Richard Baum

It’s not that often I find myself in whole-hearted agreement with John Prescott, but I was pleased to see him praising Twitter as an aid to democracy in the Manchester Evening News today. Sadly his attitude on this matter isn’t shared by the Luddites at Bury

Today is the first day of spring, which meant that the misery of having to de-frost my car for the millionth time this year was tempered a little by the irony of the date. I should have known it was going to be a cold one, because I’d spent most of yesterday out leafleting with increasingly numb hands. That numbness was rendered doubly unfortunate because I couldn’t really feel the damage being done to my fingers by a succession of gates and letterboxes each more injurious than the last. Quite why people who live in suburbia need to festoon the front of their houses with gates that wouldn’t look out of place in front of some horror mansion designed by a tasteless hybrid of Jordan and Posh Spice is beyond me. Whatever the reason, gaining access to deliver Focus is like trying to undo a pair of someone else’s walking boots whilst wearing ski gloves. My hands are bruised and battered today.

I noticed a letter in the Bury Times this week asking three questions of Labour’s Bury North candidate. Question two, about the fairness or otherwise of her selection from an all-female shortlist, is fair enough. As is question three, about the funding for her plush town centre offices. But the first question is this: “How has she attained the necessary lifeskills for this important role at her age?”

I don’t think that’s a fair question, nor do I think its inference is right. The Labour candidate is slightly younger than me, but we’re both the same side of 30 and I believe that our ages won’t make a jot of difference to the job we’ll do if elected. I am a Councillor and have been for several years, and I don’t think my age has hampered me once. Although I am younger than most of my constituents I don’t think I lack an understanding of the issues facing them any more than anyone older, mainly because a lot of those issues are the same issues facing me! I have a mortgage and a job and bills to pay the same as lots of other people. I have to think about saving for the future, how I might bring up a child, and how to put petrol in the car when it keeps going up in price!

The age of a candidate is nothing compared to their outlook, attitude and commitment to the role. After all, Winston Churchill was elected as an MP at 25 and he didn’t turn out too badly. And let’s remember, the older a candidate is, the less in touch he or she is with younger constituents. I suspect both the Labour candidate and I could have a better conversation with a university student looking for a graduate job than could the middle-aged Conservative candidate.

Of more concern to voters should be not that the Labour candidate is under 30, but that she doesn’t live in the borough, hadn’t shown any interest in Bury until selected, and has landed here because the incumbent Labour MP is facing criminal charges!

I am 28. It may sound young if you’re 88, but I suspect it doesn’t if you’re 19, and I genuinely don’t think it matters. The Tory candidate isn’t too old, we’re not too young, and I think voters should base their choices on what we stand for and our commitment to Bury, not anything else.

Rick

Followers of mine on Twitter will have been expecting updates from the recent budget-setting Council meeting. Sadly, this wasn’t possible after a decision by the Conservative-run Council to ban Councillors from using mobile phones for any reason in meetings. As someone who tweets by text, this means no Twitter for me, and no updates for constituents.

At the start of the meeting, the Mayor informed us that anyone using a phone for any reason would be asked to leave the meeting because such activity is rude and discourteous. I respected the Mayor’s request, but I disagree with it.

It might seem like a sensible plan. After all, talking on phones during meetings is discourteous. Disrupting meetings using phones is discourteous. Wandering in and out of meetings to take calls is discourteous. I’ve seen all of these and worse at Council meetings, but the Mayor has never before been compelled to react.

If the Council thinks that mobile phone usage is wrong, that’s fine, but they’ve taken their time coming to that decision, and it’s odd that it’s come immediately after I became the first Councillor to start tweeting in Council meetings. Anyone would think the Mayor was put up to it by the Conservatives worried about me revealing their incompetence in real time!

I think that it’s perfectly possible to send text messages to Twitter (or anywhere else actually) whilst in meetings without either disrupting that meeting or concentrating any less than is required. Sending a tweet takes a few seconds, and is a fine way of keeping people informed on what’s going on. To ban it is not forward-looking or fair, in my view. Even if phones have been banned for another reason, they’ve chucked the baby out with the bathwater with a blanket ban.

