Cost-saving Thurrock Council budget revealed

COUNCIL bosses have planned £9million of savings by cutting back on management costs, it has been revealed.

In a report outlining Thurrock Council’s budget for the next year, more than £600,000 will be saved by cutting management costs, including saving £240,000 on the cost of stationery, printing from PCs and cleaning.

So far, council officials have made £10million of savings including £300,000 by slashing senior management to create a “modern and slim-line Thurrock Council”.

A discussion on the proposals during a full council meeting also confirmed the Labour-led authority’s pledge to freeze the level of council tax for a second year despite cuts in Government funding of £4million.

Leader John Kent said: “We want Thurrock to be a place of ambition, enterprise and opportunity, where communities and businesses flourish.

“To achieve this with less money means we will have to focus more keenly on our priorities and also means we will all need to work differently in the future.”

However, more cash will be ploughed into education, care for older people as well as tackling homelessness.

A total of £1million will be used on child social care, £2million will be used for care for older people, £500,000 will be spent on alternative education provision and school improvements.

Mr Kent added: “We must make sure we make tough decisions necessary to protect communities and that is something we will continue to do. "It is a budget that has sought to protect our frontline services as much as possible."

Oliver Gerrish, cabinet member for education said the budget reflected the importance of education and raising aspirations in the borough while Val Morris-Cook, responsible for environment said her portfolio always came in budget.

However, Tory councillor for Stanford East and Corringham Town, said: “This budget does seem to lack vision, focus and drive and does not have a plan for tackling the challenges we are facing and no amount of smoke screen will divert away from that".

A debate broke out about how the budget would effect environment services with Tory councillor James Halden saying the council needed to “work on an invest to save strategy.”

Conservative leader Phil Anderson added: “We have a different view.

“They (Labour) have brought forward one vision and we have brought a different version on where we should be going".

The budget was approved by 25 councillors for it and 21 against.

Comments (7)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

12:52pm Thu 1 Mar 12

Dave_ says...

“ambition, enterprise and opportunity”
Hmmm words I don’t immediately associate with Labour. Unless it’s assuring people have no ambition other than how to enterprising in seeking opportunites to get money out of the state, as they have no work.
We could save a heck of a lot more if we didn't pay Cllrs any sort of retainer and they had to work for a living.
“ambition, enterprise and opportunity” Hmmm words I don’t immediately associate with Labour. Unless it’s assuring people have no ambition other than how to enterprising in seeking opportunites to get money out of the state, as they have no work. We could save a heck of a lot more if we didn't pay Cllrs any sort of retainer and they had to work for a living. Dave_

1:58pm Thu 1 Mar 12

fletch12107 says...

£500,000 will be spent on alternative education provision and school improvements!!! What is this alternative education provision?
£500,000 will be spent on alternative education provision and school improvements!!! What is this alternative education provision? fletch12107

6:01pm Thu 1 Mar 12

Thurrockbob says...

Cost saving my Arse ...... start cost saving with the councillors then maybe speak to us phlebs!
Cost saving my Arse ...... start cost saving with the councillors then maybe speak to us phlebs! Thurrockbob

10:03am Fri 2 Mar 12

gonetothedogs says...

AS someone who is all for cost saving methods,it beggars belief that after an entire year of asking for cross hatching at emergency access points we were promised that this would be done just before the elections last year and it was approved by the Council and the local residents.After almost one year of continuous requests,we are informed that cross hatching will not be made available after all because they cannot be monitored and it would move the problem down the road.So all in all,this was an empty promise to get votes for elections but now they have back tracked as always because they still have seats in the borough.Well folks..typical platitudes from a so called Council who have to bring in the "Heavies" to explain that yellow lines across emergency access areas cannot and will not be done as they have no way of monitoring them.As long as the fire brigade have 18 mtrs of hose available (this out of a Council wallah's mouth)I will not end up as a "crispy critter" should there be a fire.Comforting and downright pathetic penny pinching jobs worths who haven't a bloody clue.The biggest culprit in blocking access is a Council Worker who has the Council by the short and curlies.The cost is minimal and the area will be monitored by the residents and local PCSO..!Time to stop the Council having new cars every 3 years and that would solve 2 problems in one fell swoop.Gutless Wonders who swan around making promises they have no intention of keeping..What a Crock & buying votes..just shows where priorities lie!Absolute BS!
AS someone who is all for cost saving methods,it beggars belief that after an entire year of asking for cross hatching at emergency access points we were promised that this would be done just before the elections last year and it was approved by the Council and the local residents.After almost one year of continuous requests,we are informed that cross hatching will not be made available after all because they cannot be monitored and it would move the problem down the road.So all in all,this was an empty promise to get votes for elections but now they have back tracked as always because they still have seats in the borough.Well folks..typical platitudes from a so called Council who have to bring in the "Heavies" to explain that yellow lines across emergency access areas cannot and will not be done as they have no way of monitoring them.As long as the fire brigade have 18 mtrs of hose available (this out of a Council wallah's mouth)I will not end up as a "crispy critter" should there be a fire.Comforting and downright pathetic penny pinching jobs worths who haven't a bloody clue.The biggest culprit in blocking access is a Council Worker who has the Council by the short and curlies.The cost is minimal and the area will be monitored by the residents and local PCSO..!Time to stop the Council having new cars every 3 years and that would solve 2 problems in one fell swoop.Gutless Wonders who swan around making promises they have no intention of keeping..What a Crock & buying votes..just shows where priorities lie!Absolute BS! gonetothedogs

4:31pm Fri 2 Mar 12

noneoftheabove says...

Save even more - replace entire council with a switchboard that offers a menu of excuses to suit given situations. That's about as much as we get at the moment.
Save even more - replace entire council with a switchboard that offers a menu of excuses to suit given situations. That's about as much as we get at the moment. noneoftheabove

12:43pm Sat 3 Mar 12

A.N.Other says...

Our 49 councillors take expenses and allowances of nearly £600 thousand.

So each household gives £12 to our councillors. I would rather chuck this money down the drain than allow it line the pockets of our useless councillors.

If councillors want to cut the council tax then cut their expenses and allowances by 50%.

Of course they would never do this as they are like pigs in mud and happy to continue leaching money from the public purse.
Our 49 councillors take expenses and allowances of nearly £600 thousand. So each household gives £12 to our councillors. I would rather chuck this money down the drain than allow it line the pockets of our useless councillors. If councillors want to cut the council tax then cut their expenses and allowances by 50%. Of course they would never do this as they are like pigs in mud and happy to continue leaching money from the public purse. A.N.Other

7:46pm Sun 4 Mar 12

d_2da_ougle says...

thats a fair point an other does 600,000 include mortages on houses or is that seperate i personaly think they should only get train travel covered to go up to westminster, lets face it were on a direct route to london and then can eat out of the canteen how much more would they need to do the job honestly
thats a fair point an other does 600,000 include mortages on houses or is that seperate i personaly think they should only get train travel covered to go up to westminster, lets face it were on a direct route to london and then can eat out of the canteen how much more would they need to do the job honestly d_2da_ougle

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree