Who is to blame for the council tax fiasco?

[Lord Bracknell]

The reality of the situation is that the City Council's Green administration must have known that their budget plans would not receive the support of Labour and Conservative councillors. The final budget will be set after compromise negotiations have been concluded. The Greens have a choice - (1) take part in those negotiations, or (2) don't take part and leave it to Labour and the Tories to thrash out an agreement. Option One is the responsible way to run local government; Option Two allows the Greens to present themselves as victims of the other two main parties.

This is a turning point in the history of Green administration in Brighton & Hove. It will determine the size of the Green vote at the next council elections.

 

[Guinness Boy]

Where is the option for David Burke?

Just choose "I don't care much but don't forget my Shiraz Sven". It's much the same thing. Honest.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Funding from central government to local councils had dipped significantly and is predicted to continue to do so.

Therefore I have every sympathy with councils who take the decision to increase Council Tax to protect services.

More than happy to pay the extra Council Tax proposed by the Greens in Brighton if it means frontline services or others which support the most vulnerable in our society are not cut.

Disappointed with the stance by local Labour however. Seem more intent on scoring political points at the moment than anything else. Appears they have decided they stand a good chance to capitalising on any collapse in Green vote next time round so are doing their best to make sure that happens.

 

[Wardy]

Council across the country are finding themselves in a increasingly difficult situation. Their funding has been cut year on year for a number of years. The primary reason given by central government for these cuts is that for years councils have not been run in an efficient way and there were savings to be made. Generally speaking this was a sound idea. However there comes a point where there are no more savings to be made by restructuring services or renegotiating contracts. All that is left is to either cut or make decisions about which services they are going to have to run. The Green's have put forward a budget where they are saying if you want us to continue offering the same level of service in specific areas (social care) then we are going to have to put up your Council Tax to pay for this. Labour and the Conservatives disagree and think that there are move savings to made in other areas, however they have not put forward how they would make these savings and keep the services. Personally I think they both know that there is no other way, but do not want to be seen to back the rise for fear of what it will mean in the next local election.

Personally I think it is time for them to put-up or shut-up. If they are sure the savings can be made, show us how. If not then stop blocking it and allow the public to decide if they want to pay for the services. Be in no doubt once these services are cut, they will be cut for good. So while you may feel that you have no need for these services, should you or your love ones find themselves needing them in the future it will be too late. Luckily for me I do not leave in Brighton but I can tell you Councils up and down the country are looking at what happens in Brighton with interest. If Brighton do end up going to a referendum and then win it, expect a lot more councils to set above cap rises next year.

 

[Brighton Breezy]

Read somewhere that Government funding to Brighton and Hove City Council will have been cut by 21.4 per cent since 2010 by next year.

Yet people blame the local Green party....

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

Council across the country are finding themselves in a increasingly difficult situation. Their funding has been cut year on year for a number of years. The primary reason given by central government for these cuts is that for years councils have not been run in an efficient way and there were savings to be made. Generally speaking this was a sound idea. However there comes a point where there are no more savings to be made by restructuring services or renegotiating contracts. All that is left is to either cut or make decisions about which services they are going to have to run. The Green's have put forward a budget where they are saying if you want us to continue offering the same level of service in specific areas (social care) then we are going to have to put up your Council Tax to pay for this. Labour and the Conservatives disagree and think that there are move savings to made in other areas, however they have not put forward how they would make these savings and keep the services. Personally I think they both know that there is no other way, but do not want to be seen to back the rise for fear of what it will mean in the next local election.

Personally I think it is time for them to put-up or shut-up. If they are sure the savings can be made, show us how. If not then stop blocking it and allow the public to decide if they want to pay for the services. Be in no doubt once these services are cut, they will be cut for good. So while you may feel that you have no need for these services, should you or your love ones find themselves needing them in the future it will be too late. Luckily for me I do not leave in Brighton but I can tell you Councils up and down the country are looking at what happens in Brighton with interest. If Brighton do end up going to a referendum and then win it, expect a lot more councils to set above cap rises next year.

The referendum is not going to happen:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-26190413

 

[Triggaaar]

Am I following this correctly?
Are you saying that central government allow local councils to set their own council tax rises so long as it is not exorbitant? If so that seems like a reasonable idea.
Are you saying that the Greens are proposing a rise above this threshhold? If so that seems unreasonable.
Are you saying that Labour and the Conservatives are trying to block the rise? If so that seems reasonable.

