What the Greens said at the annual budget council meeting

Green councillor Sue Shanks criticised Labour for announcing its plan to ditch committees and run Brighton and Hove City Council with a cabinet system.

And she also said that they had excluded other parties even though the Greens worked with Labour on the budget while in office.

Councillor Shanks spoke about the pressure on funding for adult social care and the need for services to be properly funded for some of the most vulnerable people in Brighton and Hove.

Her remarks came as the council set a £1.1 billion budget for the coming financial year – 2023-24 – starting in April. It contained, she said, Tory cuts but Labour choices.

Here is an edited version what she said at Hove Town Hall this afternoon (Thursday 22 February) …

Well, here we are again. Another budget which involves rearranging the deckchairs and attempting to paper over the cracks. All over the country councils are attempting to save vital public services.

The Tory central government refuses to give us the money we need and offers authorities nothing more than significant real terms funding cuts every 12 months.

It forces councils to raise income locally, through capped increases of council tax, itself a regressive tax system which makes no attempt to deal with the chronic inequality in our country.

Local government needs to be recognised and valued as the nearest service to people’s lives and one which has a huge impact on the communities we serve.

Having unlimited time to talk this evening, I could tell you my life story – and it starts with local government.

When I started work in 1978 as a house parent in a children’s home in Devon and then later as a youth worker in a local authority youth club and then in Ealing and Croydon as a youth officer – most now long gone across the country – lack of funding was not really an issue, even during the Thatcher years.

In Croydon, the council employed and seconded workers to the voluntary sector. But later came bidding and commissioning under New Labour and the Tories and led to the destruction of most inhouse services.

This was followed by austerity and cuts under the Tories – cuts which have continued ever since.

Central government is always reluctant to trust local government, except when passing on the responsibility for making cuts, and since 2010 we have been asked to make them again and again.

We see it again with the budget this evening. These are Tory cuts. Tory cuts and Labour choices.

Later, I taught on youth work qualifying courses and then got elected in 2011 as part of the first Green administration.

The first council budget I was involved in was in 2011 when I was cabinet member for children’s services. I was excited and proud to be in charge of something I had spent my career working with.

However, right from the beginning there was austerity – cruel and completely unnecessary but bought into by all major parties.

The phrase cabinet member is interesting. Yesterday, when we are all concentrating on the budget and what services could be saved, Labour decided to announce a change in the democratic system – moving from a committee system to a cabinet system.

This is something they have no mandate for. It certainly wasn’t in their manifesto. Then again, plenty that was has already been abandoned.

The leader and cabinet model was introduced under the Local Government Act 2000, under Tony Blair’s first government. However, it wasn’t until 2008 that this council finally gave in and adopted the cabinet system.

Greens – and in fact all parties in Brighton and Hove – had never been happy with the model. Labour and Co-op group leader Gill Mitchell said, and I quote: “At the moment people do not understand that we can talk but do not have a vote on issues at cabinet. It’s just like a one-party state.”

So, when we had the chance – thanks Eric Pickles – all parties agreed to revert to the much more democratic committee system.

Whichever system we have at present will be at the whims of the current Labour majority. But there are other voters in the city who deserve representation. In fact, more than 50 per cent of the people who voted last May voted for someone other than Labour.

This council owes it to them to allow councillors to represent them in opposition and publicly scrutinise this administration’s decisions. It is disappointing my colleagues across the chamber on the Labour benches do not seem to agree.

Back to the budget before us this evening. One may be forgiven for thinking that with a Labour government looming large on the horizon, the fortunes of local authorities will soon take a turn for the better.

There must be hope that the days of devastatingly insufficient funding from central government will be over with the election of Kier Starmer, otherwise, to put it bluntly, what is the point of the Labour Party’s imminent election victory?

However, instead of hanging on and helping our vital services and treasured local organisations weather the last days of this awful Conservative era before Sir Kier appears to save us all, Labour councillors in this city are cutting services more severely than ever.

Surely Labour, and indeed Tory, councils across the country could come up with a way of opposing this ridiculous system of local government finance.

The LGA talks a lot about it, but maybe councils – including this one – should be doing more to put pressure on the government to deliver more money rather than simply produce budgets which cause so much damage to our residents.

This Labour budget is the most draconian in my experience – more severe than any we’ve seen throughout the years of austerity. It will cause untold damage to this city and its people. Again, these are Tory cuts but Labour choices.

We can’t continue, year on year, to cut services while demand increases and while the biggest cost facing councils in adult social care remains unreformed.

We had hoped Labour would look at some of our amendments this evening and change some small elements of their budget to protect vital services but they are unwilling to even consider them. As a result, we can’t and won’t support this budget.

Labour do have our sympathies. Savings need to be made. That can’t be avoided. But Labour does have a choice in where these cuts fall. And it isn’t doing anywhere near enough to protect the city’s most vulnerable and safeguard jobs and vital services.

Labour are deleting 192 posts and cutting £24 million. Last year, we saved £14 million and deleted 40 posts. Is this axe being taken to the city by Labour really necessary?

I say it again. These are Tory cuts and Labour choices.

Previously, Labour and the Greens did our best to work together to minimise the impact of insufficient funding and save jobs and services. We worked collaboratively and were proud to do so.

Indeed, sitting Labour councillors voted unanimously for last year’s budget, including the current leader of the council. That included the so called £3 million overspend set out to be repaid over three years and signed off by officers.

The scale of these cuts is not only huge but may not even be achievable, including as they do a £2 million saving on a reorganisation of the executive team – more deckchairs being rearranged – and savings from reducing foster placement costs at a time of increasing poverty, one of the biggest determinants of children’s social care demand.

We’ve also heard from the third sector that cuts included in this budget will achieve nothing more than increasing demand on statutory services. It won’t even deliver the savings it sets out.

Even in 2011, we were told to reduce costs in all our statutory services, including children’s social care and adult social care. But as demand has grown, so have these statutory duties – leaving other council services under increasing pressure.

Most residents see our services as emptying bins and maintain roads, running schools – despite the increasing academisation of our education system – and maybe keeping libraries open – and are not affected by what most of our money is spent on.

However, many residents do support our thriving voluntary sector, do want us to protect the most vulnerable and this is where the worst aspect of this budget is shown.

There is no greater example of Labour’s poor and flawed approach to local government than the abject failure to inform charities, trade unions and other valued local organisations impacted by these cuts until the very last minute.

Previous administrations have published draft proposals early – usually the December before – and given those affected time to provide feedback or campaign against cuts.

It is what the Greens and Labour did last year and, as a result, we listened to public sentiment and amended our budget accordingly.

This year, opposition councillors, trade unions, community groups and residents had less than two weeks to scrutinise proposals and provide feedback. That is far less than previous years and completely insufficient.

The voluntary sector is committed to working with the council to find solutions and is realistic about the financial difficulties facing the council.

But it also requires a longer lead-in time to find alternative ways to achieve savings, maximise the impact of existing resources, work in partnership on redesigning services around evidence of community needs, manage reduced funding to services and review impact assessments to ensure the council’s stated priorities of fairness and inclusion, health and wellbeing and commitment to addressing the “cost of living crisis” are supported.

That Community Works managed to compile a wide-reaching and compelling response to cuts in such a short time shows what a vital role it plays in Brighton and Hove.

The response, however, was heartbreaking. Charities and organisations pushed to the brink. Vulnerable people disproportionately impacted by Labour’s planned cuts. Lives put at risk. And all for a budget which achieves little more than devastating local services and increasing future demand on the council’s statutory services. Not only is it a cruel budget but it isn’t even one which achieves what it set out to.

Labour have made it clear they do not want to listen to Green councillors. But what about residents, charities, trade unions and community groups? Surely, they deserve a say. Surely, they have expertise and potential solutions to situations directly impacting their area of expertise?

I’ll quote from the Community Works summary. These cuts will “have a disproportionate and devastating effect on the most disadvantaged people, particularly disabled people, children with special educational needs and disabilities, young people, people experiencing poverty and those with multiple compound needs including homelessness and mental health issues”.

I would politely ask my colleagues in the Labour group how they can consider voting for a budget which removes support from those who need it most. I’m certain it isn’t what any of them entered politics to do.

There are cuts to funding preventing violence against women and girls. Cuts to services helping young people at risk of exploitation. Cuts to support given to people at risk of homelessness. Cuts to help given to people with learning disabilities.

These may be a result of a poor funding settlement from central government, but these are Labour decisions. Decisions Labour will have to own as the devastating impact is felt throughout this city.

Tory cuts. Labour choices.

In administration we did all we could to resist cuts as far as possible and tried to do that with an emphasis on preserving services for vulnerable people. We kept our nurseries, our youth services, our libraries, our public toilets.

We are pleased these decisions, not taken by many councils, are still supported in this budget. We also increased revenue from fees and charges, something the Audit Commission is still urging us to do.

We all know costs are rising alongside demand. Despite the Tories 2019 manifesto promise to fix adult social care, the annual shortfall in funding required, of almost £6 billion, still exists.

The reforms have been put on hold again. The incoming Labour government has already shelved changes in this area before they’ve even been elected.

We have suffered from the national issues of increased costs from providers and lack of care staff who need a central commitment to good pay and training.

We still need to achieve savings in the face of increased demand. I am pleased some in-house residential service provision still exists.

However, closing a hostel for people with learning disabilities and a hostel for homeless people will cause real damage.

And this problem is not just limited to adult social care. Difficult decisions are necessary in almost every area. But Labour have made the wrong choices.

I know Labour will not want to hear any of this – especially not from the Greens – and instead of taking responsibility for their own decisions, Labour will continue to try to deflect criticism and lay the blame elsewhere.

I fear whatever I say will be challenged. But what about hearing it from the people affected, many of whom have been protesting outside today?

I have heard from and met many community representatives in the last week and all are concerned about the devastating impact this budget will have. Will Labour listen to them?

We have proposals that could help to reverse these cuts, without taking lumps out of other budgets or forcing staff to lose their jobs.

I would ask Labour councillors to please, lower their political defences, stop point scoring and posturing and actually act in the best interests of the city. Give our amendments fair consideration.

In the past Labour and Greens worked together to defend our city from the onslaught of Tory cuts. We can and must do so again.

If not, the responsibility for the appalling impact these cuts will have on the most vulnerable people in this city will be Labour’s and Labour’s alone.