Stark warning on Council Tax

COUNCIL Tax payers will not stand for the 15.4 per cent increase forecast in Rother's early draft budget, party colleagues have warned the cabinet of ruling Conservatives.

One called it "political suicide."

Council leader Graham Gubby spelled out the stark facts of Rother's financial dilemma in a formal presentation ahead on Monday's cabinet discussion.

Cllr Gubby said that a 15.4 per cent increase was the only way that the current level and quality of service could be maintained.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

It would be up to the public at planned consultation forums across the district to say whether they wanted the level and quality of services maintained - and were prepared to pay for them.

If they were not prepared to pay, cuts could have to be made and it was up to the public to say where these should fall.

His message to the public was: "If you don't want a 15 per cent Council Tax rise, you tell us which services you want cut or which quality of service you want reduced..."

Cllr Nick Ramus, a former Rother chairman and Conservative member for Eastern Rother, is not a cabinet member.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

But he told the cabinet bluntly: "The parish council held a meeting and they made it clear that this time they are not prepared to accept any increase above 2.5 per cent or the level of inflation."

Many Council Tax payers were on fixed incomes and could not afford the increase.

"I think it is my duty as their local councillor to report their concerns..."

The meeting had previously agreed to recommend the capital programme to council. The leader had told members: "We are talking about a 13.5m programme of work which for an authority of this size is quite substantial. It is not just a sheet of figures but a commitment to a capital programme of some significance."

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Fellow Conservative, Darwell member Cllr Derek Vereker, contributing to the budget debate as a non-cabinet member, said: "A 15 per cent increase, apart from being political suicide, I don't think we should stand up here and boast about our capital programme being 13m."

He argued that heads of service should be asked to go away and come back with substantial spending cuts.

The leader said he welcomed contributions to the debate and hoped that Cllr Vereker would take part in the public forums "... to encourage the public to say what they are prepared and not prepared to pay for."

If the public genuinely believed there were opportunities to reduce costs they could say so.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

Cllr Vereker countered: "I think this is not really the right way to do it. At the end of the day, are people really going to know anything about it? The public are not really going to know what can be cut. We have to make the decisions. We have to set the lead, not go to the public and say 'What do you want cut out...?'"

The leader reminded him that all the items in the budget were there as a result of the democratic process.

Director of resources Dr Pav Ramewal asked members to bear in mind that, earlier in the year, the authority had conducted "quite an aggressive" campaign to show the public how to claim benefits. "I think there has been quite a considerable take-up from that campaign."

Winding up the debate, the leader reminded members that only 15 to 20 per cent of Rother spending was discretionary. The remainder was statutory, leaving only small window for cuts.

Hide Ad
Hide Ad

The meeting resolved to put the early draft budget out for public consultation.

r The lion's share of a family's Council Tax bill is dictated by East Sussex County Council.

Added on are Rother's demand, police costs and special Bexhill expenses.

Bexhill felt the brunt of hefty Council Tax increases from April this year after the Government switched some funding away from the South East in favour of the North.

Related topics: