By NICOLA BARRY

Published: 05/05/2010

JUST when you think Gordon Brown cannot sink any lower in the opinion of the voters, he does exactly that, in spectacular fashion.

Every time he opens his big mouth, he forgets his microphone is still on.

However, bear in mind that his comment about Gillian Duffy could have been so much worse, especially if it has been made by a woman.

We really know how to bitch. Our prime minister, on the other hand, does not. Men call women bitches when they don’t get what they want from them. So, if a woman turns a man down for a date, she’s a bitch. If she races up the career ladder faster than he does, she’s a big, fat bitch and so on.

Women are far more likely to go for the jugular and drop some interesting bombshell about the target of their gossip.

Bitching is fine, provided you are with people you know and trust. In the case of the PM, the voters are not in that category.

As a result of all the fuss, Gillian Duffy is heading for mega stardom. She might even be the Susan Boyle of politics. An ordinary wee wifie, a widowed granny from Rochdale, suddenly thrust into the media spotlight from nowhere just like SuBo.

Suddenly, Gillian D has been revealed as a major player in the general election campaign, with the prime minister wanting to shake her hand for the TV cameras. Her name is now known nationally – possibly internationally. She is, if you like, notorious.

All because Gordon Brown, in a toe-curlingly embarrassing moment, dared to describe her as “a bigoted woman” after the poor soul raised the taboo subject of mass immigration.

Brown, who is also a poor soul these days, managed to forget for a moment that he is our servant and we are not his.

Mrs Duffy’s concerns are not difficult to comprehend. There are those who say she is not a racist; that she was just questioning Westminster’s immigration policy. Of course, there are thousands of Eastern Europeans here in Scotland and in the rest of the UK; people who have come here to find work. But Mrs Duffy’s choice of words was plain unfortunate. She talked about “flocking eastern Europeans” and it isn’t hard to see why Gordon Brown took this as a slur.

Many of these immigrants work far harder than Scots. They pay taxes. They have a right to our respect. However, whatever you think of what she said, you will probably admit that her sentiments are shared by a lot of other people who are too scared to say the words out loud. And, to question government policy on this matter is to leave yourself wide open to accusations of the R word.

No one can dispute the fact that parts of this country – and the north-east is no exception – have been all but swamped by incomers from abroad. Whether skilled white-collar workers or students seeking higher education, Eastern Europeans have been abandoning their homes in their thousands, in search of a mythical promised land. And to say so does not constitute racism.

Since joining the European Union in 2004, well over 1million Eastern Europeans have come to the UK, thought to be the largest single migration movement in history.

They have good reason to come here. Times are tough at home, with unemployment reaching an all-time high. Yes, membership of the EU has brought economic benefits but not fast enough for the country’s disconsolate army of jobless.

True to their reputation, most immigrants from Eastern Europe work extremely hard and are prepared to do anything in order to earn a living. Their output is, by all accounts, prolific, their work ethic admirable. Those who have not been able to find jobs have been prepared to fill the most menial job vacancies around just to earn a crust. The jobs no one else seems to want. Others have converted derelict buildings into delicatessens or similar businesses.

Whatever anyone says in Mrs Duffy’s defence, to dismiss all these honest folk as a “flock”, implying they resemble sheep, following each other and baa baa-ing, is an insult to their integrity.

As political parties continue to debate the way forward for immigration, many politicians and would-be politicians cash in on our worst fears, on the insecurities of many white, working-class people who say they feel under siege.

But, in 2010, look around you and listen to your friends and neighbours and you will soon hear someone moaning about the invasion of foreigners. They do sound hostile, aggressive and, I’m afraid, racist.

Politicians tell us that unfettered immigration from the extended EU and beyond has stretched this country to breaking point, turning even the most liberal of citizens into something approaching rabid fascists. The popular argument is that people feel like strangers in their own country – an exaggeration, of course – but, it would take a twisted individual not to have some sympathy for their logic. Hence Mrs Duffy’s comments.

You can almost hear the BNP chortling with glee every time a court case comes up involving illegal immigrants and every time you see pictures of foreigners gathering at Calais, trying to reach the UK and its unquestioning benefits system.

I am beginning to sound racist, but, believe me, I’m not. This is what Labour has reduced us to.

Perhaps we are over-reacting to Gordon Brown’s gaffe. After all, if you lined up the number of people in this country who had muttered something about somebody else – the queue would stretch from here to China and back again.

Yet, even here, in Scotland, this simple, straightforward woman has touched us deeply. Could it be that Gillian Duffy, widow and lifelong socialist, is the psychological boost we all need to help us ride out the recession, at a time when we are all worried about our jobs and lifestyle? Or, is it simply the fact that an underdog has finally come up trumps and shown our scandal-ridden politicians where to get off?

