Twitter

you can also follow us on TWITTER

Join the fight back

50,000 strong

StatPress

Visits today: 38

SCC New Leader and LibDem’s midterm response

So, after all the lead-in,  the new leader of Suffolk County Council – Colin Noble – was elected without a hitch at today’s Suffolk Full Council. That is – every single Conservative, apart from Cllr Bee, turned up, and obediently voted him in.

A rainbow coalition of the opposition – the serried ranks of the LibDem, Labour, Independent, Green and UKIP joined forces to vote against him. A  few were absent. Brian Riley was – we presume –  in North Carolina.  Colin Noble was elected – third time lucky – 37:31. No abstentions. Time will tell where this far-from-ringing endorsement will lead.

Lib Dem Leader’s Response to  SCC Leader’s Executive Statement

The recent General Election proved a godsend for those opposite  – not just the result. What the campaign also managed to hide from the public scrutiny was the battle that seemed to be going on within the party who are in charge of the administration of our County.  Is such a seemingly divided party the best to be in charge at the present time?   Writers of  soap operas – Eastenders and Coronation Street – couldn’t have wished for better material for one of their productions, because believe me, to the casual observer that’s what it looked like!

That brings us to the present and one must wonder – is this the dawning of a new age or are we about to travel back in time.  We are all aware the new leader has a habit of looking back into the dim and distant past so God forbid,  are we about to see the re launch of THE NEW STRATEGIC DIRECTION and all that entailed?

Looking back over the past year:  yes, the roll-out of superfast broadband is proving to be a success –  although I still have a job persuading some of my electorate that it is coming. We must also applaud the roll-out of the Sunday Bus services in some rural areas – something that is essential to the way of life in these areas.

But sadly the last year has been overshadowed by the headlines Suffolk has attracted this week  – “County Slow to Improve Schools”, “Suffolk County Council too Slow” and “Not Enough is Being Done To Improve School Standards in Suffolk” – these are just but a few we have seen this very week.

We have heard the excuses and the supposed successes but this report is just not good enough.   It’s not good for our children, our future, our parents, our reputation and Suffolk as a whole.

When you consider that 25,000 children,  very nearly  the capacity of the football stadium next door,  attend schools that are classified as requiring improvement or are inadequate,  that clearly is not good enough.  This is especially so when most of those children live in Suffolk’s two largest towns,  Ipswich and Lowestoft.   Once again it has taken an Ofsted inspection to highlight our failings.   How many more times are we going to allow this to happen.   It would appear that the Raising the Bar Initiative is not working as it clearly needs to Raise its own standards.  Only this year we have seen Make Every Intervention Count by restructuring the schools improvement services to save a further £5 million.   Surely the time has come to use some of the Suffolk Council Taxpayers’ money being secreted away in reserves to seriously invest in the education of our children. After all we talk about what a wonderful County we have,  what opportunities we have here,  and will have here.   Our children are the future of Suffolk and we want them to be part of this story so let’s be serious about their future and put the resources where they are needed,  not just for education but also lets start reducing these levels of deprivation and see a real rise in attainment.

The care of our elderly has also come under the spotlight recently with the problems surrounding Care UK.  Reassurances were received that problems had been dealt with but then it all resurfaces again. Similarly with our highways contract all is not plan sailing there yet. We were told that by outsourcing these contracts it is the way forward but one must ask the question is it.

So as a mid – term report one can say, shown a slight improvement in some areas but could do better and in some areas MUST do better.

David Wood

Leader Lib Dem Group

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

Liberal Democrat Membership Soars in Suffolk

Join Us

In the week after the General Election, Liberal Democrat membership across the country soared by over 25% and continues to  rise hourly. This surge has – of course –  been replicated  here in Suffolk. The LibDem fightback has begun.

Over half of  new members are aged under 35, and  the vast majority have never been a member of the LibDems before.

A warm welcome to all our new members here in Suffolk! We are thrilled you have chosen to join us.

If you want to join,  get in touch with our membership office on 020 7022 0988, via the national LibDem website, or simply click the ‘join’ button at the left of the page. And remember, if you join before 3 June, you are eligible to vote in the elections  for the new  LibDem  Leader.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

Don’t forget – Suffolk also has District, Town and Parish elections on May 7th

BannerDon’t forget there are also District, Town and Parish elections taking place across Suffolk this coming Thursday May 7th.