At the last meeting of the Council, I sent various tweets. I don’t think they interrupted the meeting in any way, since the phone I was using was out of view and on silent. The tweets told constituents what was going on, and were even picked up by the Manchester Evening News who broadcast them live online alongside those of their own journalist. There was no difference between texting my thoughts and writing them down, except that by texting them to Twitter I was letting my constituents know about them there and then.

I managed to ask four questions and take part in two debates during that meeting as well, which is more than probably 45 of the other 50 Councillors in the Chamber. I see no reason to believe that my tweeting had any negative effect at all. In fact, I think we should be encouraging it so long as it doesn’t interfere with how the meeting goes on.

If the Council wants to tackle discourtesy in meetings, it needs to go further than stopping phones. It could start by banning pens, which are used frequently to doodle during debates, or to write down the thoughts that I’d otherwise be tweeting! It would then do well to talk to several high-ranking Councillors and ban them from talking, laughing or nodding off during questions and speeches. Many do that frequently.

Officers too would have to receive the Council’s ire, since they are not above reproach. One was the victim of one of my tweets, in fact, when I caught him mouthing “blah blah blah” during a Councillor’s speech and tweeted about it. I don’t know when my tweeting became ruder than his blah blah blah-ing, but apparently it is.

That type of stuff is far more discourteous than a bit of under-the-table texting. At the recent budget Council meeting both Cllr Trevor Holt (Lab) and I had to actually stop our speeches to allow for Conservative Councillors to stop talking, laughing and interrupting. The Council might want to look at that as well. It’s worse than tweeting in my view.

The behaviour of a number of Members is beyond discourteous and bordering on the rude. But worse is the frequent lack of complete answers given to simple questions and the Leader’s repetitive habit of leaping up and speaking without the Mayor’s permission throughout meetings. I’d like to see these things tackled too. They don’t add to democracy in this borough, and they put distance between the people and their Councillors. Tweeting does the opposite, and yet it’s this that’s been stopped because of the phone ban.

Sadly, I can’t see anything happening to tackle real discourtesy. By all means make it clear that phones should be on silent and nobody should take calls. I don’t want a speech interrupted by “Sex Bomb” blasting out as a ring tone. But there’s good stuff that can be done with phones, and I’d like to be able to do that.

Rick

An interesting side-issue coming out of the recent budget Council meeting was the ridiculous lengths I had to go to to get information from the Council that I wanted to use to help with Lib Dem budget proposals.

Normally what happens at Councils is that parties come together to discuss their ideas, or separate ideas are shared in advance so that a sensible budget can be put together. In Bury it’s different, and we do our dealings in secret, only sharing them with the other parties on the night. I think that’s silly and want to see it changed.

Whilst it still goes on though, I have to try and get financial information to write our budget plans in isolation. I start giving it some thought several months in advance, and this year thought it might be a good idea to look at the charges that the Council levies for those services which it charges for (bulky waste / planning applications / marriage registration etc). I thought perhaps I’d be wise to compare us to other Authorities and see where we could do better. Maybe the fees for some things could come down, I thought.

Sadly, even as a Councillor, getting this supposedly publicly-available information from the Conservative Council was incredibly hard. I don’t want to start going all “conspiracy theory” on you, but perhaps it’s so difficult because I’m an opposition Councillor?

I first asked for it in November (over three months ago). After no response I tried again, and again, and again. Each time I was told that information would come, but it didn’t.

In the end I was forced to take the barely-believable step of putting in a formal Freedom of Information Act request into my own Council for them to release information on the cost of services to one of its own Councillors. This would compel them in law to give me the information within 20 working days.

It’s ludicrous that I had to do this, and another display of how little the Conservatives in Bury care for democracy or the views or input of opposition Councillors.

Even the FoI request didn’t work though. It wasn’t acknowledged in writing, and the information itself still didn’t come until after 19 of the 20 working days had elapsed.

When it finally came, it was great. But it didn’t arrive until the night before the budget Council meeting, rendering it useless to me and meaning that the chance of changing things for the better in the Budget had gone.

I’d like to think that this was just a case of incompetence and the Conservatives not being able to get their act together. But it does look very suspicious that a reasonable request for financial information to help the opposition at budget time takes three months to be answered, and only then comes the night before the budget is set.