Based on the above then surely the answer is that the Greens are to blame...or is that over simplistic.

Nicely put. I'm also ready to learn.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

Funding from central government to local councils had dipped significantly and is predicted to continue to do so.

Therefore I have every sympathy with councils who take the decision to increase Council Tax to protect services.

More than happy to pay the extra Council Tax proposed by the Greens in Brighton if it means frontline services or others which support the most vulnerable in our society are not cut.

Disappointed with the stance by local Labour however. Seem more intent on scoring political points at the moment than anything else. Appears they have decided they stand a good chance to capitalising on any collapse in Green vote next time round so are doing their best to make sure that happens.

In a referendum do you think that the majority of people who actually vote in Brighton and Hove will vote for a 4.75% Council Tax increase? I honestly don't think they would especially when you have a 2% rise proposed by Labour, which then leads you onto this question: Are the Greens absolving themselves of responsibility as they also know that the people of Brighton and Hove won't vote for a Council Tax rise of 4.75%? Isn't it the job of a council administration to set a budget? You can argue that the Greens are absolving themselves of responsibility by not setting this budget and asking local people to make the decision for them.

How much would the Council Tax rise of 4.75% raise? How much would the referendum cost? If for argument's sake the referendum were won then how much money would be left to spend on essential services when the cost of the referendum is taken off? If the referendum is lost how much will the re-billing exercise cost?

http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/con...cil-finance/budget-frequently-asked-questions

Section 2 has the figures of what a yes or no vote would cost:

http://present.brighton-hove.gov.uk/Published/C00000689/M00004689/AI00037364/$20140207095834_005447_0021718_Appendix17.doc.pdf

 

[Guinness Boy]

The referendum is not going to happen:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-sussex-26190413

But hang on. From the same article:

Council leader Jason Kitcat said he still intended to propose the referendum-prompting budget as an amendment at the meeting.

He said: "The vote last night [Thursday] was just a gesture because the 4.75% budget is what we'll propose to the council on 27 February.

And also from the Argus story

Angry members also said votes were being offered in return for three Green councillors being allowed another speech on their preferred 4.75% increase.

The 4.75% is still on the table in some form or another and if accepted would trigger the referendum. It's just very unlikely to be accepted.

 

[keaton]

In a referendum do you think that the majority of people who actually vote in Brighton and Hove will vote for a 4.75% Council Tax increase? I honestly don't think they would especially when you have a 2% rise proposed by Labour, which then leads you onto this question: Are the Greens absolving themselves of responsibility as they also know that the people of Brighton and Hove won't vote for a Council Tax rise of 4.75%? Isn't it the job of a council administration to set a budget? You can argue that the Greens are absolving themselves of responsibility by not setting this budget and asking local people to make the decision for them.

How much would the Council Tax rise of 4.75% raise? How much would the referendum cost? If for argument's sake the referendum were won then how much money would be left to spend on essential services when the cost of the referendum is taken off? If the referendum is lost how much will the re-billing exercise cost?

http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/con...cil-finance/budget-frequently-asked-questions

Section 2 has the figures of what a yes or no vote would cost:

http://present.brighton-hove.gov.uk/Published/C00000689/M00004689/AI00037364/$20140207095834_005447_0021718_Appendix17.doc.pdf

You could argue it's giving the public a choice?

I can't see people voting for 4.75% rise, but at least it's a debate.

 

[Westdene Seagull]

But hang on. From the same article:



And also from the Argus story



The 4.75% is still on the table in some form or another and if accepted would trigger the referendum. It's just very unlikely to be accepted.

There does seem to be some confusion ( mostly prompted by the Greens inability to understand the 4.75% increase was rejected ).

I watched the council meeting and it's very clear that the Green proposal was voted down. They can't just bring it back - it's dead.

 

[sten_super]

You could argue it's giving the public a choice?

I can't see people voting for 4.75% rise, but at least it's a debate.

I like the idea of having a referendum (either in Brighton or elsewhere) - it gives the council a pretty clear mandate then to either i) increase taxes as required to maintain services or ii) cut services to reflect the funding gap.

 

[keaton]

I like the idea of having a referendum (either in Brighton or elsewhere) - it gives the council a pretty clear mandate then to either i) increase taxes as required to maintain services or ii) cut services to reflect the funding gap.

That's where I stand to.

I can see the point about absolving them of responsibility, but to some extent they've had that decision taken away from them.

