Publicity costs in Epsom

When Epsom and Ewell Borough Council posted their annual accounts for public consumption last month, there were some curious omissions. Not least the fact that, for some reason, officers were not keen to detail any publicity costs for the Council over the past year. A few well-placed questions from our local paper later, and the reason becomes more clear. At the same time as cutting services for its residents, our Council is spending £54,000 a year to outsource its newsletter to an external agency…which is then charging them to advertise in their own publication.

A month ago, the Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles announced a toughening up of rules regarding council newsletters. His goal is to ensure that local newspapers are not put out of business by tax payer-funded publications. Indicating that Council-authored papers increase junk mail, and undermine the free press, Pickles said:

"Councils should spend less time and money on weekly town hall Pravdas that end up in the bin, and focus more on frontline services like providing regular rubbish collections.”

I couldn’t agree more. The situation is even more exasperating in Epsom, however, as the company which won the tender to produce our local ‘Borough Insight’ (EM Communications) claims the Council specifically asked them to price advertising separately from the production and distribution costs of the paper. As the Epsom Guardian reports, the Council voted against allowing commercial organisations to advertise in the Insight to drive down costs. Instead, EM Communications only accepts Council-sponsored adverts, charging the Town Hall £150 for each one.

At an approximate cost of £10,000 per issue, the Epsom and Ewell ‘Pravda’ is a luxury this Council can no longer afford. If Eric isn’t looking hard at Epsom and Ewell Borough Council now, I’m guessing he soon will be. I think the Council’s Liberal Democrat Leader Julie Morris put it best:

“Spending £54,000 each year on a publication which, for the most part, is very dull and merely props up the policies of those in control of the council, is no longer appropriate…£54,000 would offset quite a lot of the spending cuts this year, wouldn't it?”

(N.B. - links to Epsom Guardian story to follow once it is posted online)

Epsom - Disabled must pay

Epsom and Ewell Borough Council met on Tuesday, and as per there was the usual raft of egregious decisions pushed through by the controlling Residents’ Association group. Examples of their scorn for those they allege to represent are almost becoming too legion to mention in full, but one really stood out this week.

On Tuesday, the RA pushed through plans to charge Blue Badge holders to park in Council car parks, ensuring that additional strain will be placed on the most vulnerable members of the Borough to help pay for the Council’s imagined deficit.* These plans were confirmed in the face of overwhelming opposition from local Residents, a petition of just under 1,000 signatures submitted to the Council, a campaign in the local newspaper, and strong feelings expressed by the disabled residents the Council saw fit to poll during their ‘consultation process’ (more on the failure of consultation here).

One Residents’ Association Councillor had previously resigned from the Group over the plans and duly voted against them along with every opposition Councillor. Even with these votes, and two abstentions, the motion was still carried due to the numerical advantage the RA has on the Council.

The main point raised by the RA in support of their plans was that there are other disadvantaged members of society that have to pay to use the car parks. This completely fails to recognise the differences between ‘disabled’ and ‘disadvantaged’, not least the fact that the disabled often have to use car parks where others don’t due to the difficulties of using public transport. In addition, it can often take a disabled individual much longer to pay for their parking as under both current and future plans they have to go to the parking office in person to pay/get any discount.

The new rules, which will come into effect, makes Epsom and Ewell one of the only 21 Councils in the country to charge the disabled to park. An incredibly regressive move.

I leave you with some rather unpalatable number crunching. During the meeting, one Councillor mentioned that the projected income from Blue Badge charging in 2010/2011 - £45,000 – is less than the Council spends on its newsletter - £54,000. Our Council obviously thinks it is more important to screw money out of the disabled than to stop telling us about it…

* One ex-RA Councillor made the excellent point that, despite a couple of years of declining revenue, the Council is still running a surplus, and has a significant emergency reserve in place to deal with any funding shortfall.

Epsom Council doesn't get it pt.94

I’ve never had much discipline as a blogger – hence the large gaps between posts on this site. Thankfully my local Borough Council normally manages to do something egregious enough to make me pick up my pen (well…laptop…) before long, and last night’s Strategy and Resources Committee meeting has afforded just such an opportunity.

One point at the meeting centred on petitions to the Council. Epsom and Ewell has a minimum 2% of population limit on all petitions before discussion is triggered at Council – effectively, if you don’t get more than 1,500 signatures, attention won’t be paid. Last night, Liberal Democrat and Conservative Councillors argued that this limit disregarded issues that were important, but only to a small percentage of the Borough’s population. A fair point – even in the furor that met the Council’s decision to deny the local Regiment the Freedom of the Borough last year we only managed just over 2,000 in our petition.

It seems, however, that the Residents’ Association isn’t so keen to change the rules. Councillor Eber Kington from Ewell Court ward went so far as to say that he didn’t want debates to have to be triggered by ‘residents’ backgarden’ issues. A moot point certainly, but it beggars belief that it is the Residents’ Association that is making it. The entire raison d’être of the RA is to localise politics; to ensure that national agendas are not followed in Epsom and Ewell; and that Residents can have direct representation on the Council. Their entire structure is based on Councillors being beholden to their locality through an Association Committee and Street Representatives. For Cllr. Kington to argue in this way seems to be completely against the objectives of his own group. I wonder how many Ewell Court residents are happy to see their local issues dismissed as NIMBYist posturing?

It saddens me that, yet again, the controlling party on the Council has not ‘got it’. If you are going to have a body allegedly run with direct input from local residents, then you have to listen to their concerns. Last night seems to be yet another erosion of the true few merits of the RA as an organisation. Added to the huge arguments going on in Stoneleigh and Auriol, where Councillors are ignoring the wishes of their RA Committee on the closure of the local conveniences (covered superbly, as ever, by the Epsom Guardian here and here), it surely can’t be long before these Councillors are finally called to account. Perhaps in the local elections next May? One can only hope…

Post-election 1: Epsom & Ewell

So now that I've actually managed to get some sleep in after a mammoth Thursday night's electioneering, I thought it was high time I added my two pence in about the results, both locally and nationally. First up - the local area and campaigns I was directly involved in.

It was good to see that the Conservatives did so well in Epsom. My slightly bullish prediction of a 20,000-plus majority for Chris was always in doubt after the Liberal Democrat surge in the polls (which actually led to an increase in their vote in Epsom, unlike elsewhere), but to increase our percentage of the vote and poll above 30,000 votes is no mean feat. Full results were as follows:

Chris Grayling - 30,868 (56.2% of vote +1.2%)

Jonathan Lees - 14,734 (26.8% of vote +5.3%)

Craig Montgomery - 6,538 (11.9% of vote -8.1%)

Elizabeth Wallace - 2,549 (4.6% of vote +1.1%)

Peter Ticher - 266 (0.5% of vote)

Labour saw its vote all but disappear to the Liberal Democrats, who ran an aggressive campaign in the area. Our unfortunate independent cabinet - Peter Ticher from 'Radical Reform' - had a disappointing night, and didn't even bother to stick around for the count.

These results mean that next year's Borough elections could be very interesting. The controlling Residents' Association will be sure to come under increased pressure from all national political parties. The LibDems will hope to make inroads in the Town and Stamford Wards. Labour will look to add another Councillor in Court (perhaps even the former PPC if the rumours are true and he decides to stick around?). Finally, the Conservatives will be hoping that the increase in their vote translates to further successes following their recent by-election victories in Ruxley. It's going to be interesting!