Rick

Council Tax in Bury will rise by an inflation busting 3.65% after the Conservatives running the Town Hall rejected Lib Dem budget proposals for a greener, safer Bury.

Last night was the annual budget setting meeting of the Council. Despite it being less of a carnival pie-chucking fest than normal (largely due to a very welcome change in the Conservative Councillor making the budget speech) it was still a disappointment.

The Liberal Democrats proposed a Council Tax rise of less than 3% for all of Bury. Both the Conservatives and Bury Labour proposed higher levels. The agreed rise in Bury is amongst the highest in Greater Manchester.   Lib Dems also proposed measures which would have improved local roads, put more police on local streets, and made Bury a greener place.  

Obviously it’s a personal disappointment that the Conservatives didn’t vote for our amendment (although Labour did, and we voted for their’s too, because both were pretty sensible). The Conservative priorities are clearly not those of my party or me.  

I made the speech proposing our amendment. For some reason I get more nervous now making speeches than I used to when I was a new Councillor. I don’t know why that is, but hopefully it sounded OK. I am very self-conscious these days. Perhaps a return to my awkward teenage years! But hopefully not…

Anyway, the Liberal Democrats proposed:

DOUBLING the amount of money for local road repairs

SCRAPPING the controversial Fairfax Road parking charges set to be introduced by the Conservatives

Giving every part of Bury extra Police

REVERSING Conservative cuts to parks, playgrounds and the countryside service 

Sadly, they were voted down by the Conservatives. Our plans were for a green Bury. We wanted to change the way the Council uses energy to reduce its carbon footprint, but this was rejected by the Conservatives.

We wanted to have a lower Council Tax rise but this too was rejected by the Conservatives. 

And we wanted to see more police but this was rejected by the Conservatives as well.

To top it all off, it was revealed that the Conservative budget contains £100,000 cuts to Civic Halls like the Longfield Suite in Prestwich. This despite a consultation on the issue still going on! We are all disappointed that once again the Conservative in Bury have let local people down. They continue to neglect Bury, and are again asking us to pay more for less.

So we’ll all have higher bills from next month than we would’ve had if the Lib Dems had had our way. So much for lower taxes under the Tories!

There was also more bad news for Prestwich after the plans to introduce car parking charges on Fairfax Road were approved. Again, we voted against, but the Conservatives who run the Council have more Councillors, so they won. Another mistake which will damage Prestwich.

Rick 

Last night it was the Council’s annual budget setting meeting. The Liberal Democrats proposed an amendment to the Conservative budget plans. Our amendment proposed more police, greener Council buildings, more road fundings, and a Council Tax rise less than the Tories or Labour.

Sadly it was defeated despite Labour support because the Conservatives voted it down.

Here is the speech I made to propose it: 

“Let me start by echoing Cllr Gartside and thanking Mr Owen and his staff for helping us with our amendment.

Their dedication to Bury continues to be appreciated by members of my group.

Mr Mayor, this Conservative budget is as unimaginative as it is unimpressive, and as uninspiring as it is underwhelming.

Cllr Gartside made an impressive speech, a welcome and refreshing change in the tone of recent budgets.

But this Conservative budget is disappointing, dull, and devoid of ideas.

We have looked to the Bury Conservatives for leadership.

They have failed.

They have no new ideas, and nothing new to add.

They have given us something that leaves me deflated, depressed, disillusioned.

David Cameron the Conservative Leader says “We can’t go on like this,” and yet the Bury Conservatives are continuing just as before, cutting away at services and changing nothing, nothing about them.

They do nothing differently.

Same story, different year.

David Cameron says that we are all desperate for change, and yet the Bury Conservatives have given us more of the same.

Actually they’ve given us a bit less of the same, but are charging us more for it.

Because despite David Cameron saying that Council Tax rises should be low, but yet again the Bury Conservatives have put up Council Tax by more than inflation, and amongst the highest in Greater Manchester.

In 2007 the Bury Conservatives put up Council Tax by 3.4%, Last year they put up Council Tax by 4.9%, this year 3.39%.

Someone paying £1,000 when the Tories came to power in Bury just three years ago, now faces a bill of over £100 more.

The Bury Conservatives really are the high tax party in Bury.

As the staff who work for us get a real terms cut in pay, the bills that they themselves help create, produce and distribute mean that they’ll be paying much more in the unfair Council Tax.

Mr Mayor, our proposal is different.

Our’s is a sensible tax level.

It doesn’t penalise the people of Bury with an above inflation rise like the Conservatives is when the precepts are added in.

Nor is it a vote-grabbing raid on reserves or a headline chasing 0% as Labour have proposed in previous years.

We respect the Council and the people more than that.

Our’s is a tax proposal that recognises the challenges we’re in, but also that the Council is nothing without its staff and its citizens and that we can’t ask them to pay too much.

Our plans will still preserve high quality services whilst at the same time allowing Bury residents to keep more of their money.

It is the fairer option.

Perhaps most disappointing of all in this Conservative budget though, is its cynicism.

The Tory plans to impose car park charges in my ward are awful.

The charges will damage trade, set back regeneration and take people and money out of Bury.

Worse though, is that the plans are borne not out of honest endeavour, but a simple desire to win votes in Prestwich by lying to voters in the papers and blaming the charges on me.

Cllr Holt was right. The charges are vindictive. They are nasty and wrong.

Cllr Bibby’s sneering untruths about these car park charges are beneath contempt, so we propose abolishing the charges and concentrating on improving the lives of the people of Bury, not making them worse just to remind me who runs the Town Hall.

Mr Mayor, Cllr Bibby has been given a chance to lead this borough, where I live and grew up.

A handful are given that chance.

His legacy so far is an angry staff, a disappointed public, and a catalogue of closures and cuts.

He does that legacy no favours tonight.

His party may soon be in power nationally.

But as a Conservative leader may be about to sweep into Downing Street, I advise the people of Bury to look at Conservatives closer to home before casting their votes.

The Conservatives propose cuts to children’s play areas, which the Liberal Democrats will reverse.

The Conservatives will cut our contribution to local forests and to the countryside service. The Liberal Democrats will reverse them too.

The Conservatives propose a budget of cuts and closures, the Liberal Democrats propose the opposite, a budget for a safer, greener and better Bury.

The Conservatives propose cutting £100,000 from Civic Halls despite a consultation still going on.

If there is one proposal which typifies this nasty and anti-democratic administration, this is it.

Their efforts to stifle debate seem to be getting worse.

Not one but two Task and Finish Groups which are still ongoing have been pre-judged by a Tory group intent on trampling on democracy.

Mr Mayor, I am proud of the Liberal Democrat proposals tonight.

Our’s is a plan which gives Bury new ideas and new ways of doing things

The Liberal Democrats will give more for Bury’s priorities whilst putting taxes up less than the Tories propose.

Our’s would be a green, local budget, protecting services and providing for the future.

We will do what the Tories won’t, and find savings in management efficiencies which could give hundreds of thousands for front line services.

And we will make sure that these services are sustainable both financially and socially.

Mr Mayor, as Councillors we need to lead the communities which elect us.

We have a responsibility to those who rely on us, and to people growing up in Bury today who will live here when we’re gone.

That’s why we propose tonight a fundamental shift in the way that the Council buys and uses energy.

The Tory plans for less than a quarter of a million pounds are nowhere near enough.

We will borrow eight times that amount, to make buildings more energy efficient and switch to greener energy providers, using interest free borrowing where we can.

Within 7 years the investment will have paid for itself entirely, but even in year one we will see over a quarter of a million pounds worth of savings in energy bills.

More importantly, these changes will make Bury a model borough for sustainable energy.

They show what we can do as Councillors to lead this borough.

We can change things. Really change things. If only we have the will.

See beyond the ballot box. See beyond May 6^th, and look to the future of Bury.

This is something we can approve right here, tonight, to show the people of Bury that we mean business on climate change.

Let’s be the generation of Councillors that makes future generations proud of what we did here.

But Mr Mayor, beyond the aspirational, there are practical things we need to do now to give local people back their faith in this Council.

Time after time people say that, for them, the most important things the Council needs to get right are good bins, good parks, good roads.

That’s why the Liberal Democrats got a blue bin for every suitable home in Bury.