Local elections matter!

Support your local Lib Dem Councillors. These are the people you meet in the street, at local events,  the ones who listen to your concerns about the areas in which we all live. We are the ones who act and try to make things better for us all. We don’t grab the headlines, but go about our business thoughtfully and diligently to the best of our ability. We are the ones who live in the areas we represent – we might even be your neighbour – we care passionately about our areas and want to do the best we can to maintain them.

“Just local elections”? No way! When you are casting your vote for the national picture this coming Thursday don’t forget to remember to vote for your local councillors  as well. And make sure you vote for the person you can rely on to work for you.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

General Election May 7th – A Few Facts to Consider

LD rosetteOKAY – after all these weeks the finish line is coming upon us.

Your LibDem candidates on May 7th are:

Bury St Edmunds   David Chappell http://davidchappell.org.uk/en/

Ipswich   Chika Akinwale  http://www.libdems.org.uk/chika_akinwale

Central Suffolk& North Ipswich Jon Neal http://www.libdems.org.uk/jon-neal

South Suffolk  Grace Weaver http://www.libdems.org.uk/grace_weaver

Suffolk Coastal James Sandbach http://www.james4suffolkcoastal.com/

Waveney Stephen Gordon http://www.libdems.org.uk/stephen_gordon

West Suffolk Elfeda Tealby-Watson http://www.libdems.org.uk/elfreda_tealby_watson

A few things to remember when you cast your vote on Thursday:

In 2010 the Labour government left a mountain of debt for the nation. Liberal Democrats shouldered unpopularity to take the responsible step of forming a stable coalition government. In the last 5 years 2 million new apprenticeships and 2 million new jobs have been created and Labour’s deficit has been halved.

The following initiatives were in the LibDem 2010 Manifesto and would not have happened without us:

  1. Tax cuts: Low and middle income earners have had a tax cut of nearly £1,000 a year. Because we raised the income tax threshold – as we promised (though David Cameron said it was impossible) people who earn £10,500 a year of less pay no income tax at all. We want to raise this threshold to £12,500.
  2. Education: We have invested in education, targeting funding at the most deprived children. This has meant an extra £60m for Suffolk schools. It is making a real difference to literacy and numeracy and has provided, for example, one-to-one tuition, breakfast and after-school clubs. In addition we have given free school meals to 5-to-7 year olds.
  3. Health: We have provided additional funding for health and introduced the first ever mental health waiting time standards. We will invest an extra £8bn a year in the NHS each year by 2020. We are the only party to promise this and say how it will be funded.
  4. Renewable energy and environment: We have trebled the amount of energy generated from renewables. We will introduce 5 green laws including protection for bees and pollinators.
  5. We have cracked down on tax dodgers – getting £9bn tax back through deals with Switzerland, Liechenstein and the Channel Islands. We have also prosecuted 10 times more people for tax crimes than happened under the last government.

Some endorsements in the national press:

The Times  “Nick Clegg made a bold decision to take the Liberal Democrats into government. Power has been a justified gamble for the Liberal Democrats…Their signature policy of taking people who earn £10,000 or less out of taxation altogether has been one of their successes.” http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/leaders/article4430579.ece

Independent  “Many of the good things the Coalition has done are owed to the Liberal Democrats. Nick Clegg may not personally recover from the tuition fees debacle, despite being right (eventually). But history will record him as the man who turned a party of protest into one of government.  http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/editorials/in-defence-of-liberal-democracy-10224221.html

Sunday Times  “…[the Coalition] did survive and this has been a period of political stability that would have been the envy of many majority governments of the past. Mr Clegg deserves to survive and so do his closest Lib Dem colleagues in government. Tory supporters in Labour-Lib Dem marginals may wish to vote for the Lib Dem candidate… http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/comment/article1551497.ece

 

Published and promoted by E Da Costa on behalf of the Liberal Democrats all at 16 Two Acres, Capel St. Mary, Ipswich IP9 2XP

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

The Conservatives – Suffolk’s Divided Party

A Game of Tug of War with the County in the middle?

A Game of Tug of War with the County in the middle?

Just what is going on with the Conservatives on Suffolk County Council?

First of all we have the Brian Riley fiasco – yes Hadleigh,  sadly he still is your representative. Now we have the news that Council Leader Mark Bee is standing down. Was he pushed or has he left of his own free will?  Regardless of one’s political beliefs, Mark came in and steadied a very rocky boat in the wake of the Andrea Hill episode.