Tweet this!

The Lib Dems’ Welsh manifesto shows leader Kirsty Williams apparently speaking to a police officer – but he is not one David Cornock’s blog

Welsh Liberal Democrats have defended using a “model” dressed as a police officer in a photo with leader Kirsty Williams in their manifesto.

It is the second time in a week that the Welsh Lib Dems have admitted using stand-ins in photographs.

The party said the photo was “illustrative” and that it would not be detailing the identity of the stand-in.

Last week Cardiff North candidate John Dixon used a Lib Dem researcher dressed as a nurse in an election leaflet.

The leaflet showed him talking to a woman in nurse’s uniform who was actually a researcher for Lib Dem Assembly Member Mick Bates.

This leaflet picture showed a Lib Dem candidate speaking to a researcher dressed as a nurse

The photograph with Ms Williams appeared on page 35 of their general election manifesto in a section promising more officers on the beat.

Explaining the rationale for using such photographs, a Lib Dem spokesperson said: “Photos like these are used for illustrative purposes as it is obviously difficult for some serving members of the police force or the health service to appear in general election literature.”

The party said that the use of such “illustrative photographs” was strictly limited to the policy areas of health and policing.

The spokesperson said: “In our election communication, we only used illustrative photographs to highlight our commitment to improving the NHS and increasing the number of police on our streets.”

The party stressed that Ms Williams was not “complicit in the impersonation of a police officer”.

‘No impersonation’

The spokesperson said: “There has been no such impersonation. Being photographed dressed in a way that illustrates the police service, does not in any way represent impersonating a police officer, so there is nothing to be complicit in.”

We don’t intend to divulge the identity of the model for obvious reasons as it would potentially cause a lot of media intrusion for the individual concerned Welsh Liberal Democrats

However, a Welsh Conservative Party spokesperson said: “We were under the impression impersonating a police officer is a criminal offence.”

He added: “It would seem the Lib Dems’ support for law and order is purely ‘illustrative’ – just as it was last week when they used a fake nurse to promote their claims of support for the NHS.

“The Liberals talk about being an ‘honest partner’ at this election. Yet twice in three days they’ve been caught out trying to mislead the public.”

Tories said they were not aware of any such examples in their own election literature, and that each election publication was the responsibility of each election agent.

‘Fireman Sam’

A spokesman for Plaid Cymru said: “We can confirm that we don’t dress up members of staff or supporters in uniforms to pretend that we’re talking to real policemen or nurses – we prefer to talk to the real thing.”

Plaid also told BBC Wales: “It’s pretty worrying that the Lib Dems leader appears to be getting advice on law and order from and actor or member of staff dressed up as a policeman, however we’re not surprised by this latest leaflet – everyone knows that the Lib Dems are a party willing to do just about anything to get votes.”

“They have also tried to dress Nick Clegg up as someone who cares about Wales – and clearly that’s not true.”

A spokesperson for Welsh Labour said: “First a fake nurse, then a fake policeman – what’s next, a picture with Fireman Sam?

‘Media intrusion’

“Everyone knows that the Lib Dems will do absolutely anything for a vote, from their dodgy graphs to make-believe photos, they have always been the shameless chancers of Welsh politics.”

Lib Dems said they would not reveal the identity of the stand-in police officer.

“We don’t intend to divulge the identity of the model for obvious reasons as it would potentially cause a lot of media intrusion for the individual concerned and is not material to the issue,” the party spokesperson said.

Tweet this!

We are in desperate need of social and “truly affordable” housing for rental with 10,000 people on the Highland Council Housing Waiting List.
Those on local average earnings have little chance of accessing mortgages since the Banking crisis.
Most work locally and need housing in the areas where they work.  Spiralling petrol and diesel costs make it even more difficult for those on lower incomes who live in rural areas, hence my concern on this issue.

Members of the public have made clear their dismay over Labour Government’s failure to control immigration.
Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrat comments, recently broadcast, have incensed the electorate when stating Inverness and other areas need more migrants! Gordon Brown’s Labour “open borders” policy has been a complete failure. Massive increases in migration have resulted in overstretched Public Services. The increased cost of the Benefits System underpinning the policy could have major economic consequences.

If migrants are to be welcomed, we must ensure crucial infrastructure is in place, including jobs, education, health and housing and naturally the ability to cope with the diversity of languages involved which is particularly difficult in rural areas.

We need to develop Tourism further as it is a principal Highlands industry and vital for local economy creating crucial meaningful jobs and provide the necessary homes for these people.

We need a common sense approach to address Highlands problems.