That’s why Liberal Democrats are reversing Conservative cuts to parks.

And that’s why tonight we propose a massive increase in road funding across the borough.

Our roads have been left to crumble for years.

This past winter, the cold snap tested them beyond their limits, and the holes and cracks remain to show it.

There’s one in my ward so deep that I don’t know whether to call for the highways department or the archaeologists..

The staff have done what they can, but still too often cars are damaged and people are injured by roads and pavements in disrepair.

We all have to answer to residents who ask, quite rightly, why this Council is failing in its duty to keep the roads and pavements in a good condition.

Whoever’s to blame, we need to do something.

That is why Liberal Democrats are proposing to double the amount each Local Area Partnership has to spend on road maintenance.

It is a commitment from us to change where money is spent so that it is directed where it’s needed most.

The Tories’ £100,000 is not enough.

We can’t allow another harsh winter to further wreck our roads.

Failure to support this investment will mean just that.

Mr Mayor, this party believes in true partnership working.It is only when we work together that we will achieve all that we can for Bury.

A few weeks ago the Liberal Democrats raised the issue of Police cuts, and whilst we disagreed on some things, one thing united us all – a desire for more Police for Bury to keep our streets and our people safe.

Tonight we propose a partnership with Greater Manchester Police, using money from the Priority Investment Reserve for an additional Police Community Support Officer in each township in this borough.

Every community in Bury will have a dedicated officer to work with the local police team, specifically focussed on council and LAP priorities which will make this borough safer.

We all agreed that we want more Police.When we said it, we were willing to pay for it.

We know what our priorities are, and we’re willing to fund them.

Mr Mayor, this is the third year I have proposed a budget amendment to this Council.

Each time before it has been rejected, and we’ve suffered from cutbacks and higher taxes as a result.

Tonight I’ll try again.

We propose a sensible Council Tax, and investment where it’s needed.

A budget for a greener, safer Bury which protects services now and looks to the future as well.

Better roads, greener energy and safer streets, with hundreds of thousands left over  for the wider pressures we realise are, of course, important too, like domestic violence, Adult Care Services and EDS.

It is realistic yet refreshing, prudent yet innovative.

This is my town Mr Mayor, and I firmly believe that our amendment will make Bury a better place.

I am proud to propose it.”

Rick

Wednesday night is Budget Council night, when the Council Tax level for the coming year will be agreed. It’s the boring legislative equivalent of a bevvy of black-suited heavies holding you upside down until all the money has fallen out of your pockets.

It’s actually one of the more interesting nights in the municipal year. What will happen is that the Conservatives will propose a budget, then Labour and ourselves will propose amendments which we think will make it better, and then there’ll be a vote which the Conservatives will win because there’s more of them than there is of us.

In a way that is hugely depressing because the party whip system means that debates are meaningless and we may as well not be there. But on the other hand the budget is pretty much the only thing we vote on that we legally have to agree, so if we don’t get a result we all get sent to prison. One Bury politician facing the threat of jail time is quite enough to be going on with for now, thanks. And of course the Conservative majority is only one, so if one of them happens to be in the gents at the crucial time (as happened a couple of meetings back) there’ll be much hilarity.

Us Councillors don’t have a huge sway in terms of what gets spent and how much. Most Council funding comes from central government in terms of grants, a lot of which have to be spent on certain things like schools. What Councillors can do though is set the Council Tax which makes up about 25% of Council funds, and reduce it or increase it up to 5%. We can also make changes to lots of services like roads maintenance, street cleaning, parks, libraries, youth services and so on.

Obviously the most headline-grabbing bit of the budget is the Council Tax level, but there are also lots of other bits, the importance of which we realise as they creep up on us during the year. For instance, there will need to be lots of cuts in services to make up for the fact that Councils need to do more things these days (buy lots more grit because it has barely stopped snowing for three months / provide care for the ageing population / maintain civic buildings that are falling down etc etc) but aren’t getting that much more money to do it with. These will also be agreed at the meeting.

I find Council budgets really interesting (which is probably why no girls fancy me) and you can come down and see the process in action tomorrow. You’ll see how the three parties do things differently, what our priorities are, and how the whole thing gets turned into the bills and services you receive. And if you don’t like it, there’s an election in a few weeks so you can vote to get it changed!