Clearly with all the turmoil within the administrative party one has to ask oneself are they the right party to be leading Suffolk at this moment in time.

Asked by the EADT to comment on Mark’s resignation, Group Leader David Wood said ” I am shocked and disappointed to hear the news. Mark has always been fair to all parties. He’s always listened to what we have had to say. He’s always recognised that whatever our political backgrounds we are all keen to do what we see as best for the people of Suffolk. I know he has problems within his own group, and that might be because he’s been prepared to talk to us – but this is sad news for the county as a whole”.

Today’s (2nd April 2015) EADT  states that some Conservatives had feared that whilst Mark Bee would have been re-elected unopposed at their AGM next week there would have been a vote of no confidence in the Leadership immediately before May’s annual council meeting. Oh boy! Conservative Democracy at work!!! We have seen how one of your Councillors operates –  we have to ask ourselves is it spreading?

David Wood

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

Brian Riley – Hadleigh’s long distance councillor?

Dave WoodJust what does Brian Riley the Conservative Councillor for Hadleigh think he is playing at? It is just beyond comprehension that he thinks he can still represent the good people of Hadleigh from his new abode in the USA.

As leader of Suffolk Lib Dems i am particularly angry because for close on 30 years Hadleigh was represented by Lib Dem Councillor David Grutchfield who was truly a man of the people. David was well known throughout Hadleigh, could be contacted day or night, would often be seen in the High Street – or any of a number of functions that might be taking place. David was your model of a good local councillor – always there to lend an ear and help out. Now what have Hadleigh got?  an absent councillor who is under the misapprehension that he can do the job from miles away! Think again Mr Riley. and do the decent thing and step down thereby allowing the people of Hadleigh to have their voice heard again.

David Wood

 

You can sign our petition to remove Brian Riley here

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

Sizewell C: an opportunity for better transport in Suffolk Coastal?

Caroline Head small (800x800)At March Suffolk’s full council Woodbridge Councillor Caroline Page spoke  regarding the development of Sizewell C and how any mitigation and compensation in development must include forms of sustainable transport .

“I’d like to make clear that the decision as to whether to build or not to build Sizewell C is not at issue here. THAT is a decision being taken elsewhere. However, what is very clear to me is that if Britain’s city-dwellers want us in Suffolk coastal to host their nuclear-powered electricity generation, they need to be compensating us handsomely for this. I haven’t noticed any great  desire to build a new power station in  London, after all.

Suffolk coastal is already an area suffering from a double whammy of traffic problems – traffic congestion onsections of  the A12 on the one hand, rural transport poverty on the other. Any development of Sizewell C must be seen as an opportunity to address this.

In addition to  finally getting round to building the Four Villages bypass (a crying need since I’ve been a county councillor) any development should include heavy investment in the East Suffolk line and better rail services along the Suffolk coast, together with huge investment in other forms of sustainable transport, such as regular reliable bus services. This would aid building work and allow both residents and visitors to enjoy the Suffolk coastal countryside while leaving a lasting and green legacy of the development  that would go a small way to compensate us for all we are being asked to hazard – in short-, mid- and long-term – when hosting such a project for the benefit of the nation,”  says Cllr Page.

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

What we Need from a New Passenger Rail Franchise

DSCF4355 (600x800)The Suffolk County Lib Dem response in full:

I am replying to the East Anglia Rail Passenger Franchise Consultation as County Councillor for Woodbridge, and as LibDem Spokesperson for Transport – on behalf of my constituents and all the rail travellers of Suffolk.

In addition I am a very regular rail traveller, using Abellio Greater Anglia rail services several times a week: generally using the East Suffolk  line, the Ipswich to Cambridge line, the Ipswich to Peterborough line and the Ipswich to London line  – though I also make fairly regular journeys on other portions of the network. I am therefore qualified to talk about the current rail provision with significant personal knowledge of the day-to-day running of the services.

Firstly I would like to make special reference to questions 3, 4 and 5 which all link together:

“Question 3  Are there any changes to the current passenger rail service which you feel should be considered? “

Currently the trains specified to and from Ipswich are:  Hourly to Felixstowe . Hourly to Lowestoft . Hourly to Cambridge . Every two hours to Peterborough.