Jim Ferguson
****************************

Press Release 21^st April 2010

Lib Dem proposal increasing cost of new homes sheer madness

Home building industry body Homes for Scotland, whose membership provides 95% of all homes built for sale in Scotland as well as an increasingly significant proportion of affordable housing, today slammed Liberal Democrat proposals to add VAT to new build homes if elected to Government.

On the day that Tavish Scott launched the party’s manifesto in Scotland, the organisation’s Chief Executive Jonathan Fair said:

“Somehow, the Liberal Democrats seem to be unaware that Scotland, not to mention the UK as a whole, is facing its worst housing crisis since the Second World War.  Not only has our industry lost up to half its workforce, development is touching an all-time low and vital First Time Buyers are struggling to find deposits of up to 25%.  Any measure increasing the cost of new homes, whether in the public or private sector, is sheer madness and will simply exacerbate the problems we as a country already face.”

Ends

Enquiries to:

Jennifer Kennedy, Homes for Scotland – 0131 455 8350

Notes to Editors:

Homes for Scotland (www.homesforscotland.com) represents the country’s home building industry which, prior to the onset of the credit crunch,:

-  was the largest source of private investment in Scotland and the largest user of the planning system

- built 20,000 new homes, contributed £6bn to the economy and directly impacted the employment of 100,000 people (2007 figures)

Half the industry’s directly employed jobs have already been lost and Scottish new build housing output has plummeted, presenting far-reaching and long-term social and economic consequences.

Click here to read Homes for Scotland’s “building for their future” appeal to MPs as they prepare to enter the election season.

Tweet this!

Earlier in the week the Liberal Democrats launched a poster, warning of a VAT bombshell if the Conservatives won. Cross-examined by BBC1′s Politics Show today the Liberal Democrats’ Treasury spokesman admitted that the idea of a £389 bombshell was conjecture and conceded that he couldn’t rule out a hike in VAT. Transcript below.

JON SOPEL: I mean let’s leave aside whether or whether not there is a black hole in the Tories’ finances. Leave that to one side. You don’t know factually, that they are going to raise VAT. That is your conjecture.

VINCE CABLE: It is a conjecture and it’s a reasonable assumption and I wouldn’t claim anymore than that.

JON SOPEL: And that £389 is a rough figure plucked –

VINCE CABLE: It’s a ball park estimate of what it would require in order to fill that gap, and it seems a reasonable way of expressing that argument.”

…

JON SOPEL: Would you rule out raising VAT?

VINCE CABLE: No, I don’t. It’s something –
JON SOPEL: So therefore your position is no different to them.”

Well done Mr Sopel. Vince Cable is a serial flip-flopper.

Tim Montgomerie

Tweet this!

Nick Clegg claimed a couple of days ago that the general election is not a two-horse race.

As the BBC reports, he said:

“This isn’t the old politics of a two-horse race between Labour and the Conservative Party.”

For anyone familiar with Liberal Democrat election literature in their target seats, this claim from their leader will come as something of a surprise.

Take, for example, the below leaflet the party has been distributing in Sheffield Hallam, where the Lib Dem candidate is “local campaigner” and incumbent MP, er, Nick Clegg:

Forgetting the disingenuously skewed graph for a moment, if it’s a two-horse race in Sheffield Hallam on account of the Labour Party starting in a distant third place on 19%, then what difference is there with the national battle at this election – where the Liberal Democrats start a distant third with a similar percentage of the vote and fewer than 10% of the seats?

People of Britain: it’s a two-horse race here – only the Conservatives can beat to win this general election and form a government. Voting Lib Dem only helps the Labour Party remain in office.

Jonathan Isaby

Tweet this!

Tuesday, March 30 2010

Previously unpublished papers reveal the true scope of Labour’s dependency on union cash.

Following Conservative pressure, the Government will publish the previously confidential minutes and papers of the Inter-Party Talks on the Funding of Political Parties.

Francis Maude, Shadow Minister for the Cabinet Office, led the Conservative delegation in the Talks. “Gordon Brown wrecked the opportunity to clean up politics because he wanted the unions’ votes to become Labour Party leader”, he said. “These documents expose the Labour Party’s addiction to union cash”.

The Talks were chaired by Sir Hayden Phillips and were suspended without substantive agreement in October 2007.

Peter Watt, then Labour General Secretary and a delegate on the Talks, has subsequently written how the Talks failed since “the Labour Party could not resolve its internal issues”, “my own party was the biggest block to reform” and Gordon Brown “repeatedly warned the Prime Minister [Tony Blair] that he would block any attempt to reduce the unions’ power.”

Peter Watt also notes how the Liberal Democrats were bought off by Labour:  “[Labour] managed to clinch a deal with the LibDems by promising that Menzies (Ming) Campbell would get a taxpayer-funded car and driver if the reforms went through.”

