Welsh politics drift thread

we may as well have one, I'll start

according to this article, it suggests that 7 Welsh LAs have significant cash reserves and that despite budget cuts from the block grant, cuts in services aren't really necessary as the cash reserves could cover any perceived shortfall. If this is the case, and I doubt the Public Services watchdog would lie, then it would seem as if the Labour party within WG and Welsh LAs are playing a dangerous political game by deceiving the public about the need to cut services and blaming Westminster, when there are adequate reserves built up to avoid such cuts.

Who'd have thought that Welsh Labour and their socialist cohorts would try and deceive the Welsh public

Bless you. It's a Labour Minister who's drawn attention to the reserves, in case you didn't read the article properly, and said that the councils should do something about it. Having reserves but still cutting services is a bad habit of local authorities of every political stripe across the UK - it's just that ours are mostly Labour. But full marks for trying to start a dogfight.

There must be another forum somewhere to discuss general Welsh politics. I know you'll say that it affects Cardiff, and that is true, but until there are details relating to the situation of Cardiff CC itself I dont personally dont think this loaded thread is appropriate for a Cardiff specific forum.

Frankly, I'm suprised you are not running to become an AM to sort out these, and most other, issues you feel so outspoken about in politics?

@Lucky

I've not said it's not a Labour minister. what I've said is that it's a bit rich blaming Westminster when councils have reserves than can protect from the cuts somewhat

@reddragon
I'm generally against the concept of the state. I want to see fewer politicians (or is it less politicians). I couldn't think of anything worse than trying to legislate for hoe other people should live their lives. You confuse me with the rest of the parasitic control freaks who enter politics

The thing is you can only use reserves once. When they're gone they're gone. With Labour and the Conservatives promising swinging cuts for the next five years you could use reserves to postpone the pain - but that's all you'd be doing. Meanwhile if some unexpected crisis or opportunity came along you'd have lost your means of dealing with the situation.

Any body, public or private, needs reserves - and I have yet to meet a politician who wouldn't prefer to spend money rather than to save it!

I'm aware you can only use reserves once ash, but that is not the point I'm making. Welsh Labour know cuts are coming, so rather than delay the cuts by using reserves (and taking the blame for the cuts in say 2 years time), they prefer the cuts to services now, where they can lay the blame at Westminster. In the meantime, the public have to have unnecessary cuts to services because Welsh Labour don't want to be seen as the bad guys. it is contemptible.

So you'd prefer a situation where the cuts would have to made anyway, albeit two years later, but under circumstances where authorities have very little to fall back on for emergencies or capital investment? I can just imagine how scathing you'd be should that one come back to bite us.

I would have thought building up healthy capital reserves that can then be used for investment and as economic catalyst even during times of revenue austerity should be seen as prudent. Even the article concedes that most of the reserves are earmarked for used in some way. And it's simply not true to say that authorities are not making use of these reserves to plug gaps. In my experience council departments are spending more and more capital on investment projects to enable working practices to be more efficient in the future, or attempting to justify spend coming from capital reserves in areas where previously revenue spending would have been used.

Ultimately councils need to change what they do and how they do it given the reductions in block grants. That is a given, whether it happens now or in two years. Whilst I accept that capital spend as a way of softening the blow (e.g. keeping a leisure centre open while putting another mechanism in place to run it) might be sensible, and is no doubt happening in a variety of ways, simply using reserves across the board to plug the gap until such a time as cuts need to be made anyway would seem to me to be irresponsible in the extreme.

The fact is that councils are seeing their revenue stream cut massively NOW. You have to cut your yearly spending to fit your income, not to fit the stuff you have stashed under the bed. Party politics is completely irrelevant as far as that principle is concerned.

By your own admission the cuts are here, so what is the point in building up reserves if you don't use them when you need them? What is the criteria to use reserves? At what point does the council say we have no choice but to use the reserves?

I'd say this delay was more political in nature than a requirement to preserve the reserves for the reasons outlined - welsh labour cam blame westminster for today's cuts rather than take the blame directly in two years time.

The cuts are being made now to the budget given, no council are going to rejoice, no elected body are going to rejoice about cuts and politics is always about blaming the other guy. Just look at the Right's paranoia about Europe and perceived incursions into UK sovereignty.

Reserves are, I thought, a legal requirement?

Didn't want to create a new thread but thought this was an appropriate place...

I'm sure I saw a member of our forum on Newsnight last night ?