Councillors approved £12m worth of cuts and a council tax rise of 3.9% for 2015/16 at a meeting of Caerphilly County Borough Council on February 25.
The council tax rise means residents living in Band A properties will have to pay an extra 48p a week taking the annual cost to around £670. Band B properties rise to around £780 with the highest rate for Band I houses at £2,370.
The cuts will see street lights turned off for part of the night in some residential areas which, along with energy saving measures, will save £450,000.
Funding for Christmas lights in towns and villages will be cut completely and Bargoed Ice Rink will only return if Bargoed Town Council can match-fund the cost.
Charges for the use of sports fields by adults will rise by 30% and leisure centre costs will go up 5% above inflation. Street cleaning will be reduced and civic amenity sites will close one day a week, after proposals to close them for two days were changed following public consultation.
The council also agreed to increase the cost of meals on wheels by 50p instead of £1 and scrap plans to charge for car parking on Sundays, increase hourly parking rates by 10p and increase parking penalty charges.
A controversial plan to close the council’s Pontllanfraith House offices was also approved.
Speaking at the meeting, Deputy Leader Cllr Barbara Jones, said: “We have all seen the troubling headlines about deep cuts and controversial budget announcements being made in other council areas over recent months.
“Thankfully, Caerphilly has not featured in these headlines to date, but there is still a long way to go, which is why it is so important that we make decisions to ensure effective financial management is maintained.
“This report shows that we are able to deliver a fair and balanced budget. We have listened to the views of local people as a result of our extensive budget consultation.
“We are protecting the vulnerable, protecting frontline services and safeguarding as many jobs as we can.”
Fellow Deputy Leader Gerald Jones said: “What we’ve got here is a fair and reasonable budget in what is a very difficult situation.
“The cuts are a direct result of the austerity measures by the Tory and Lib Dem coalition.”
In opposition, Plaid Cymru councillors voted against the budget and council tax rise and lost an amendment proposing to increase the cost of meals on wheels by £1.
Plaid claimed the cost of meals on wheels should be covered by benefits and wanted to use the cash to save the Area Forum Budget that is used by community partnerships.
Labour councillors claimed a further rise in the cost of meals on wheels would penalise the vulnerable, with Cllr Gerald Jones calling the amendment “a desperate act from a desperate party”.
At the meeting Plaid Cymru leader Colin Mann said: “I do not support the council tax rise of 3.9%.
“While we recognise that some people do not pay council tax, for those who do pay, council tax is one of the biggest financial commitments they have to face.
“In fact a survey published recently stated that across Britain, council tax has even overtaken credit cards as the main reason why people are falling into debt.
“Any rise is too much but the proposals of the Labour administration represent a 70% increase over the 2.35% rise they forecast last year. This represents yet more broken promises to the households and the electorate of Caerphilly County Borough.
“Frontline services are in grave danger. For example, the post for an environmental health officer, a vital service to the public, has only had a temporary reprieve.
“We don’t want the authority to lose any posts but just one of the higher paid managerial posts could pay for two or more jobs on the frontline. We don’t believe enough been done to slim down the management structure.
“And there is the downright arrogance of Labour who refuse to return to the issue of senior pay.”
Council Leader Keith Reynolds said: “Our agreed budget clearly demonstrates that we are working hard to protect the vulnerable, protect frontline services, identify efficiencies, reduce waste and safeguard as many jobs as we possibly can.
“We have a fair budget and a fair council tax increase of 3.9%. That means 48p a week for a Band A property and the vast majority of the properties across the borough are in bands A and B.”
Independent councillor Dave Rees urged Labour and Plaid Cymru to stop fighting and work together to remove the Conservatives from power in Westminster.
More than £26m of further cuts are planned by Caerphilly Council between 2016 and 2018.
The council currently has a general fund of £14m, which is projected to fall to £10m by March 2016, with money spent on school building, road works and a proposed waste transfer station on Dyffryn Business Park in Ystrad Mynach.
It has been reported that the Caerphilly Council will have to make further cuts totalling £26 Million Pounds in the financial years 2016/17. and 2017/18.
There are, at least, two very important events which will seriously influence how the budgets in those years effects ratepayers of the borough, Essembly Elections, and the Caerphilly Council Elections. and it as certain as night follows day that any cuts and increases WILL be influenced in the race for popularity during those critical periods.
A lot will also depend on the levels of further public expenditure cuts promised if a Tory Government is returned to power in nine weeks time, or, a labour government is elected in which case the level of cuts they will have to make will become clear. It is also a fact that after next years Assembly Elections it will be necessary for them to also make heavy cuts to its local authority settlements.
It is my view that the Council have simply put off the inevitable, but, unpalitable considerations which have been put forward by Plaid Cymru to consider financial savings on management structures. Why do some consider this untouchable? is it because some of those Officers are `gatekeepers`, to inefficient Councillors who head up department budgets and therefore protecting the position of Councillors who are not prepared to reduce the financial burdon on the pocket of ratepayers?.
It has been reported that the Caerphilly Council will have to make further cuts totalling £26 Million Pounds in the financial years 2016/17. and 2017/18.
There are, at least, two very important events which will seriously influence how the budgets in those years effects ratepayers of the borough, Essembly Elections, and the Caerphilly Council Elections. and it as certain as night follows day that any cuts and increases WILL be influenced in the race for popularity during those critical periods.
A lot will also depend on the levels of further public expenditure cuts promised if a Tory Government is returned to power in nine weeks time, or, a labour government is elected in which case the level of cuts they will have to make will become clear. It is also a fact that after next years Assembly Elections it will be necessary for them to also make heavy cuts to its local authority settlements.
It is my view that the Council have simply put off the inevitable, but, unpalitable considerations which have been put forward by Plaid Cymru to consider financial savings on management structures. Why do some consider this untouchable? is it because some of those Officers are `gatekeepers`, to inefficient Councillors who head up department budgets and therefore protecting the position of Councillors who are not prepared to reduce the financial burdon on the pocket of ratepayers?.
A truly disgraceful council tax increase that is totally unjustified, Welsh Labour will only be satisfied when they fulfil their vision of equality across the country, problem is they want us all to be equally deprived and living in squalor whilst they award themselves massive pay rises of the back of crushing tax increases.
A truly disgraceful council tax increase that is totally unjustified, Welsh Labour will only be satisfied when they fulfil their vision of equality across the country, problem is they want us all to be equally deprived and living in squalor whilst they award themselves massive pay rises off the back of crushing tax increases.
The only thing that was disgraceful was Plaid Cymru’s amendment to increase Meals on Wheels by £1 a meal. I called for a recorded vote on Plaid’s amendment so that all Plaid Councillors who voted for their £1 increase to Meals on Wheels would have to face the consequences of their actions.
Doubtless Plaid weren’t expecting a recorded vote with some of them slumping further into their seats when they knew the game was up. All the names of those Plaid Councillors who did vote for this option will be down in the record books as doing so. I made a remark in Council that Leanne Wood would have been ashamed of the Plaid group if she’d walked into the meeting.
I stand by what I said and sincerely hope those Plaid Councillors who did vote for this over the top increase think hard about their actions. I would welcome any Plaid representative coming on here to defend their move to increase the cost of Meals on Wheels by £1.
Be truthful! You are not outraged by the £1 increase. Effectively Plaid proposed a 50p increase over the increase Labour councillors supported.
Would`nt that be `DOUBLE` the increase Labour proposed?
Unfortunately there is only going to be a 50p increase. A good way to cut budgets would be to scrap all government subsidies to the service and allow a private company to set up their own service. Private companies will have more flexibility when it comes to costings allowing a high quality meal at a around £4.50, or a cheaper, lower quality meal at around £3.
If you would like to justify the further increase to recipients of Meals on Wheels Dean, be my guest. I truthfully am outraged a party claiming to be on the left of British politics proposed such an increase.
I am surprised a party claiming to be on the left of British politics (your party) accepted any increase. Surely if you were as principled as you claim to be the Labour-dominated council would have rejected all plans for an increase. After all, it is not a numbers game for Labour when it comes to voting against increases. Your claims stink of jumping on the bandwagon.