The newly published papers today reveal the true extent of the union funding of the Labour Party:

• Many union members would not pay a political levy to the Labour Party if given a choice.
• Some trade unions affiliate more individuals to the Labour Party than they have union members paying a political levy (only money from the political levy can be used for political purposes).
• From 2001 to 2006, the unions gave the Labour Party £45 million in cash.
• Trade unions pay £1 million a year to the Labour Party at a local and regional level, tying in local Labour Party branches through binding “Constituency Development Plans”.

Sir Hayden Phillips drew up detailed option papers on how the political levy could be reformed to give union members genuine choice. The Labour Party objected to these proposals. This was the key stumbling block that led to the Talks failing.

It’s wrong that union barons, not rank-and-file union members, decide how much to give to Labour”, Maude added.

“A Conservative Government will seek an agreed long-term settlement that would introduce an across-the-board cap on donations to end the big donor culture. As part of that reform, union members must have real choice on whether they want to pay a political levy and where it goes.”

Interesting to see how easy it was to buy off the Libdems.  I suppose some things never change.

Jim Ferguson

Tweet this!

Gordon Brown now leads a discredited Government.

The latest revelations regarding the three Labour MP’s who were caught in a sting operation offering to influence  Government policy for money is sickening. Confidence in the members of Parliament is at an all time low as people form the opinion that none can be trusted with even the basic decency of someone expected in such high office.

I find it quite embarrasing to see the greed of people surface like this and ofcourse as a political candidate I feel uncomfortable with the fact that as a political candidate people are looking at me and asking if I am the same. Would I also conduct my self in this greedy dishonest way ?

The answer is no. I am horrified at how far those we trusted to run the country have fallen but perhaps we are also to blame !

Thats right we as in the electorate are also to blame. Let me explain.

Its not political parties who elect MP’s to parliament. Yes they select the candidates but its the people who vote and give those people they elect the mandate to enter parliament.

Perhaps we need to look at what we base our decisions on not only on party policy but to look with a far more critical eye at those we are preparing to vote for.

I believe that the general public need to be very certain that they know exactly where the political candidates stand on the fundamental issues of importance to them and to the good of the country.

Why vote for someone who has never experianced the real working world for example. ? A Career politician who knows noting of the pressures or issues of everday life ? Some career politicians are perfectly capable ofcourse but the question remains valid.

Scrutiny of the candidates views is fundamental to ensuring that only candidates of good character and trustworthiness should enter parliament. If there had been more scrutiny of the candidates themselves and a hard look at what they may have already achieved in life instead of a blind vote cast purely on party lines then I believe we could have avoided a lot of the problems that we have seen.

Patricia Hewitt, Geoff Hoon and Stephen Byers are now disgraced former Labour cabinet ministers who have shown their true nature. What appals me is that these people were involved and sat at the most senior positions in Government. The question is did they conduct themselves in this way while in those positions of power and influence.

Are there more Government ministers on the take ?

As for myself I will stand with the people of the Highlands in this region and give every support and assistance in a truthful and honest way. If I am elected to Parliament then the trust that has been invested in me will not be wasted but I will lead this region with strength and integrity.

I have been involved in business and hold positions of the highest order in other organisations where truth and honesty are beyond doubt.

There would be no distinction made as far as my views on parliamentary affairs are concerned.

The people require politicians who can be trusted and who will assist the country to go forward with honesty, hard work and above all who they can trust.

Jim Ferguson

Tweet this!

BBC BRIAN TAYLOR

As the Conservative Parliamentary Candidate for Inverness Nairn Badenoch and Strathspey at the forthcoming General Election I was delighted that the BBC had invited the various political parties to attend a live radio show in Avimore in the Scottish Highlands.

A number of us agreed to attend but on arrival despite having been on the list I was refused entry due to the fact I was a political Candidate.

The BBC told me that they had to remain impartial and that Candidates were not allowed in so that no one had an unfair advantage.

However Danny Alexander the LibDem MP who’s seat I am contesting is also a candidate. Not only was he allowed to attend but he was also on the panel. I pointed this out to the BBC,  but they refused to listen. When the SNP Candidate arrived we discussed the situation and agreed that we would simply sit in the audience and not take part in the debate. Once again we were refused.

Later I spoke to security staff who had controlled entry to the room where the broadcast was taking place. They confirmed that they had been specifically told to refuse entry to the Labour Candidate Mike Robb as the BBC had been concerned that he was going to disrupt proceedings. I spoke with the hotel staff who also confirmed they were simply acting on instructions from their client.

While I accept that the BBC wish to remain impartial, why on earth then would they allow Danny Alexander to remain on the panel. It would have been easy to arrange to have a LibDem MSP to join the Conservative, Labour and SNP MSP’s who were also on the panel.

Danny Alexander should therefore never have been allowed to attend this event let alone sit on the panel.

With a General Election just around the corner this gave him a distinct advantage and high profile that was denied to the other political Candidates.

The BBC have been accused of left leaning, liberal bias before, but now I have experienced it for myself.

I have written to the BBC demanding a full and detailed explanation as to why they acted the way they did including the political editor Brian Taylor who Chaired the debate.

So far they have not even acknowledged my email.

I am sure that Danny Alexander is relieved. However he will have to face me on the various hustings where there will be no liberal bias allowed.

Bring on the General Election.

Jim Ferguson

Candidates barred from BBC debate

Anger over reception at Aviemore

By Iain Ramage

Published: 22/03/2010

A WOULD-BE Tory politician who was among three election candidates barred from a live BBC lunchtime debate at Aviemore Highland Resort claims they were “treated like terrorists”.

Jim Ferguson, the Conservative candidate for the forthcoming contest for the Inverness, Nairn, Badenoch and Strathspey constituency, is the boss of an Inverness security firm.

Stunned by the reception the trio had on Friday, he has written to the corporation asking for an explanation.

SNP candidate John Finnie and Labour’s Mike Robb were equally amazed to have been refused entry to Brian Taylor’s Big Debate on Radio Scotland despite being on the original audience guest list.

Mr Ferguson said: “We were treated like terrorists. It was totally bizarre.

“I was astonished to have been refused entry to a public debate. I explained that Danny Alexander was the MP, and also a candidate, and asked why he was allowed in and I wasn’t.

“It was embarrassing. It was humiliating. I felt this was absolutely undemocratic and very worrying of the BBC to be allowing the proceedings to happen like that.

“John Finnie and I even offered to observe the debate without asking questions, but they wouldn’t accept that.

“They have given Danny Alexander an unfair advantage.”

Mr Robb said: “I was initially told by the programme’s researcher that I could attend the event. However, I was later called by the programme to say that, as a declared local candidate, I would not be allowed to on the grounds of political impartiality.

“I was astonished to find out that the Lib Dems were to be represented on the panel by local MP Danny Alexander, rather than a Lib Dem MSP.

“He therefore had a platform to put his views to local voters whilst his political opponents at the coming general election were barred from even being allowed in the room.”

Mr Finnie, the opposition SNP group leader on Highland Council, said: “It does seem very peculiar.”

A spokeswoman for BBC Scotland said: “Participants and audiences at our debate programmes reflect our guidelines on impartiality.

“We are confident these guidelines were met.”

Mr Alexander declined to comment.

Tweet this!

I am disapointed to see that the Highland Council who now have to make £12 million pounds of savings are cutting front line services in areas such as care workers who are a lifeline to many families across this region.

The SNP, Labour and LibDems have all had an opportunity at running the Highland Council but have failed to achieve the outcomes that the people need. Their in-fighting and petty politics have caused inaction and a failure to properly provide for the elderly community which is growing at an incredible rate.

There really does have to be some common sense introduced so that we don’t end up with a situation where we simply dont have the resources to cope.

Add to this the fact that we have had huge numbers of Eastern Europeans migrating to the Highlands who have not being paying contributions to the country but who quickly claim all their entitlements and we see a recipe for disaster due to not having the care provision and infrastructure to cope. The Labour Government were warned that this would happen but neither they nor the LibDems were prepared to listen and simply used political correctness as a weapon to silence their critics.

The SNP are faring no better and despite thousands of Scottish jobs being lost on a weekly basis they still adopt an insane policy of trying to bring huge numbers of immigrants to Scotland when there is simply no jobs for them.

An already overburdoned NHS is now creaking at the seams and the recent case of having 54 beds at Raigmore hospital blocked is tragic. Almost an entire floor is now taken up with people who have no other place to go because the Highland Council did not make the proper provision when they had the opportunity to do so. The bed blocking situation at Raigmore hospital has seen a 50% increase in just one year and may increase further next year unless a soloution can be found.

Local people who require hospital treatment will likely find that waiting lists will grow and with cutbacks in funding this will conspire to bring greater pressure to bear on local people.

Our elderly deserve better and after a lifetime of paying contributions into the NHS and their taxes they should not be worrying about healthcare provision at a time of life when they should be able to relax and take life at a slower pace.

I hope that people across the Highlands quickly wake up to the failures of those we trusted to lead and prepare this region for the future.

Immediate action must now be taken before it really is too late.

Jim Ferguson

Thought you should see (if you have not already seen), the areas that Highland Council are looking to achieve budget cuts and reduce level of service delivery at front end.