It is clear to all regular travellers that the Cambridge and Peterborough services need extending: Increasing the Ipswich- Cambridge service to  twice an hour; Ipswich -Peterborough  service – hourly would meet the needs of our developing community. An later extension to the Lowestoft service would be a huge benefit.

The current poor service to Peterborough means that Ipswich is already substantially cut off from rail connexions to the west and north unless one travels via London, putting unnecessary stress on passenger numbers on that line and a huge extra-time burden on Suffolk travellers. Cynically this might seem for no better reason than the privatised competitive operators seem  reluctant to extend services beyond the Intercity route with the biggest gains (Norwich to London). This then causes a London bottleneck and a lack of flexibility in travel which seriously needs addressing:

People in Suffolk need an hourly service to Peterborough as a bare minimum  – both for their own convenience and benefit  and, strategically, to take pressure off the London route.

Similarly the Ipswich- Cambridge service needs to be improved from the once-an-hour service which is all that  it currently merits – bearing in mind that the Ipswich-Cambridge line is not only the gateway from Suffolk to the west but to Stansted.

Although we are hugely grateful for an hourly service, people in Woodbridge  and further along the East Suffolk line could do with at least  one later train in the evening to allow them to enjoy a night out in London – or even Ipswich. The last London train to meet the last existing Lowestoft service leaves at 21.00. The last Lowestoft service leaves Ipswich at 10.17.

“Question 4:Results indicate that rail is not the preferred mode of transport when travelling to Stansted Airport. What improvements do you believe should be made to the rail service in order to make this your first choice of travel?”

See answer to Q 3. Try to get to Stansted from anywhere in Suffolk – especially east Suffolk and the answer is simple. Currently Abellio runs a slow hourly service that is far from reliable. The last train from Ipswich goes at 21.19 and takes just under an hour and a half if all goes well. Reliability being an issue (and I personally have been given as little as 30 seconds notice of this train stopping dead at Newmarket an turning around  rather than continuing to Cambridge, although it was clear the guard had known in advance!) means that no sensible person would rely on this service if they have a  plane to catch.

 A frequent, fast, reliable service to Cambridge from Ipswich, starting early and finishing late and costing a reasonable amount is what is required if you wish to support rail transport from Suffolk to Stansted. This is a simple strategic decision that has been beyond every planner since Stansted became a functioning civil  airport.

“Question 5  If you have a view on or would be affected by the proposal set below, please provide it: In order to improve connectivity between Cambridge and the north of England, Rail Executive is currently assessing the case for the diversion of the current Liverpool Lime Street to Norwich East Midlands Trains to Cambridge and a new hourly East Anglia operated service between Norwich and Peterborough providing good connections to the East Coast Mainline services to Yorkshire, North East England and Scotland. The assessment will equally include a sub-option where the current Ipswich to Peterborough service would be limited to Ely and connections would be provided with the new Norwich to Peterborough service. The option to retain the current Norwich through service to Liverpool Lime Street will be included within this assessment.”

My view is simple, and relates to my answer to Q3.

  Suffolk needs an direct  hourly service between Ipswich and Peterborough. If you elect to link the service to anything that carries on further, that is up to you, however it MUST NOT be any less (eg to Ely). Anything else will be selling the residents in Suffolk short, and limiting our transport choices further than they are already limited.

The Peterborough – Ipswich service is already the poor relation of Abellio’s services. The last time I travelled on it, it compared very unfavourably to several rail trips I had recently made in rural China! As planning legislation requires more and more housing in the Suffolk countryside we Suffolk residents deserve rail services that are better, not worse –  and that will allow us to move around the region to employment and education choices that do not funnel us automatically through the already overly congested unreliable bottleneck that is Liverpool Street Station. By removing the direct Peterborough train you will be doing just that!

“Question 8a How can the franchise operator help you better during planned disruption, such as engineering works?”

Let us rephrase this question: “How (excuse my bluntness, but I am put beyond patience) can the franchise operator best get off its backside and consider providing the service that the farepaying public are paying for when they cynically ‘plan’ their disruption during weekends and public holidays?”

  The current franchise operator appears to  consider the needs of the distance city commuter first and foremost when it comes to ‘planned disruption’ I suggest that it is time that this should be queried as a priority. As Woodbridge county councillor I represent a huge tranche of travellers and business people who would like to travel – or to service the needs of travellers able to arrive by rail – at the weekends and on public holidays. The next rail franchise operator needs to consider that leisure and tourism is an important part of Suffolk business and understand that supporting the travel of a wider range of passengers should be a significant part of their operation.