I will happily defend any cuts to council spending, or price increases to the public provided I pay less council tax. If you need my help on spinning anything you know where to find me.
The Labour Group voted down Plaid’s £1 increase because it was clearly over the top. No doubt you would have been very happy to accept if the £1 increase would have come in so long as your Council Tax bill was kept down. As for spinning, I tell it how it is so I wouldn’t require any help from an expert in spinning such as yourself.
Again, you have missed the point. Labour still voted in favour of a 50p increase. If Labour were a true left-wing party all Labour councillors would have voted against any increase, whether it be 50p, £1, or £1.50. The amount of an increase is not important; the principle of an increase is!
You definitely do need spin. You are criticising Plaid for proposing a £1 increase saying it does not fit in with left-wing principles, yet you are happy to see a 50p increase which somehow is left-wing. You are playing this whole thing out as if 50p is somehow an okay increase but a further 50p is not. It’s daft!
Yes Dean, two wrongs don’t make a right, a 50p increase by Labour is still an unacceptable increase for those people who depend on the meals on wheels service. Like one reader has already mentioned the meals on wheels service would be run more efficiently by a private company as they wouldn’t be restricted by ridiculous public sector procurement rules paying way over the odds for everything.
Would`nt that be `DOUBLE` the increase Labour proposed?
Congratulations! You can do maths. It is double but that is besides the point. You cannot criticise an increase for being un-leftist, only to go and vote through an increase yourself.
It’s like criticising someone for raping two people, but then raping one person yourself. Both are terrible despite the fact the other person raped double the number of people.
A 50p Increase on the meals on Wheel service. turns by you into an
ideological debate on the forces of left and right party dogma.
You
clearly, but I suspect, incongruently, fail to understand and accept that
both Plaid Cymru and Labour are both proud left of centre parties. Now
if this debate was really about a `left` or `right` of centre
ideological priorities then your position may be worth debating, but, it
is`nt, it is a matter of priorities between two left of centre
parties, on which they disagree on the level of the impact and effect of their
positions to local residents.
Unfortunately, ( or fortunately depending on the decency of
ones political views) the Tories and Lib Dem’s prospective view does`nt
come into it, they are totally unrepresentative of the voters in
Caerphilly CBC and have no say on the matter, so there is no left right debate to be had.
Your analogy in respect to a double rapist is also misjudged, and really does not make sense.
You have missed it again. The debate has nothing to do with being right-wing, but the inherent nature of leftiness.
A left-wing party cannot claim an action is not left-wing, but when they do it, it is left-wing. It is internal hypocrisy over the pure definition of left of centre. The rape analogy is to try and put it in a different context seeing as you continually fail to understand the point.
The only thing that was disgraceful was Plaid Cymru’s amendment to increase Meals on Wheels by £1 a meal. I called for a recorded vote on Plaid’s amendment so that all Plaid Councillors who voted for their £1 increase to Meals on Wheels would have to face the consequences of their actions.
Doubtless Plaid weren’t expecting a recorded vote with some of them slumping further into their seats when they knew the game was up. All the names of those Plaid Councillors who did vote for this option will be down in the record books as doing so. I made a remark in Council that Leanne Wood would have been ashamed of the Plaid group if she’d walked into the meeting.
I stand by what I said and sincerely hope those Plaid Councillors who did vote for this over the top increase think hard about their actions. I would welcome any Plaid representative coming on here to defend their move to increase the cost of Meals on Wheels by £1.
Be truthful! You are not outraged by the £1 increase. Effectively Plaid proposed a 50p increase over the increase Labour councillors supported.
Would`nt that be `DOUBLE` the increase Labour proposed?
Unfortunately there is only going to be a 50p increase. A good way to cut budgets would be to scrap all government subsidies to the service and allow a private company to set up their own service. Private companies will have more flexibility when it comes to costings allowing a high quality meal at a around £4.50, or a cheaper, lower quality meal at around £3.
If you would like to justify the further increase to recipients of Meals on Wheels Dean, be my guest. I truthfully am outraged a party claiming to be on the left of British politics proposed such an increase.