Looks to me as if everything possible is being done to protect the non-performing layers of management earning salaries  in excess of £40,000 per annum.

One example detailed below demonstrates how management level salaries have got completely out of control:

“Schools General Reduce the number of Quality Improvement Officers by 2″ – Saving 0.140 = £140,000 simply staggering, given the average level of earnings across the Highlands of those employed outside of the Public Sector

The areas that appear to be under the knife are the very areas community leaders feel should be strengthened. particularly in relation to Education and Care of the Elderly!

Please click the link to download the Highland Council document concerned:

http://www.highland.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/FD04B6BA-B0E6-4CC5-B3D6-A10FCA5CE352/0/Item9HC4809.pdf

This is the document listing the potential cutbacks for the next two or three financial years within Highland Council and highlights the years of gross mis-management  of public finances by  successive political parties and elected councillors

Large sums of money have been wasted on flights of fancy, such as the Kessock Bridge fireworks display, with no thought as to how the mooey could have been better utilised for public benefit.

The huge external debt running into hundreds of £Millions, run up by successive administrations has never rung any alarm bells, whilst job protectionism has always been exhibited at the highest level of management – this simply cannot be allowed to continue.

Best wishes

Barrie Haycock
Chair Planning Watch UK

********************************************************

Documentation extract (NOT Edited):

Highland Council Agenda

Item – 4 March 2010 Report

Budget Consultation
Report by Depute Chief Executive & Director of Finance

Summary

Highland Council, on 11 February, noted that budget consultation proposals would be considered by the Council in March. This report sets out the proposed approach to the
budget consultation exercise.

1. Introduction

1.1 The revenue budget for 2010/11 was agreed by the Council on 11 February. While that report set out a range of savings now agreed for 2011/12 and 2012/13, it
highlighted a considerable budget gap remained across those two years, estimated at £36m.

1.2 Recent comments by the Accounts Commission on the 2009 Audit Overview Report, sets in context the challenges faced by Council’s in the wake of the
economic downturn.

“…the scale of the budget challenge they face means councils need to take urgent
action. It is essential that they continue to develop and implement plans to cope
with the tough times ahead, including thinking radically about service design and
delivery.”

1.3 Given the difficult financial prospects for local government over the next few years, and the level of savings the Council is likely to be faced with, the Council agreed to
consult on budget proposals for 2011/12 and 2012/13, prior to the proposals being considered by the Council in the Autumn of 2010.

1.4 This report sets out the proposed approach to the budget consultation exercise.

1.5 This report is produced in support of the Council’s corporate governance process, which in turn is designed to support/augment the Council’s overall/corporate
delivery of all of its obligations in terms of the Single Outcome Agreement.

2. Purpose of Consultation

2.1 The purpose of the budget consultation exercise will be to:-

? Seeks views from the public and other stakeholders, on a range of specific budget proposals the Council may be asked to consider in Autumn 2010.

? Seek views on the more strategic matters the Council is considering in relation to the budget, for example the education provision/school estate review and the
waste collection strategy.

? Ask the consultees for any areas where they feel budget savings could or should be made.

? Raise awareness of the financial challenges facing the Council and actions that may be necessary to address that.

3. Format of Consultation

3.1 A consultation document will be produced to support the exercise. This document will set out:-

? The financial context facing the Council, including the level of savings the Council thinks will have to be made over the next two years.

? Information on what the Council currently spends its budget on.

? The types of strategic review the Council is conducting or considering in major service areas e.g.

? Corporate Improvement Programme to improve efficiency and effectiveness (including procurement, asset management and business support along with other projects).

? Review of management costs.

? Reduction in travel and subsistence costs.

? Business case review for 5 new care homes.

? Review of education provision/school estate.

? Review of waste collection strategy.

? A range of specific saving proposals the Council may be asked to consider in Autumn 2010.

? Any other relevant supporting information.

? The format of response sought, including questions to be asked of consultees.

3.2 As a working draft, the enclosed annex 1 sets out a list of saving proposals that may feature in the consultation document. This list represents those savings identified by Services as part of the 2010/11 budget exercise, over and above those agreed by the Council to date. Some further refinement to proposals, and incorporate of further information where appropriate, will take place before finalised.

3.3 The consultation document will be hosted on the Council website, with consideration given to availability/distribution through other mediums where appropriate. It is not intended to print mass copies of the document, or utilise newspaper advertising or supplements, to minimise the costs of the consultation.

3.4 Consultees will be asked to provide comments via email, or in writing. Consideration will be given to a dedicated email address for responses. Ward
Forum meetings will also be used to discuss the consultation and receive feedback.

