Robbing Peter?
Nothing to do with our First Minister, but just the expression which came into my mind as I mulled over last night's Executive decision to get our local councils to pay for the estimated £118 million cost of the proposed transition from 26 bodies to just 11. The Environment Minister says this move would be "rates neutral" as the councils could borrow from central government and then pay back as and when they make savings. Presumably the idea is this would provide a direct incentive to collaborate over the provision of services in order to make those efficiencies.
But if the architects of the Review of Public Administration are so convinced the streamlining will ultimately save money should it matter which arm of government finances it up front? If they aren't convinced, isn't the notion of borrowing large sums up front and paying back in the long term in direct contravention of the current emphasis from Whitehall on bringing down our collective debt? Put like this the latest manouevre could look like an accountancy trick, robbing the council Peter to pay the central government Paul. After PFIs and all those other schemes which have contributed to our bloated public borrowing how much faith do the ratepayers have in government accountancy tricks?
Whilst some argue that stalling the process now is damaging the maorale of council staff, the Green MLA Brian Wilson reckons oushing ahead would be a case of "throwing good money after bad". Mr Wilson says "there is no sound evidence to believe" that the savings projected from the streamlining process are real.
Coming back to last night's fortnight deal by the Executive, the atmosphere at a NILGA (Local Government Association) meeting today was, according to one source, "poisonous". The Environment Minister is to see if the councils will foot the transition bill before the next Executive meeting takes place on Thursday week. But I'm told that NILGA won't have the authority to deliver an answer - instead each of the 26 councils will have to consider the matter. The logistics of getting an agreed answer from local government within the next fortnight are challenging to say the least. And what happens if 13 councils agree to foot the bill, but 13 say no?
Comments