I am surprised a party claiming to be on the left of British politics (your party) accepted any increase. Surely if you were as principled as you claim to be the Labour-dominated council would have rejected all plans for an increase. After all, it is not a numbers game for Labour when it comes to voting against increases. Your claims stink of jumping on the bandwagon.
I will happily defend any cuts to council spending, or price increases to the public provided I pay less council tax. If you need my help on spinning anything you know where to find me.
The Labour Group voted down Plaid’s £1 increase because it was clearly over the top. No doubt you would have been very happy to accept if the £1 increase would have come in so long as your Council Tax bill was kept down. As for spinning, I tell it how it is so I wouldn’t require any help from an expert in spinning such as yourself.
Again, you have missed the point. Labour still voted in favour of a 50p increase. If Labour were a true left-wing party all Labour councillors would have voted against any increase, whether it be 50p, £1, or £1.50. The amount of an increase is not important; the principle of an increase is!
You definitely do need spin. You are criticising Plaid for proposing a £1 increase saying it does not fit in with left-wing principles, yet you are happy to see a 50p increase which somehow is left-wing. You are playing this whole thing out as if 50p is somehow an okay increase but a further 50p is not. It’s daft!
Yes Dean, two wrongs don’t make a right, a 50p increase by Labour is still an unacceptable increase for those people who depend on the meals on wheels service. Like one reader has already mentioned the meals on wheels service would be run more efficiently by a private company as they wouldn’t be restricted by ridiculous public sector procurement rules paying way over the odds for everything.
Would`nt that be `DOUBLE` the increase Labour proposed?
Congratulations! You can do maths. It is double but that is besides the point. You cannot criticise an increase for being un-leftist, only to go and vote through an increase yourself.
It’s like criticising someone for raping two people, but then raping one person yourself. Both are terrible despite the fact the other person raped double the number of people.
A 50p Increase on the meals on Wheel service. turns by you into an ideological debate on the forces of left and right party dogma.
You clearly, but I suspect, incongruently, fail to understand and accept that both Plaid Cymru and Labour are both proud left of centre parties. Now
if this debate was really about a `left` or `right` of centre
ideological priorities then your position may be worth debating, but, it is`nt, it is a matter of priorities between two left of centre parties, on which they disagree on the level of the impact and effect of their positions to local residents.
Unfortunately, ( or fortunately depending on the decency of ones political views) the Tories and Lib Dem’s prospective view does`nt come into it, they are totally unrepresentative of the voters in Caerphilly CBC and have no say on the matter, so there is no left right debate to be had.
Your analogy in respect to a double rapist is also misjudged, and really does not make sense.
You have missed it again. The debate has nothing to do with being right-wing, but the inherent nature of leftiness.
A left-wing party cannot claim an action is not left-wing, but when they do it, it is left-wing. It is internal hypocrisy over the pure definition of left of centre. The rape analogy is to try and put it in a different context seeing as you continually fail to understand the point.
I was watching from the gallery, interesting to see what was going on and interesting that it was not mentioned, that although one party wanted to raise meals on wheels prices by a further 50 pence more than Labour did to offset a cut on another budget, it was not mentioned by Labour the 4 million pound they agreed to fund the odean cinema in Bargoed whilst cutting lots of other council services !!..
I was watching from the gallery, interesting to see what was going on and interesting that it was not mentioned, that although one party wanted to raise meals on wheels prices by a further 50 pence more than Labour did to offset a cut on another budget, it was not mentioned by Labour the 4 million pound they agreed to fund the odean cinema in Bargoed whilst cutting lots of other council services !!..
Bring back the poll tax! All council tax does is force the people in big houses to subsidise the services of people in smaller houses. It is a class tax with a middle class family of four paying nearly double a working class family of four in a smaller property.
I think you are trying to say that a tax based on the house you occupy bears no relation to your ability to pay (your disposable income) or the services that you use. The method of raising council revenue is a mess, most of it comes from central government anyway and councils tax homes because this is the easiest method available to them for revenue raising.