3.5 The Council has agreed that a Citizen Panel be established to support consultation on a range of matters, including the budget. Given the time necessary to recruit
and establish the panel, it will not be possible to use the panel for this initial budget consultation. It is expected that once up and running, the panel will be used for
future budget consultations.

4. Questions to be asked

4.1 While the Council could use a ‘blank sheet’ approach, i.e. leave the consultees to determine the format and content of their response, there are benefits in providing
a structure to the expected response, to aid analysis and collation.

4.2 A range of questions could be considered, to provide a structure to the response, while still leaving the consultee as much freedom as possible to give their views.
The questions could also provide a useful structure for discussion at Ward Forum meetings.

4.3 Some example questions that could be included are set out below.

(1) Are there any other areas of the Council, not reflected in the enclosed proposals, where you feel the Council could or should make savings? If so please provide details.

(2) Are there any comments you wish to make about the strategic reviews the Council is conducting.

4.4 The final structure of the document and questions will be prepared over the coming weeks, prior to formal launch of the consultation.

5. Next Steps and Timetable

5.1 Following the Council meeting, the consultation document will be prepared and incorporated on the Council website. The target date for this task is mid to end March.

5.2 The Council will then arrange for a press release, media coverage, posters in Service Points, etc as a means of promoting the consultation.

5.3 The first Ward Forum to be asked for views on the consultation will be the North West and Central Sutherland Ward Forum on 27th March.

5.4 Discussion at further Ward Forum meetings during April and May will also take place, with the consultation exercise estimated to conclude June 2010.

Recommendation

Members are asked to consider this report and agree the budget consultation approach and timetable.
Signature:
Designation: Depute Chief Executive & Director of Finance
Date: 24 February 2010

Ref:

Background Papers
Author: Brian Porter, Finance Manager
Author’s Telephone No.: 01463 702424

Savings Proposals for Consultation 2011/12 – 2012/13 Annex 1

Education, Culture & Sport

Ref. Activity Heading Savings Proposal

Indicative Savings £m

1 & 3 Devolved budgets – schools Review Secondary timetabling methods, curriculum delivery methods and review teacher entitlement formulae 1.791

8 Schools General Review delivery of music tuition and region-wide music support 0.559

9 Schools General Reduce the number of Quality Improvement Officers by 2 – 0.140

12 Schools General Reduction in teaching absence cover funding 0.047

13 Schools General Discontinue the peripatetic janitorial function 0.287

14 Schools General Clothing Grant Allowance – Reduce level of award and change to “voucher” system 0.080

19 Additional Support Needs 20% reduction across Psychological Services, a 5% reduction across other specialist ASL budgets held centrally, at area level and in schools, including some reorganisation of management and administrative structures. 1.000

20 School Residences Income generation opportunities in School Residences 0.060

22 Grants to Voluntary Organisations

Further review of support for Voluntary Organisations 0.312

23 Youth Work Reduction in Youth Work 0.573

24 Community Learning Further reduction in Adult Education 0.050

25 Community Facilities,

Inverness and Nairn

Reduce number of Community Centres in Inverness 0.133

26 Archives Focus provision on new Highland Archive Centre 0.183

27 Culture Removal of the Out of Eden drama provision including the Highland wide Higher Drama course 0.195

29 Museums Reduce museum provision by two thirds through closures or alternative provision 0.400

30 Highland Culture Fund Removal of Highland Culture Fund and Lochaber Events budget 0.509

31 Integrated Library Service Reduction in library provision, including ceasing the Bookstart service 0.394

32 Integrated Library Service Library Support Unit – Reduce logistical support for libraries 0.100

33 Integrated Library Service Cease all development of the Am Baile gaelic heritage web resources, and seek alternative resources 0.172

34 Leisure, recreation and sports development

Reduce number of swimming pools 0.380

35 Sports Development and Play

Reduce support for sports development and play through review of Council and Partner provision 0.138

36 Floral Hall, Inverness Floral Hall – Close or find a social enterprise model to continue the operation 0.115

Total 7.618

ECS

Savings Proposals for Consultation 2011/12 – 2012/13 Annex 1

JCCYP

Ref. Activity Heading Savings Proposal

Indicative Savings £m

9 Review of Teacher input to nurseries

Reduce in line with service rationalisation 0.100

11 Workforce Qualification Standard

Reduction in expenditure to support early years staff qualification standard, as this will largely have been met. 0.050

Total 0.150

JCCYP

Savings Proposals for Consultation 2011/12 – 2012/13 Annex 1

Social Work

Ref. Activity Heading Savings Proposal

Indicative Savings £m

15 Establish Community Health & Social Care Partnerships with NHS Highland

Move towards integrated management of health and care 0.250

16 Community Care Learning

Disability Support Work provision

Review in – house support services for learning disabilities at Cradlehall, Inverness 0.035

