The ruling Labour leadership on Luton Borough Council have decided on a massive reduction in street cleansing standards for the Town. The decision will see graffiti go unremoved for days, and one in eight roads not cleaned to an acceptable level.

The plans, agreed by the all-Labour Executive on a meeting on Monday 3 OctoberMonday, include:

• Axing 12 Street Cleaning posts
• Having no street cleaning supervisors or graffiti removal staff at weekends
• Cleaning only 87.5% of Luton’s streets to an “acceptable” level
• Cutting overnight mechanical sweeper cleaning

A comparison of Councils’ cleansing performances contained in the report shows that the proposal will leave fewer streets clean in Luton than in places like Coventry, Leicester, Blackburn, Bradford, Bolton and Medway in Kent.

Opposition Deputy Leader, Cllr Martin Pantling comments:

“These horrific cuts that the Council are imposing are designed to slash Street Cleaning budgets by £262,000, but have absolutely nothing to do with efficiency. This is a reduction in service and a reduction in the pride the Council takes in Luton, pure and simple.

“Labour ‘s own report admits that their plans would leave 1 street in 8 not cleaned to an acceptable level, and that graffiti appearing on a Thursday or Friday won’t be removed until the following Monday or Tuesday. Leaving our roads and public areas dirtier than in the Cities of Coventry, Bradford or Leicester seems an odd way to win a City Bid.”

A “Whistleblower” Hotline that cost Luton residents £5,500 in 2009/10, despite not receiving a single call, has finally been phoned up!

An Audit Committee told Luton Council, who run a confidential scheme for employees to report wrongdoing, to find a more cost-efficient way to operate the scheme a year ago.

A year later, an annual update has confirmed that the contract and line are still active – and that it received ONE confidential complaint in the year 2010/11. This means the Labour-run Council has spent £11,000 so just one call could be answered.

Of all 4 “whistleblowing” complaints made through various routes to the Council – only one of which was to the hotline – none were taken up for further action or investigation.

Liberal Democrat councillor and former Mayor of Luton, Michael Dolling, who was at the meeting on Wednesday, says:

“ We heard a lot at the meeting about staff sickness being above the national average and I do fear the poor take-up is a sign that staff don’t think their concerns will be acted on, or that it could rebound on them if they report wrongdoing. If people are not using the service it could well show they don’t think they will be listened to.

“ And after high-profile decisions by Labour councillors to reinstate staff in management positions after some terrible wrongdoing, who can blame them?”

“ It is disappointing though that this expensive line is still in place even after the same Committee demanded a cheaper option a year ago. Spending £11,000 over two years to answer one phone call is an astonishing waste. It says a lot about Labour that they didn’t do a thing about it, and residents are paying through the nose to this day.”

The Whistleblowing Policy and Annual Report was the last item on the agenda for the meeting of the Audit and Governance Committee, 20th September 2011.

Parking fees across Luton look set to rise substantially following a decision by the Labour Executive on Monday 12th September.

Ruling Labour councillors approved a schedule of revised tariffs that will see many parking fees hiked by up to 50 percent from 1st November – with further rises due within 8 months.

New fees being imposed by the Labour Executive include:

• A 25% rise in the cost of parking in Bute Street on Saturdays, from £1.60 to £2.00
• Rises of over 20% for 2 hours weekday parking in Bute Street or Vicarage Street
• Parking in Wenlock Street Car Park on Saturdays costing 50% more
• A hike of over 20% in weekday parking charges in Hitchin Road Car Park – to £4.00
• 11 different on-street parking tariffs where rises average around 30%

Liberal Democrat Deputy Group Leader, Martin Pantling comments:

“ In these tough times, with many people finding a 5%inflation rate quite difficult, the very last thing the Council should be doing is charging people up to 50% more every time they want to do their basic shopping or need to attend a meeting or appointment.

“ With the Library Road car park long gone, many residents will have little choice but to pay the extra fee if they want to park in or near the Town Centre. But this could be a very short- sighted move, as affordable parking is key to encouraging people to shop locally in Luton. To add insult to injury, Labour are promising further rises in just 8 months time.”

“ I hope the Executive will rethink this. If they really must make £26,000 more a year out of residents being able to park, why not scrap the crazy bureaucracy involved in having 11 different charging schemes for on-street parking? This would save a small fortune in officer time, ticket machine and meter costs, and help keep any rises at a more sensible level.”

The European Regional Development Fund has allocated £5 million to the East of England in order to help the extension of fast broadband, especially in rural areas. This money is supplementary to that £50 million on offer from Broadband UK (BDUK) and to the commercial investment. Bids for the package have to be in soon from all county and unitary authorities. Business cases will then have to be developed, with roll-out anticipated from April 2012 onwards.

Small businesses from all backgrounds stand to benefit. The project will assist the economic recovery of the region, and reduce our carbon footprint.

The ERDF funding will in some cases help to do “the final mile”, linking up the backbone of superfast broadband to nearby business sites. However, a big part of the funding will take the form of business support, helping SMEs exploit the new infrastructure to the full. High speed broadband is an enabler, but does not do the business itself.

Andrew Duff, Liberal Democrat MEP for the East of England said ‘Regional applications have been slow in coming forward and in some cases insufficiently focussed on adding business value to local businesses. A number of the draft proposals have not been meeting the desirable quality of partnership between local government and other players, such as universities.

Mr Duff added ‘the continuing existence of dial-up modems rather defies the image of the East of England as a pathfinder in the field of science and technology. Broadband is the infrastructure of the future and if we are to be competitive with other regions in the EU, we need to get this job done now.’

‘I fully appreciate how difficult it is for local government in the present circumstances to find the match funding to contribute to the development of fast broadband but it is difficult for me to make the case in Whitehall and Brussels that the East of England is still in need of EU structural funds if we cannot exploit what is on offer today with skill and imagination.’

A meeting of Luton Council’s Scrutiny Board convened to discuss the unloved Luton-Dunstable Busway was described by councillors present as a farce. Senior managers in charge of the £90M project attended to answer questions from councillors but almost no new information emerged.

Fuming Liberal Democrat leader, councillor David Franks, said:

“The 31st August meeting was a complete farce and made a mockery of the whole scrutiny process. The Board’s request for the Busway report could not have been more clear. The minutes record that what was asked for was ‘a report with sufficient information for the Board to establish whether the project was proceeding on time and on budget’. We received nothing of the kind.”

“The written report gave no useful information and the managers present did not answer any of the serious questions which were asked. Given the closeness of these managers to the project it seems unlikely they did not know the answers.”

“I asked what was their current estimate of the construction costs to completion and they said they did not have that information with them. Of course it makes me suspicious. Is this project heading for a huge overspend and they are afraid to admit it?”