In America people pay income tax to the federal govenment but taxes are raised locally by a tax on goods and services consumed; the state tax. Perhaps when we leave the EU, and can abolish VAT, we can institute a similar purchase tax with which to fund local authorities.
No. I am saying that a tax based on the house you occupy is unjust. I am not a fan of ‘taxes based on your ability pay’ debate as you still end up with disproportionately funded services, and groups of people paying over the odds for the services they use.
The principle of the poll tax was fairer (the implementation and levels were terrible), we should all pay equal amounts based on the local services we use, with no one laying over the odds for subpar services. If the council is cut back to a minimal local authority providing road, lighting etc… and nothing more, total tax can decrease
I do like the idea you suggest since all people will be paying rates based on what they consume. However, it only works in the USA where cities and towns are, most of the time, 50+ miles away. The local authority county equivalents are much larger in the USA. Britain’s small size will make local purchase taxes ineffective. For example, if there was a higher tax on good in Caerphilly than goods in Cardiff, people living on the mountain would go into Cardiff to make their purchases. There could be a Wales wide purchase tax but people near border regions would cross over. Soon you realise a country wide tax is the only solution to maintain parity but that is essentially VAT.
Council tax itself I am fine with, but everyone should pay the same rate. We cannot allow some people to freeload by receiving council services for free just because they cannot pay the tax. There could be forced community service on top of their work as an alternative to non-monetary payments of council tax. This would rarely happen too as with sensible council spending the tax could be taken down to £16.60 per month which, for the whole of Caerphilly’s population, gives the council revenue of over £35.6m if everyone can pay (probably be less as no everyone could pay so I’ll estimate £25m being generous) which is more than enough for the council when WA-given budgets are taken into account.
Some good points Dean, I share your view that the present system is not equitable. For instance I still resent the ‘re-banding’ exercise that was carried out in Wales but not in England. The banding system was set up as a comparative index of the housing stock, which is why it was assigned letters instead of values. Any numerate person can see that homes cannot change from the band they were assigned unless substantial improvements were made to the dwelling in which case a ‘re-banding’ would be justified.
The English never did reband and manage perfectly well using the original bands. We in Wales often found our homes were taxed substantially more; for no good reason.
On local purchase tax I accept your examples of why this is not feasible in small country. I did not make clear that I did not mean this county setting its own tax, the national government would levy the same tax across the UK. Councils get most of their revenue from a central treasury anyway, only about one sixth of council income is raised from council tax, an expensive way of raising a small part of the budget. Considerable cost savings would be made by not having to collect this tax.
On waste, yes I agree that there are a few items of expenditure that do not bear scrutiny. I wil not go into that as the Editor tends to ‘pull’ any post I make that mentions them. What is clear is that there needs to be a debate on how local services are paid for. With some changes predicted in the coming General and Welsh Assembly elections we may get a ‘changing of the guard’ and an improved, fairer system implemented.
As an update to my thoughts on American systems of local tax I talked to the UKIP local branch treasurer who lived and worked in the USA. Apparently they do also pay a property tax (at least in Texas) as well as state taxes, so I am happy to admit I was wrong on that.
What was revealing was that his federal income tax amounted to just 12% of his salary, much lower than tax has ever been in Britain during my working life.
A little more info on my Texas experience. As Cllr Williams states I paid 12% of my gross salary in Federal Income Tax with a further 7.65% in Social Security (National Insurance) Tax. Property Tax on my home was 2.75% of the homes market value and it was revalued each year. In my case on a 135,000 GBP home I was paying 3,600 GBP a year to cover my local county, schools, hospital district, flood control district etc. My other major tax was a 8.25% sales tax of which 2% went to local government.
My concern is that here in the UK, local governments rely on the Westminster government for too much of their funding. In the USA about 80% of local government funds were raised from the local citizens. This is almost the reverse of the situation here in the UK. As a result local government in Texas is more professional and accountable than what I have seen here in Caerphilly.
Bring back the poll tax! All council tax does is force the people in big houses to subsidise the services of people in smaller houses. It is a class tax with a middle class family of four paying nearly double a working class family of four in a smaller property.