18 Learning Disability Day Care Review of day care facility at Beachview, Brora. 0.069

19 Learning Disability Day Care Review learning disability day care service provision at Tigh na Drochaidh 0.020

20 Community Care Establishments

Review Raasay Day Centre 0.014

22 Care at Home Consider tender for all home care (public sector process involving comparator – phased approach) 1.000

23 Orchard Cease providing residential care at Orchard and downsize provision. Restrict the service to short breaks. 0.150

24 Top slice of fostering & adoption budget

Top slice of fostering & adoption budget 0.100

28 Children & Families Overnight provision in Children’s Units 0.100

31 Care Homes Review of all LA care home provision, to ensure best value tbc

35 Day Care Review Older People’s Day Care at Tigh na Drochaid, Portree 0.065

36 Childrens Services Review Staffin respite unit 0.130

Total 1.933

SW

Savings Proposals for Consultation 2011/12 – 2012/13 Annex 1

TECS
Ref. Activity Heading Savings Proposal

Indicative Savings £m

16 Service Review of overall staffing structure 0.075

18 Service Review all income streams. 0.300

20 Roads & Community Works Review standards of cyclic road maintenance. 0.400

21 Roads & Community Works Review standards of grounds maintenance. 0.500

22 Roads & Community Works Use contractors to replace seasonal staff employed on grounds maintenance. 0.050

23 Roads & Community Works Bught Nursery – examine option to procure plant material from external providers. 0.100

24 Roads & Community Works Review standards of street cleaning. 0.500

25 Roads & Community Works Review provision (numbers) of public toilets. 0.200

26 Roads & Community Works Review Pest Control function 0.095

27 Roads & Community Works Remove budget for unadopted roads. 0.050

28 Roads & Community Works

Business Support

Review the burial administration function for Inverness,

Nairn, Badenoch & Strathspey Area. 0.020

32 Waste Management Review level of grant to Social Enterprise Groups. 0.050

33 Transport & Infrastructure Review level of service for street lighting. 0.500

34 Transport & Infrastructure Replace external contractors with internal staff (internal transfer from Roads and Community Works to Street Lighting). 0.050

35 Transport & Infrastructure Review levels of subsidies for public transport. 0.500

36 Transport & Infrastructure Review level of grants to Community Transport Schemes 0.050

37 Transport & Infrastructure Review long term arrangements for the Corran Ferry. 0.150

38 Transport & Infrastructure Review Materials Testing Laboratory. 0.050

39 Transport & Infrastructure Review airstrips. 0.026

40A Environmental Health Review staffing level for Environmental Health. 0.060

40B Trading Standards Review staffing level for Trading Standards. 0.060

42 Business Support Review provision of vehicle workshops including options for amalgamation. 0.050

43 Business Support Review provision of materials stores including options for external provision. 0.075

44 Business Support Review business processes. 0.040

TECS
Ref. Activity Heading Savings Proposal

Indicative Savings £m

45 Roads & Community Works Review temporary mortuary facilities at Glen Nevis, Fort William. 0.005

Total 3.956
TECS

Tweet this!

The rate of registrations for Highlands and Islands NHS is a mere 50.7% which is a shockingly low rate of registrations and this money could have been put to good use for local people across the area.

If this is the sheer contempt that the SNP, Labour and LibDems have for the Highlands then I would urge people to remember this betrayal of their health interests at the coming General Election.

Jim Ferguson

Conservative move to treat 27,000 new dental patients and scrap SNP dental propaganda is defeated

A Conservative motion aimed at annulling the £2.4m annual cost of allowing patients to remain registered with a dentist forever, regardless of whether they have ever been treated, has been rejected by other parties at Health Committee.

£2.4m would be enough to fund at least 20 more dentists, which means an extra 27,000 patients could have been treated

Mary Scanlon MSP, Shadow Cabinet Secretary for Health & Wellbeing, says:

“At a cost of two and half million pounds every year, the SNP Government wants to allow the names of patients to remain registered with a dentist for ever – even if that patient hasn’t turned up for years or hasn’t turned up at all. By contrast, if my annulment had been accepted this morning, at least 20 new dentists could have been funded and 27,000 extra patients treated.

“This £2.4 million a year is there just to make the SNP Government look better. It allows the SNP to trumpet that more and more patients are being registered with dentists – but it doesn’t mean any more patients are being treated by dentists.

“NHS dentists in Scotland warn that this change will undermine the importance of regular check ups, and most alarmingly of all, they warn this change will increase the chances of serious conditions such as mouth cancer going undetected.

“I am astonished that the other opposition parties have also voted to put SNP propaganda ahead of patient care. We need to scrap this pointless and costly measure as soon as we can.”

Tweet this!