And I imagine a large part of Brighton would not want to pay more council tax but will go batshit mental when it's suggested that Rubbish collection is only going to happen every fortnight or a library has to close.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

You could argue it's giving the public a choice?

I can't see people voting for 4.75% rise, but at least it's a debate.

Agreed it is giving the public a choice but the budget will have cuts in it whether the Conservatives, Greens or Labour got their own way.

You're correct it is a debate but one that will cost money to organise and thus reduce the money raised from the Council Tax rise if the vote was a 'Yes'. If the referendum went ahead and it was a 'No' money would be taken from an already tight budget to pay for the referendum costs.

 

[Southover Street Seagull]

I like the idea of having a referendum (either in Brighton or elsewhere) - it gives the council a pretty clear mandate then to either i) increase taxes as required to maintain services or ii) cut services to reflect the funding gap.

Don't the council already have a mandate to set a budget without the need for referendum? The Greens have the most seats on the council but no overall majority and are therefore a minority administration, they have the mandate already; a mandate from the Brighton and Hove electorate that voted for them during the council elections of 2011.

 

[sten_super]

Don't the council already have a mandate to set a budget without the need for referendum? The Greens have the most seats on the council but no overall majority and are therefore a minority administration, they have the mandate already; a mandate from the Brighton and Hove electorate that voted for them during the council elections of 2011.

I'd argue that as a minority administration they don't have a (clear) mandate from the population. You'll have to excuse my lack of knowledge of B&H politics, but I also don't know what platform the Greens have been campaigning on - was it to maintain the existing service provision? If so, then a case could be made that they have a mandate, but otherwise I think it's reasonable to put the decision to the masses.

I don't favour endless referendums, but I do like the idea of transparency in politics. If the Greens are attempting to put through something that wasn't in their manifesto then I think they should be answerable to the public. I was incredibly frustrated by the fact that, at the last general election, there was no discussion of cuts to public services and budgets, despite the fact that it was clearly going to be a massive issue in this parliament. All three parties largely skirted around the issues because it was unpopular with voters - but it has been THE defining issue for this government. That's not transparent (nor efficient) politics in my book. I'd like to think (although it's probably massively unrealistic) that if it became clear that significant decisions require public backing, politicians would be more up-front in the first place on the big issues.

 

[Hotchilidog]

Don't the council already have a mandate to set a budget without the need for referendum? The Greens have the most seats on the council but no overall majority and are therefore a minority administration, they have the mandate already; a mandate from the Brighton and Hove electorate that voted for them during the council elections of 2011.

A referendum is a legal requirement for any rise above 2%. As a minority administration I'd suggest they do not have a mandate, but then neither does any other party, which why giving the council taxpayers a say should be applauded. The Greens are trying to minimise the effects of cuts brought about by a shortfall in funds from central govt. It's one of the reasons why they have to resort to things such as the i-360 to raise revenue.

Personally i think it's a disgrace that the labour party is refusing to give the people a say in this budget. I would like to cast my vote.

 

[Hamilton]

Am I following this correctly?
Are you saying that central government allow local councils to set their own council tax rises so long as it is not exorbitant? If so that seems like a reasonable idea.
Are you saying that the Greens are proposing a rise above this threshhold? If so that seems unreasonable.
Are you saying that Labour and the Conservatives are trying to block the rise? If so that seems reasonable.

Based on the above then surely the answer is that the Greens are to blame...or is that over simplistic.

What's unreasonable is that Labour are objecting to the rise based along party politics lines. They want to protect services and so by rights should probably support a rise in council tax, but because it's the Greens proposing it they are objecting. And I'm no Green apologist.

 

[Guinness Boy]

I'd argue that as a minority administration they don't have a (clear) mandate from the population. You'll have to excuse my lack of knowledge of B&H politics, but I also don't know what platform the Greens have been campaigning on

I read their manifesto and it was, to be honest quite confusing. About half seemed to be pure common sense and the other half read like it had been written by Rik from the Young Ones after a night on the weed. The pertinent point, though, is none of it was costed.

 

[seagullsovergrimsby]

Personally i think it's a disgrace that the labour party is refusing to give the people a say in this budget. I would like to cast my vote.

All three parties voted to stop any proposal by the others being accepted. Greens and LAB voted against a CON freeze , Greens and CON voted against a LAB 2% increase , LAB and CON voted against a Greens 4.75% increase.