Yet, because Abellio concentrates on the Norwich-London commuter traffic ,  the company  has shown itself totally cavalier to the requirements of internal Suffolk  travel and travellers and specifically weekend and holiday travellers. Why should it be so difficult for travellers to travel at the times most peoplewant to travel? And for that matter why on earth should travellers be paying the same fare for this substandard and shoddy service? Most of all – if people can carry a bicycle on the train why can they not carry their bicycle on these replacement buses?  It is not beyond the wit of man to make adequate provision for the people the operator is so ready to discommode while they continue to charge them full fare for this poor apology for ‘service’ in a wholly ‘Jesting Pilate’ spirit!  Our expectations from the next franchise operator should be of a reasonable level – and I am expecting them to be able to commit to do a lot better! (Incidentally, I travel around the world on trains and have yet to find another country which grinds to a halt the way the UK does on Sundays and public holidays. Perhaps a new franchise operator would like to investigate that?)

“Question 9 …However, we are confined by limited timetabling and infrastructure constraints and are therefore looking for other innovative ways to resolve the issue of excess capacity. When travelling on a service where capacity is stretched, what opportunities do you see which would improve your on board experience?”

First and foremost I go back my answers to Q3 and 5 and to the simple notion of not allowing the franchise operator to neglect the minor routes and produce these bottlenecks in the first place – which is pretty much what you are proposing to do by eg removing the Ipswich to Peterborough service! It is not rocket science to see that you need to be reducing the pressure on these trains. So, simple solutions are:

Ensuring that as many competing rail services are across the area running efficiently and well and at as full capacity as possible by funding them appropriately and not allowing franchise operators and their shareholders to cherrypick the lucrative Intercity routes for short-term profits

Investing in double-decker carriages which are standard  in Europe and China (and don’t give me that spiel of amazingly long and impossible time-scales for commission and delivery that I have been given by UK rail operaters! They built an entire monorail across Chongqing: rail, stations, carriages and all in two years. In this global marketplace a rail company could source and build new carriages fast if it was in any way motivated to do so).

Biting the bullet and giving up the spacious first-class carriages and replacing them with the much more intensively occupied standard seating which is what the current franchise holder has provided for the rest of the passengers! My view of first class is that if there is no pressure on space, I have no issue with provision of first class seating – should people wish to pay for it. If however we have limited room and no chance of extra carriages, I’m afraid they stand in the way of efficiency and progress and are doomed to extinction

Question 15 mentions facilities:
There is a continuing diminution of cycle, buggy and luggage storage on current Greater Anglia trains, and the situation is getting worse.  On some Abellio trains (eg Cambridge – Ely and beyond) there is none at all within the carriages  although they are also without a guard’s van (and now resemble tube train carriages). This means there is nowhere at all to carry luggage. So what then is a traveller? Someone who only carries themselves? On these trains this lack of storage has a dreadful effect on the travel experience – cyclists and passengers with heavy luggage standing at the exits and getting in the way of people wanting to get on and off, and often with guards and passengers shouting at them. This is not appropriate reasonable or fair. Even on, say the Ipswich – Cambridge  or East Suffolk Line trains there is limited space for cycles and  it means that travelling is fraught with anxiety that one might be denied access. On several occasions in recent years I’ve been denied access onto a Greater Anglia train with a prebooked ticket because there was no space for my bicycle. More commonly, however, I’ve suffered great anxiety that I might be denied access, which has diminished my travelling experience. The East Suffolk Line is rural and there are no connecting buses so this is a particular handicap.

Babychanging facilities  are important and not very noticeable on trains (though, to be fair, I don’t carry babies any more and have had no complaints). It must always be included in carriages.

Staff presence is essential – particularly to protect the  vulnerable. It must not be reduced

Tables on trains are useful for those of us who work as we travel, while plug sockets are very useful – and so is free WiFi which every FirstBus in Suffolk provides for its passengers included in the price of their average £3.50 ticket – but which Abellio does not include in the eg £50.70 standard second-class single ticket it charges Ipswich to London

“Question 16 What areas of customer service within your end-to-end journey would you expect to see monitored and reported on in the new franchise, in order to improve the service quality for passengers?”