It all kicks off at 7pm, and you can come down to Bury Town Hall and watch the proceedings live if you like. Due to the seating configuration of the chamber, you won’t even need to look at my ugly mug because you’ll be sat in the balcony on top of me, so that’s a bonus too! But if you can’t make it, I’ll be on Twitter and you can follow me there. Rumour has it that the Council are about to have a fun-ectomy and ban Councillors from Tweeting in meetings, so this may be the last chance you’ll get.

And if the worst comes to the worst and the Tories savagely cut services whilst bumping up bills and ignoring our sensible amendments to the contrary, at least me being at that meeting saves me from the horror of watching Stoke 0-0 City (AET Stoke win 4-3 on penalties) in the cup instead.

Rick

Many’s the time I have wanted little more than to gag a political rival, not least in interminable Council meetings when one or other of them has droned on for what seems like months. Sadly, I have never had any gaffer tape or rope to hand, but today I found out exactly what it’s like to be so silenced when I was informed that the Conservatives “controlling” Bury Council have gagged Prestwich Local Area Partnership in its attempts to tell them exactly where they can stick their plans to close the Longfield Suite.

The Chair of our august local body, Cllr Vic D’Albert, has requested a special meeting of the LAP to hear about the issues facing civic venues and to provide an opportunity for residents to comment. This is in the wake of the Tories’ plans to respond to overwhelming public support for the Longfield Suite by potentially closing it down.  However, in a style which has come to typify the inclusive, conciliatory approach of the despots operating under the Conservative banner at Bury Town Hall, our simple request was met with a resounding thumbs down, a cackle, and some stirring of some cauldrons.

“There’s no chance on God’s green earth I’ll go to Prestwich and face the understandable anger of a betrayed public,” Council Leader Bob Bibby may as well have said. Unfortunately his precise words have been lost to the archives of history, but what is not in doubt is that the Conservative leadership has refused the request for another meeting, arguing that the ongoing consultation on plans for the venues makes the meeting unnecessary. 

Just to refresh your memory as to the current state of play in “Civic Suites: The Disaster Movie,” the Tories began a “task and finish” group review into the future of Bury’s Civic Halls. The task appears to have been to finish the Civic Halls. This all started when it became clear that the Civic Halls were costing money. What the Tories don’t understand is that although at present they are losing money, two things need to be considered. First, that the reason they’re losing money is because various recommendations about improved marketing, functioning and efficiency which have been made in recent years have been acted upon with all the lightening speed of a sloth on tranquilisers. Second, that even if the Civic Suites are losing money hand over fist, there is still a swathe of the population (me included) which doesn’t think they should be sold off because they mean more than pounds and pence. That’s the reason the Council doesn’t stop providing other services that lose money - like bin collection, road maintenance and street lights - because people care more about the service than the cash. We need to find savings elsewhere to make up the difference.

It’s typical Tory bluster which means they won’t come to the Prestwich LAP and explain themselves. They know that the strength of feeling against their plans is enormous, and the truth is that they just don’t want to have to face awkward questions in public again. The Area Partnerships are the formal body representing the communities of Bury’s six townships and we have a right to be heard. Once again the Conservatives running the Town Hall have shown that they don’t know the meaning of the word partnership.

The consultation itself on the future of the Civic Suites is set to end on February 28th. I understand that over 900 responses have been submitted already. After that date there may not be any further opportunities to register your views, so make sure you send in your survey responses as soon as possible. Surveys are available from all council buildings and on-line at www.bury.gov.uk.

Rick 

There are close to five million unpaid carers in England, with a million providing more than 50hrs care each week. Liberal Democrats believe that people who selflessly provide care to their loved ones deserve a break.  In most jobs you get paid holidays but for a huge number of carers that simply isn’t an option. We believe that respite care is a lifeline - not just for carers but for whole families.  That’s why we will provide a weeks break from caring every year to the million unpaid carers who provide more than 50 hours care each week.
 
Why is it Necessary?

