Mostly, in both Croydon and Birmingham, it was the Tory Central government cutting funding massively.
Most councils didn't lose £500m through "ill-fated commercial investments", as the Guardian rather politely puts it. Private Eye has additionally documented a lot of handing out contracts without competition to connected parties, in other areas of Croydon council's activities.
Clearly a lot of councils are increasingly squeezed between what they are legally obliged to spend and what the bastard government has given them to spend in recent times. But the egregious and early cases of bankruptcy have involved large waste of public funds in addition well beyond the usual case, at least according to Baron Amyas Morse.
You should expect a reasonable amount of incompetence and bad luck in any efficient system. Because it costs too much to weed out all incompetence and mitigate all risks.
So it comes down to there not being enough reserves in the system, which is central government's fault.
You should expect a reasonable amount of incompetence and bad luck in any efficient system. Because it costs too much to weed out all incompetence and mitigate all risks.
Indeed. But what Morse was saying is that those who have gone bust first are those that had a lot more than the average amount of incompetence or worse.
These things can be due to bad luck, and I will contrast with the case of Woking, where it seems plausible to me that bad luck played a much larger part. But I would argue that it was not bad luck in Croydon's case. Its "ill-fated commercial ventures" were "ill-fated" because they were implausible, and some would argue corrupt, from the start.
A resident of Woking tells me that their even larger "ill-fated commercial ventures" resulting in their £1.2bn bankruptcy, risked on a much smaller income than Croydon, were "the right kind of thing to be doing", and that arguably there was a large amount of bad luck there. Woking is not a unitary authority, so has a small income because most of the local spending there, social services, education, etc, is spent by Surrey County Council. But there was also incompetence in that there is no way a council with such a small "core funding of £16m" should ever have been risking such very large sums of money in commercial ventures, even if they were, in principle, reasonably sensible ideas. Croydon had a much larger income to take risks against.
There are funds for bailing out councils. But if they are too freely available, then there is much less discipline on councils to avoid carrying out the kind of misdeeds that went on in Croydon.
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Mon May 06, 2024 12:33 pm
by bjn
Councils are only allowed to speculate in the way Croydon did because the Tories changed the rules to allow such stupidities. From what I can see it was a sop to make up for the central funding cuts.
From my slightly informed understanding (I know people), most councils are screwed regardless of competence. They can barely carry out core functions and are operating at significant losses.
From my slightly informed understanding (I know people), most councils are screwed regardless of competence. They can barely carry out core functions and are operating at significant losses.
As this recent House of Lords Library report says, local budgets available for expenditure fell by 26% in real terms from 2010/11 to 2020/21, regardless of the growth in demand for local services. Central government funding to local authorities fell by 50% in real terms in that time, the difference being made up by increases in local taxation. Available funding has since slightly increased, but demand for local services carries on increasing, and maintenance backlogs get longer.
Clearly the government has applied a double standard to central and local government funding, and to increases in central and local taxation over that period. "Most councils are screwed regardless of competence" is a reasonable way of putting the conclusions of that report, which are of course stated in rather less sensational terms.
Patrick Dalton
@shitlondon
Hearing rumours from Westminster that Johnathan Gullis is planning a defecation.
3:12 PM · May 8, 2024
·
81.7K
Views
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Thu May 09, 2024 5:47 am
by Grumble
So, Natalie Elphicke hey? Renowned for her left wing views.
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Thu May 09, 2024 6:40 am
by FlammableFlower
There were lofty thoughts that this is some kind of plan by Starmer to create a more centrist party that would gather up a wider range of voters, but I don't buy that.
I think it's more short-term vicious politicking where they've just pulled another jenga block from the rickety tower that is the Tory government and it'll cause more paranoia and despair in the party - Labour aim to produce levels of distrust that will become paralysing. No10 won't know who they can trust, who's next, especially if Labour can turn someone like Elphicke. If they ask someone if they are loyal, can they believe their answer?
There were lofty thoughts that this is some kind of plan by Starmer to create a more centrist party that would gather up a wider range of voters, but I don't buy that.
I think it's more short-term vicious politicking where they've just pulled another jenga block from the rickety tower that is the Tory government and it'll cause more paranoia and despair in the party - Labour aim to produce levels of distrust that will become paralysing. No10 won't know who they can trust, who's next, especially if Labour can turn someone like Elphicke. If they ask someone if they are loyal, can they believe their answer?
Yup.
Which in this case, to damage such an incompetent and dangerous government is sufficient reason.
