spend within them', especially with Cllr. Cowan who along with myself and another Labour Cllr., voted for a double figure increase within the then Labour Group some years ago, when Cllr. Collins was setting the budget.
But just look at the spending requests -
- more street cleaning in Wollaton and Lenton;
- more money for repairs to pavements; now what's that a draw on - revenue or capital funds?; whatever, how would they match the money we'd raise for extra repairs from the Workplace Parking Levy;
- speed cameras for Southchurch Drive and Collin Street;
- extra resources for the switchboard;
- more support for the elderly;
- education doesn't get real term increases, say the Tories - cos the Tories don't acknowledge the real terms increases for staff as valuable; they'd have wanted to spend more in 2003;
- more money for youth work;
- money money to implement area action plans, and Area Cttees, repeated again today by Cllr. Price;
and even -
- to pay for a secretariat for "Crime Cities Group".
Repeated calls for more services.
But the Conservatives are in a bit of a hole. They publicly called for capping before realised how quite bizarre it could be. Their national spokespeople condemned the decision in last week's parliamentary debate.
[Updated 2004-09-26]
Commenti