Caring matters deeply to families and individuals but when you are taking care of somebody you also need to think about caring for yourself.  The millions of unpaid carers in this country deserve as much support as possible and that is why we will provide a week of guaranteed respite care each year for a million carers who work the longest hours. This also makes financial sense because carers who don’t get a break can often end up suffering health problems themselves. Sustaining the ability of carers to provide the care and support they give to others is of critical importance.
 
Policy Detail

We will provide a weeks respite care to the million carers in England who currently provide more than 50 hours of care every week. Each carer will be entitled to receive a personal budget each year equivalent to the cost of a care homes weekly charge to redeem with whichever local service they choose.
 
How you use your personal budget will depend on your own circumstances. The money can be used to take one break or a series of breaks, for example: to get someone to take over caring for several weekends while the carer takes a break; payment towards the cost of the person you care for going away leaving you to take a break at home; arranging for someone to look after the person you care for at home while you go away; payment towards the cost of a break for you both together.
 
Each Local Health Board (currently Primary Care Trusts) will receive a block grant dependent on an assessment of the needs of their local populace and the costs of care in their local area. Local Authorities are already equipped to carry out assessments of the needs of the people requiring care, and the needs of their carers. Once such an assessment has been made and the person is considered to eligible they will be able to apply to their Local Health Board for funding for respite care. By operating the system in this way we hope to encourage improved partnerships between the NHS, social care and third sectors, in looking after the needs of carers.
 
Costs/Savings

We will provide a week’s respite care to the million carers in England who currently provide more than 50 hours of care every week. The total cost of this scheme will start from 460m in 2010-11 rising to 500m in 2014-15. Some people will not want to take part in the scheme and some will already qualify for respite care through local authority funding. We have therefore assumed a 90% take-up rate for this scheme.
 
We will pay for this by using the 420m of health funding that the government intends to use for the Personal Care at Home Bill. And we supplement this money with the 100m that has already been allocated by the Department of Health for respite care through the Carers Strategy.

After a week of to-ing, fro-ing, wedding preparation, slacking and general debauchery I have now returned refreshed and revitalised into the pre-election fray.

Being intimately involved with a teacher means that I can only ever take the school hoildays off, which is a faint disappointment made only slightly more bearable with the knowledge that my friends will join me in half-term hell when they have children of their own. As a result of my holiday sojourns and a tragic timing/planning error on my part, I found myself in a shopping centre in London on Tuesday surrounded by thirteen billion screeching children trying to gain entry to a cinema. It was hugely traumatic and louder than having a jet engine clamped to my ear. As a result of the experience I have requested a vasectomy and a one way ticket to Vulgaria for my birthday.

Now though I am back, and ready for the week ahead, which sees me dive head first back into the world of the Council. Tonight it’s a meeting of the Bury Liberal Democrat Council group, and then on Wednesday it’s the meeting of the Council where the budget and Council Tax will be set for the coming year. That’s an important meeting, of which more later in the week. The fun doesn’t end there either, as after that there is a meeting of the Licensing and Safety Panel on Thursday.

I hope everyone had a good week, especially if they were off work too.

Rick

It was Valentine’s Day today (still is, in fact) and so I whisked my fiancee off to Ramson’s in Ramsbottom for the type of indulgent Sunday Lunch that makes me glad there’s on one Valentine’s Day per year. They had their Sunday farmer’s market on, which was interesting because most of the people there are the same people at the Prestwich one. It was just as busy too, which was a relief as it turns out there’s more than one community in the area gullible enough to pay £3 for a loaf of “artisan” bread.

Having rolled home from Ramson’s, heavier in stomach but significantly lighter in wallet, I now find myself thinking of the week ahead. 

I am off work, which would normally be a cause of celebration but which is just a prelude to more leafleting at the moment. I am also starting to think about a week on Wednesday, when the Council will set its budget and we’ll all find out how much more Council Tax we’ll be paying next year. Lots more, I suspect.

However, amidst the leafleting, budget planning, and an interview tomorrow with this man who is doing a feature on Bury North and who will out-brain me by a factor of 100:1, I am going away for a few days to sort out wedding things. And so the blog may be a touch under-updated during the week. Sorry.

In the mean time, Happy Chinese New Year to all celebrating it. Happy Valentine’s Day to all celebrating that too.

Rick