22/02/2016

HOW MUCH?

The local government transparency code was issued to meet the Government’s desire to place more power into citizens’ hands, in order to increase democratic accountability. It is intended to make it easier for local people to contribute to the local decision making process and help shape public services.

Without any ambiguity it requires all Local Authorities to publish details of each individual item of expenditure that exceeds £500. This includes items of expenditure, consistent with Local Government Association guidance, such as:

·         individual invoices

·         grant payments

·         expense payments

·         payments for goods and services

·         grants

·         grant in aid

·         rent

·         credit notes over £500, and transactions with other public bodies

 
For each individual item of expenditure the following information must be published:

 
·         date the expenditure was incurred

·         local authority department which incurred the expenditure

·         beneficiary

·         summary of the purpose of the expenditure17

·         amount18

·         Value Added Tax that cannot be recovered, and

·         merchant category (eg. computers, software etc).

 
It really couldn’t be clearer, however if one had cause to seek out the transaction details incurred by Tameside Council (See under COUNCIL SPEND on the council website) you’ll find on opening the latest expenditure report, (July to September 2015) it is now only available in CSV format, with more redacted information than a farfetched Tom Clancy espionage thriller!
 
In this limited format, the reader is also left none the wiser as to what the payments were for, and makes it impossible to ascertain the overall spend.

However, if one has the patience to wade through, you will find a few eye-watering sums that have been/and continue to be paid out on a regular basis.

Of course, the usual suspects are there, sucking vast amounts out of the coffers, but there are a few others, which need a second look too.

Remember the ‘bin swap scheme’ –that’s the one which we were told would save us money. The one that 1001 people ‘voted for’ on the budget simulator.

But, nowhere on that simulator did it mention the cost of replacing domestic bins!

Would it surprise you to learn that on October 2015 a total of £289.325.90 was paid to a company called SSI SCHAEFER LTD to supply domestic bins?

Perhaps someone could explain why, when the council claims to have ‘no money’ for lollipop crossing attendants to keep our children safe on their way to and from school, they need to spend £300 grand on all these extra bins?

And whilst they are thinking of creating an excuse for that, perhaps an explanation as to why £25,000 was paid out on the 23rd October 2015 to New Image (Public Relations Ltd) for the design, manufacture and storage of 30 'market stalls' and the organisation and management of a Christmas Market, when, one would assume that the 'market stalls' had already been designed, built, stored and paid for and featured in 2013's expenditure records?

6 comments:

  1. And your post is entirely apposite as no more than 24 hours later our leaders (sic) elect to impose a 4% increase in Council tax.

    The Reporter's Twitter feed during the evening was enlightening - all comments from the Labour side blamed central government, but there again we would expect no less.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Interesting figures.

    Looking at the £602,000 paid to Age UK by Tameside M.B. in 2015 has made me consider becoming a charity. Not to mention donating my old stuff to a charity which needs the money.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The new Ashton open market is a farce, Brian Rix couldn't have done better. It must already have been under construction for a year. Why is it taking this long?
    How many people are now shopping elsewhere and will never return?
    Market stalls gone and replaced by shops. How much will prices rise to pay the increased rents because these can't possibly be as cheap as a wooden stall and of course security alarms would ideally need to be fitted, more cost, and insurance because goods will now be in there at night and weekends.
    Then we lose space to have a garden and fountain.
    Hyde market decimated and Denton gone and now it seems Ashton outdoor market gone and replaced with lock up shops.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Re Ashton market, in response to Anonymous (2/25/2016 8:39 am).

    I've nothing against the new market, but also wonder about the length of time it's taking to complete. It's almost a year since the first stalls were demolished to start the work.

    All last summer, a time of year when the council could have taken advantage of better weather and lighter nights, I never saw anyone on site after 4pm. Wouldn't it have made sense to pay the workers overtime and recoup some of the extra cost in increased Christmas trade in the town?

    In contrast, the new Clararendon college on Camp Street, with all its complexity of services to organise during construction, took about two years to complete.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Never go to Ashton. From being regarded as a bit of 'a cut above' thirty years ago, it now looks like a cross between a chav's convention and a third world semi-slum.

    ReplyDelete
  6. A very interesting item.
    Am I right in thinking that the late Councillor Frank Robinson and past Mayor of Tameside 1999 was instrumental in the initializing of the new multi purpose plastic bin rollout to Tameside residents whilst as Tameside Metropolitan Councillor and at the same time working for the Company SSI SCHAEFER LTD, as a director or partner in the Company.
    I believe he died whilst on their company business at an airport in the UK.
    Now that is interesting!
    The Blue Knight.

    ReplyDelete

Please feel free to comment and express your views, all opinions are welcome but we will not post comments that contain abusive language or are deemed to be offensive or inflammatory.