In January, as usual, the Council carried out a workshop on the budget, which we all then seem to ignore. The groups at this workshop were concerned about social care services and mostly wanted to fund all services for older, and other vulnerable people that they could. Last November, we agreed to consult the Citizens' Panel on the availability and adequacy of adult social care in Oxfordshire. We knew that this exercise would not tell us anything that we didn't know already, and it didn't: 'The highest levels of agreement with "negative" words', the summary tells us, was 'under-funded'. We certainly knew that. Here are some more detailed responses.: 'More funding, and when approached making a decision and being more positive rather than avoiding the issues'; 'Continually check to see that whatever services are needed are being provided, not just one-off visits'; 'Far more money and expertise is required'; 'Not enough attention is paid to how stressful frequent chances to care provision can be for vulnerable adults'; 'With an ageing population the demands for care will increase so it is important that funding, numbers of carers etc is increased to meet this demand'.
Oh, we knew what they would say all right. It is what we do about it that is the issue. So the difference between this budget and the Conservative one is the extra £3.93 a year that provides the extra money to do this. That is our main priority for the future.
The ageing of the population is not new news - we had statistics very similar to the ones now being quoted when we were planning the externalisation of the homes for older people. Choice can only go so far. We cannot choose not to grow old, or anyway as has been famously said, being old is often better than the alternative. A Council that aspires to be excellent needs to be mindful of its responsibilities to all who need its services, not grudging, half-hearted and ageist.
The Liberal Democrat budget funds the investment proposals in the Cabinet's budget and puts in more beside. It rejects many so-called 'cost efficiencies'. The balance of pressures and savings is very complex, however. It is not the intention of this Group to appear to thwart a review of the Council's contract with the Order of St John. We remain committed to wanting a high standard of residential care, and we are prepared to see the contract pay a fair price for the quality we expect.
We accept the Investment Proposals in the Cabinet's budget, and we have no quarrel with the additional investment proposals put forward by the Green group. Some of them are affordable within our budget. Two additional proposals of our own are a Wellcheck scheme for older people - a kind of annual MOT for all who want it over the age of 75 - which has had excellent results in neighbouring counties, and a scheme for supporting people recovering from mental illness - or grappling with enduring mental illness - back into appropriate work. Nothing can be a more valuable preventive scheme than that to help people with colossal skills get back into the jobs they once did.
This is a budget that does its best for older and frailer people and is not ashamed at proposing an addition to the council tax of £3.93 for a Band D taxpayer a year in order to do so.
Follow the party's activity on...