Frank Little

There seems no alternative, given the restrictions on council spending, to involve a partner in the building and running of care homes. Only one of the council’s existing facilities is up to the latest standard, and replacement with fewer, larger, units is the best option. The partner may be a commercial or a not-for-profit organisation. That partner will be chosen with care, having regard to their record.

I have deliberately used the vague term “involve a partner” because there are several options. These are laid out in a consultation paper obtainable here.  The cabinet member for Social Care does have a preferred option, but I was assured that the consultation would be genuine.

One might expect that a Liberal Democrat would be enthusiastic for a scheme which promises to deliver a service more economically than the council could do, but care of the elderly is a sensitive subject. The scope for efficiency savings is narrow, and pressure must inevitably fall on wage costs. For that reason, rigorous standards must be set and monitored.  Director of Social Services, Health & Housing, Tony Clements, has promised that this will be done.

During the Scrutiny hearing, I - along with Labour’s Councillor Scott Jones (Cymmer) - also emphasised the need for good transport links, especially public ones, to the new care homes, seeing as how more old people would be settled a greater distance from their previous neighbourhoods than at present.

Finally, it should be emphasised that, whatever scheme is adopted, no existing home will be closed until a replacement is up and running.

The Safer Neath Port Talbot Partnership has issued a readable bilingual leaflet entitled “Help us keep your neighbourhood safe”, with handy tips and useful phone nos. and web addresses.

If you have not already done so, visit the Neath Port Talbot Fairtrade Forum Web page.

Last Monday, the community council resolved to increase the council tax precept by just under 3%. Although I have campaigned for lower precepts in the past, I think that we should have been more conservative this year, given the level of activity Blaenhonddan community is committed to. We are gambling on no major unforeseen expenditure arising, which would deplete the reserves.

In case you hadn’t already heard the latest news, there is an update on the council’s web-site. The news that no asbestos fibres escaped during the fire is very welcome.

However, the financial implications of replacement now loom larger. We will be looking to the council to avoid any extra cost to the taxpayer.

Today should have been the occasion of a presentation to Neath Port Talbot council by the new chief constable of South Wales Police, Peter Vaughan. At least once a year before the precept is set, our top local policeman says what the force has been doing, overall as well as in the county borough. There is also an outline of the programme for the coming year, followed by the opportunity for questions by members. Last year, these were quite searching.

Anyway, presumably because of the weather,  Mr Vaughan has been unable to make it to Port Talbot today, and the presentation has been postponed. I trust this postponement is not long delayed, because there are several questions which I hoped to put.

Last year, Barbara Wilding, the outgoing chief constable, promised that policing on the ground would be the last to suffer, even if the force had a poor 2009/10 settlement. There have been a few incidents of slow or inappropriate response in Cadoxton - and in the industrial park, which is actually in Bryncoch South, but which affects our residents - to give the lie to this.

She also outlined administrative measures which had increased efficiency and reduced sick leave. I had the impression that Mr Vaughan had been closely involved in these, and I hope that he can not only confirm this but also pledge that the efforts will continue.

The 101 number has been a success, but the response to email requests has been patchy, and I would have encouraged SWP to make better use of contact via the Web.

If anybody can think of other aspects of SWP performance or strategy which should be raised at the rearranged meeting, please let me know.

Yet again, residents have stated the obvious need for grit boxes at strategic points in the ward. I will raise this with the council once more. Hopefully, the recent frosts will have persuaded the relevant cabinet members of the economic, never mind the health and safety, benefits of providing more grit boxes.

On a lighter note, any suggestion that Neath Port Talbot members look after their own pales into insignificance compared with this example from Conservative Cheshire.

The Independent today (as part of a report about a favourable outcome for UK investors in Kaupthing) has worrying news about Glitnir Bank, which had its first creditors’ meeting a fortnight ago.  Stephen Jones, the finance director of the Local Government Association (LGA), attempted to have UK councils named as “priority” creditors rather than simply as “general unsecured” creditors, which would mean that councils could get back as little as 25 per cent of their money. In Landsbanki’s winding-up order, UK councils were made priority claimants.

Mr Jones seems (the report to the creditors is still confidential) to have failed so far, but a spokesman for the LGA said that nothing had changed since the December meeting, and that discussions were ongoing. The good news is that Neath Port Talbot had only£1 million invested in Glitnir. A possible loss of £750,000 is not to be taken lightly, but it could have been worse if either of the other two banks with which your council is involved had not been predicted to repay virtually 100%.

Legal action could still follow and the only certain winners from the situation are accountants and lawyers.

 [Update 2010-1-5: the President of Iceland has put on hold the legislation to repay the Icesave (not Kaupthing as a whole, as I wrote above) deposits. It can now only be saved by a positive vote in a referendum.]