Amendment to Emergency Budget, July 2010 (Oxfordshire Liberal Democrats)

Oxfordshire Liberal Democrats <info@oxfordshirelibdems.org.uk>

Amendment to Emergency Budget, July 2010

July 27, 2010 2:30 PM
By Cllr Zoe Patrick in Council

Unfortunately we all know that due to the mishandling of the nation's finances the country is now in a mess. Labour's spending like there was no tomorrow has forced the current coalition government to impose budget cuts on the public purse. It must also be said that had Labour been in power they would also have to implement cuts so it might look easy for them to criticise when they don't have to do it! That said, in opposition here, we have embraced this special council meeting constructively and set out to try and make some concrete suggestions as to how we may address the immediate financial situation facing us.

In the spirit of co-operation we had tabled an amendment before the deadline (it was sent on Friday evening) with the following alternative to Item 6 (c)

We had asked for the following cuts to be removed:

Positive activities for young people -£78K

Teenage pregnancy -£25K

Reduce the cut in the Road Safety Partnership -£300K

Again, in the spirit of finding the money to finance the cuts we had suggested reintroducing on-street parking charges on evenings and Sundays, which we calculated to bring in £300K. We also wished to reduce money spent on publicity and communications by a total of £103K.

We know the parking surplus has to be used for specific purposes but I have checked with the relevant officer and the money could be used for the Road Safety Partnership, though it would be taken as surplus next year if we are not to change that policy.

However, unfortunately, despite being in my office well before 9am yesterday morning, no-one had the courtesy to tell me that this amendment was not to be allowed. It was only when I was in the Council briefing meeting that the Chairman informed me that this was not possible because it meant a 'change in policy'. I always understood that it was only at council that policy could be made or changed, but it was clear to me that this administration, yet again, was not prepared to discuss or debate this budget - only to rubber stamp was has already been agreed in the papers.

I had naively thought when this council meeting was agreed that there was going to be a proper debate in the same way we have a debate at our budget meeting in February. However, I am proved wrong; there is no debate today; no room for any suggestions or ideas; only the usual driving through the will of the administration.

I leave my colleagues to give more information of what we would have liked to see, but feel very disappointed today that we have not been able to put forward an alternative to these damaging cuts.