I think you are trying to say that a tax based on the house you occupy bears no relation to your ability to pay (your disposable income) or the services that you use. The method of raising council revenue is a mess, most of it comes from central government anyway and councils tax homes because this is the easiest method available to them for revenue raising.
In America people pay income tax to the federal govenment but taxes are raised locally by a tax on goods and services consumed; the state tax. Perhaps when we leave the EU, and can abolish VAT, we can institute a similar purchase tax with which to fund local authorities.
No. I am saying that a tax based on the house you occupy is unjust. I am not a fan of ‘taxes based on your ability pay’ debate as you still end up with disproportionately funded services, and groups of people paying over the odds for the services they use.
The principle of the poll tax was fairer (the implementation and levels were terrible), we should all pay equal amounts based on the local services we use, with no one laying over the odds for subpar services. If the council is cut back to a minimal local authority providing road, lighting etc… and nothing more, total tax can decrease
I do like the idea you suggest since all people will be paying rates based on what they consume. However, it only works in the USA where cities and towns are, most of the time, 50+ miles away. The local authority county equivalents are much larger in the USA. Britain’s small size will make local purchase taxes ineffective. For example, if there was a higher tax on good in Caerphilly than goods in Cardiff, people living on the mountain would go into Cardiff to make their purchases. There could be a Wales wide purchase tax but people near border regions would cross over. Soon you realise a country wide tax is the only solution to maintain parity but that is essentially VAT.
Council tax itself I am fine with, but everyone should pay the same rate. We cannot allow some people to freeload by receiving council services for free just because they cannot pay the tax. There could be forced community service on top of their work as an alternative to non-monetary payments of council tax. This would rarely happen too as with sensible council spending the tax could be taken down to £16.60 per month which, for the whole of Caerphilly’s population, gives the council revenue of over £35.6m if everyone can pay (probably be less as no everyone could pay so I’ll estimate £25m being generous) which is more than enough for the council when WA-given budgets are taken into account.
Some good points Dean, I share your view that the present system is not equitable. For instance I still resent the ‘re-banding’ exercise that was carried out in Wales but not in England. The banding system was set up as a comparative index of the housing stock, which is why it was assigned letters instead of values. Any numerate person can see that homes cannot change from the band they were assigned unless substantial improvements were made to the dwelling in which case a ‘re-banding’ would be justified.
The English never did reband and manage perfectly well using the original bands. We in Wales often found our homes were taxed substantially more; for no good reason.
On local purchase tax I accept your examples of why this is not feasible in small country. I did not make clear that I did not mean this county setting its own tax, the national government would levy the same tax across the UK. Councils get most of their revenue from a central treasury anyway, only about one sixth of council income is raised from council tax, an expensive way of raising a small part of the budget. Considerable cost savings would be made by not having to collect this tax.
On waste, yes I agree that there are a few items of expenditure that do not bear scrutiny. I wil not go into that as the Editor tends to ‘pull’ any post I make that mentions them. What is clear is that there needs to be a debate on how local services are paid for. With some changes predicted in the coming General and Welsh Assembly elections we may get a ‘changing of the guard’ and an improved, fairer system implemented.
As an update to my thoughts on American systems of local tax I talked to the UKIP local branch treasurer who lived and worked in the USA. Apparently they do also pay a property tax (at least in Texas) as well as state taxes, so I am happy to admit I was wrong on that.
What was revealing was that his federal income tax amounted to just 12% of his salary, much lower than tax has ever been in Britain during my working life.
A little more info on my Texas experience. As Cllr Williams states I paid 12% of my gross salary in Federal Income Tax with a further 7.65% in Social Security (National Insurance) Tax. Property Tax on my home was 2.75% of the homes market value and it was revalued each year. In my case on a 135,000 GBP home I was paying 3,600 GBP a year to cover my local county, schools, hospital district, flood control district etc. My other major tax was a 8.25% sales tax of which 2% went to local government.
My concern is that here in the UK, local governments rely on the Westminster government for too much of their funding. In the USA about 80% of local government funds were raised from the local citizens. This is almost the reverse of the situation here in the UK. As a result local government in Texas is more professional and accountable than what I have seen here in Caerphilly.