  Price of tickets

  Punctuality and reliability

  Provision of sufficient capacity in terms of a) train frequency b) availability of seating on board the train and c) provision of services to required destinations;

  Adequacy of cycle, buggy and luggage storage;

  management of disruption: information provision and outcome;

  ease of buying the most appropriate ticket for the journey at ticket office, online, AND via ticket machine;

  The ease of access for disabled passengers and those with young children

In Summary – which is what question 18 asks from me – I ask for my constituents from the new franchise, as top three priorities:

1 More and better evening/weekend /holiday rail services without disruptions, so that we business people, residents and travellers in Suffolk can benefit as well as the Intercity commuters from the franchise.

2 More services to Peterborough/Cambridge (1 an hour to Peterborough; 2 an hour to Cambridge, a further  evening service along the East Suffolk Line). NO REDUCTION OF EXISTING SERVICES

3 Better design of carriages to allow for more passengers to travel with bicycles and luggage and buggies (in other words – to travel) – and the fast commissioning and provision of these carriages.

Finally, I must point out – once again – that I take great issue with the first question in this Franchise consultation.  I have already responded personally, and face-to-face, as a county councillor in a public consultation, to this  – but I cannot emphasise how improper and dismissive it is to ask the poor passengers who travel on the current Greater Anglia trains your Question 1 (which asks them to prioritise only three of the following  list which they consider require  particular attention in order to improve an end to end journey:

Delivering value for money; Providing a punctual and reliable service;Provision of sufficient capacity, both in terms of train frequency and the availability of seating on board the train;Effective management of disruption, especially through information to passengers;The availability of accurate information about trains and platforms;The comfort and adequacy of accommodation on the train, especially on longer distance journeys;The availability of train and station staff;The ease of buying the most appropriate ticket for the journey at a ticket office, online, or via a ticket machine;The ease of access to services for passengers with reduced mobility; and Free wi-fi available on trains)

I wish to put it on record for a third time that this question is deeply inappropriate considering the current levels of service provision. Are we expected to make a choice?  Yet as any person filling in an electronic version will be unable to continue UNLESS they tick three boxes and three only, it will completely distort the problems that exist with the current provision given that:

*The train tickets are expensive (£50.70 each way standard fare Ipswich to London) * the trains are often not punctual or reliable, * they are often not of a suitable capacity (at least for second class passengers) * management of disruption is perfunctory and kneejerk with conflicting advice being given and the poor staff on the ground left without support to deal with enraged passengers*The availability of accurate information about trains and platforms is such that I am often reminded of the comic film M Hulot’s Holiday; *space – particularly for people with luggage or bicycles and most particularly at peak or holiday times is unreliable – the stock being variable; trying to travel with a bicycle  on the ‘tube-style- carriages north of Cambridge is a particular challenge * one cannot buy the popular Day Ranger ticket either online or from a ticket machine because -although I have repeatedly asked  Abellio  to do so – they  do not provide it  online or via a ticket machine machine, presumably because it is rather too good value (!) * reduced mobility covers a multitude of problems some of which  are dealt with better than others* Finally, as I travel around Suffolk on First Eastern Counties buses who all provide free wifi in the price of their ticket – I am at a loss to understand why Abellio should decide it is a First Class perk!

Given, as I say, all these factors , I would absolutely refuse to prioritise three of these recommendations ‘that would  make my journey better’. Why on earth should anyone imagine that passengers should not need them ALL to make our journeys better, if all are lacking? 

Caroline Page

Liberal Democrat Group

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

Suffolk Schools – two- and three-tier education

Penny Otton SCCI am of course extremely pleased to learn that education results in Suffolk are at last beginning to improve.

However to still be so near the bottom of the table is not only disturbing , but  ironic,  in that two of the best performing secondary schools in the County are in Bury St. Edmunds, where there is still a three tier school system.

Conservatives in Suffolk have spent an undeclared amount – which must run into tens of millions of pounds – on reorganising from three to two tier schooling.

The independent report by Ofsted last year on Suffolk schools  gave a damning verdict on the council’s performance of supporting county run schools and challenging academies, stating  “The Local Authority arrangements for supporting school improvement are ineffective.”

At the very start of the schools reorganisation Liberal Democrat councillors warned that the benefits would be minimal –  as poor school performance was related to deprivation not school structure.  Year on year we challenged Conservative cuts to the funding for school improvement. They seemed hell-bent on continuing with this very costly process, whilst Suffolk plummeted down the national education league tables.