She'll have to accept Labour discipline and isn't standing
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Thu May 09, 2024 11:23 am
by El Pollo Diablo
Caution advised on the new YouGov poll showing a 30-point labour lead. It's probably an outlier, most other polls show a 16-23 point lead. Two polls yesterday - More In Common and Deltapoll - showed the Tories on 26% support. The difference is generally in the don't knows and how many of them are assumed to come back to the Conservatives at the election. Probably there's some sampling differences too.
That said, it's possible there's been an anti-Tory dip in their support since the locals, which we'll see in the next few days. At least two pollsters should be publishing tomorrow (Techne and WeThink, plus possibly JL Partners), so we'll get a better sense then.
Edit: Savanta and JL Partners have actually now both published their polls, which are in line with More In Common and Deltapoll - 27/26% respectively for the Tories and 43/41% for Labour.
However, also worth noting that the locals indicate proportional swing against the Tories, which is very good news for Labour - it shows their vote is much more efficient than uniform swing shows.
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Fri May 10, 2024 1:51 pm
by IvanV
One would think that the main point of defecting to Labour for a conservative would be to try and keep your job after the next election. So I was discussing with a friend last night. But Natalie Elphicke is standing down at the next election, so what's the point. My friend suggested that in the circumstances it would be so delicious to defect instead to the Monster Raving Loony Party.
One would think that the main point of defecting to Labour for a conservative would be to try and keep your job after the next election. So I was discussing with a friend last night. But Natalie Elphicke is standing down at the next election, so what's the point. My friend suggested that in the circumstances it would be so delicious to defect instead to the Monster Raving Loony Party.
Nah - always hurts more to defect to the enemy. We basically now have Tories supporting Starmer to be the positive change the country needs...!
I heard Elphicke may have been offered a SPAD role in housing after she steps down, apparently it's a topic close to her dead cold Tory heart.
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Wed May 15, 2024 11:36 am
by Gfamily
Could have put on one of the Twitter moments threads,
Screenshot_2024-05-15-12-29-34-54_40deb401b9ffe8e1df2f1cc5ba480b12_1.jpg (108.46 KiB) Viewed 1379 times
My local Tories have shoved something through my door providing information giving the appearance of providing evidence that, seemingly suicidally, that the tactical vote to beat the Tories is for Labour, not the Lib Dems, despite us having a sitting Lib Dem MP that famously won a by-election. Of course, there are some boundary changes. Probably they eat Lib Dems for breakfast in the very wealthy new areas we have gained, though I wouldn't have thought the largely rural areas we have lost were top Lib Dem voting ground either.
Their reason for giving us this apparently suicidal info is "so you can see Con is the tactical vote to beat Labour here". Which is a very funny thing to write. I don't think anyone here would vote Lib Dem to keep Labour out. So I wonder if this is just disinformation to try and split the anti-Tory vote. The Tories recently won the Thames Valley PCC vote on 40%, because the anti-Tory vote was split and Labour did beat the Lib Dems into 3rd place. I voted Lib Dem because on the info I had that was the best vote to get the Tory out, but apparently I was wrong. I worry about being wrong again when the General Election arrives.
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Fri May 17, 2024 12:30 pm
by jimbob
Theresa May is a former leader of our party & should be treated with respect.
But I can't forget her disastrously bungled Brexit negotiations, her near-loss of an election to the worst Labour leader ever, and her delivery of a Conservative vote share of 9% in the 2019 Euro "elections".
Boris Johnson successfully cleared all this up.
So take what she says about how to do politics, and who is and is not Conservative, with a very large pinch of salt.
Theresa May is a former leader of our party & should be treated with respect.
But I can't forget her disastrously bungled Brexit negotiations, her near-loss of an election to the worst Labour leader ever, and her delivery of a Conservative vote share of 9% in the 2019 Euro "elections".
Boris Johnson successfully cleared all this up.
So take what she says about how to do politics, and who is and is not Conservative, with a very large pinch of salt.
Interesting re-interpretation of reality to say that someone else f.cked up the negotiations you led on a daily basis, isn't it... Angling for a Job in the Ministry of Truth?
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Wed May 22, 2024 1:47 pm
by FlammableFlower
Bit of feverish speculation going about on Twitter over the possibility of the election call happening today (Cameron and others cutting short overseas visits and returning etc).
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Wed May 22, 2024 2:41 pm
by headshot
A friend who works on the Govt side of NHS planning has been told to prepare for 4th July.
Re: General Election '24
Posted: Wed May 22, 2024 2:45 pm
by El Pollo Diablo
Our chair who is a former permanent secretary has said he thinks it's on