A whole generation of school children have now been through Suffolk schools that have failed to improve . Perhaps those in charge should pause now to reflect on where the time , money and expertise would have been better spent.

Penny Otton

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn

Suffolk Lib Dem Group: Suffolk’s 2015-16 Budget

BannerThis year we have chosen not to attempt a detailed amendment to the budget but to comment on matters of principal at a strategic level on those service areas we consider most important.

The Liberal Democrat group is fully aware of the overall financial situation and supports the government focus on reducing the budget deficit.  However it believes that many services provided by local government are valuable and should not be a first priority for cuts.

We believe that the county should use the resources provided by government and those it raises locally to support the local population and the economy.  The Tories have diverted significant funds into reserves “for a rainy day”, and we have seen reserves grow dramatically during the financial crisis.  They appear to be saving for a “rainy decade” while cutting services NOW.  Funds could be used on today’s issues using reserves set aside for activities that will never occur.

The county must fund infrastructure that supports the local economy and ensure it is fit for purpose.  For broadband we can see some progress but highways maintenance is slow and inadequate.

The county should provide services that support a good quality of life for vulnerable people and those who have difficulty getting work.  We need to help people into work or help them into work re-enabling people who have had problems whenever possible.

ACS–Services for the elderly and vulnerable   Within ACS the administration continuously seeks to reduce demand making no increase for inflation or demographic change.  We support continuous pressure to improve efficiency removing bureaucracy and deploying new techniques and technology.  However, we must ensure that people are not just forced out of relative low cost services into those with much higher spend.  Into acute hospitals due to a lack of care places for instance.  The county should collect data on local needs, understand it and focus on those needs.  There should be clear evidence that needs are being met.

The cycle we see too often in our divisions, of a chaotic and disastrous end to life bounced from service to service must cease.  We find it difficult to believe that this can be achieved in the face of an increasing elderly population while we put money in reserves “for a rainy day”.  The problems experienced with care homes within the County’s contract are inexcusable.

The County must watch its strategy closely to be sure that the vulnerable are not being pushed out of the support system.  Cost reductions purely from lower wage rates or working hours are not acceptable.  They just move the budget problem to the benefit bill.

Public Health  Mental health services are clearly inadequate but at national level Liberal Democrats are taking action and we welcome the moves by Norman Lamb to establish maximum times for referral.  We believe that the County must play its role in this area.

CYP– Children’s services with emphasis on education  These concern us concerns us most.  The performance of many of our schools, particularly those in deprived areas lags the national picture.  While there are improvements, in key stage 2 reading, writing and maths Suffolk has improved moving us up the Local Authority rankings from 145 to 141 this is not good enough.  The Tory response is to cut the overall CYP budget by £6.6 million.

We have the “Raising the Bar” initiative but find it difficult to detect any real enthusiasm for it in Suffolk Schools or a belief that it is an effective approach.  A school governors commented recently “If the Local Authority continues to focus on such non-events as the distribution of meaningless and infantile rosettes, I think we can be confident that the Bar will remain firmly on, or near, the floor.”  Currently we appear to have a learning inspection service and we need a learning improvement service.

Leadership is essential but the enthusiastic effective leadership teams in our good and outstanding schools just don’t have the budget to cover supply replacements while they help others to make the leap in teaching and learning required.  They can’t neglect their own schools and let them fall back.

We still believe that the County should fund supply cover and in addition establish a small number of “excellence” teams who could work with the leadership teams in failing schools to remove pressure, determine what needs to be done and put it in place.   Excellence teams would need people with proven track records who enjoy a challenge and would need to ensure that necessary management decisions are taken.

The cost of such teams would not be trivial but would be small compared to the County budget and must be less than the continuing cost of failure.

The Conservative administration have been in control of our children’s education now for ten years and in many areas a whole generation of Suffolk young people have been through a failing education system.  This system must be improved and “Raising the Bar” is not working.

And, while the government has made it mandatory for young people to remain in education or training until 17 it seems deeply inappropriate to have no fundng mechanism in place to support the poorest young people of the county for this last year of what is now statutory education, as exists up until 16. Our view is  that you need to speculate in order to accumulate – that savings should be measured longterm. A small investment from our our rainy day millions now could reap dividends in years to come

The Suffolk County Council Lib Dem Group

Be Sociable, Share!
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • email
  • LinkedIn