COUNCIL MERGERS ARE A ONE-WAY DOOR

First published by: The Guardian

TRADE UNIONS WARN LOCAL AUTHORITIES NOT TO BREAK TRUST PUT IN THEM BY COMMUNITIES

Labour councillors in Westminster, Kensington & Chelsea and Hammersmith & Fulham are all in favour of any genuine efficiencies. But we believe major long-term changes should not be driven by one party's political agenda. The planned merger would result in services being provided to a population equivalent to the size of Glasgow. Large councils are not necessarily more efficient – there have been many high profile failures when councils have merged services before. 

We believe that there must be cross-party involvement and wide public support for these proposals before they are carried out. Sadly, the Conservatives in all three boroughs have been highly secretive. Indeed, they would not allow their officials to consult any opposition councillors in the three local authorities prior to the announcement and have failed to provide any detailed information since. We also have the following concerns:

The Conservatives are not ruling out using this merger as a mechanism for even more frontline service cuts, stealth taxes and loss of jobs, or as an excuse to undermine local democracy or sell off more community buildings. Nor have they explained how local residents will keep their ability to hold their council to account. They have not explained how any newly elected administration would be able to secede from any part of this if political control changes. They have also failed to explain why these particular local authorities should merge services. 

Already, there appear to be different messages coming from the three Conservative authorities. This confusion does not bode well for the project's success. We call on the Conservatives to take a more open, inclusive and transparent approach to the plans. Cllr Judith Blakeman, Leader of the opposition, Royal borough of Kensington and Chelsea, Cllr Stephen Cowan Leader of the opposition, London borough of Hammersmith and Fulham, Cllr Paul Dimoldenberg Leader of the opposition, City of Westminster 

• As the first chief executive to take responsibility for managing two local authorities, I am writing to express disappointment at your coverage of the proposed arrangement between three London boroughs. The London-centric vision gave little credit to the dozen or more such partnerships that now exist. These have delivered millions of pounds of savings and service improvements and found many lessons for others contemplating this path.

The key to success is the nature of the arrangements that control the joint business. If constructed well, to give the politicians of each partner a real say, this can allow local standards of services to exist alongside the efficiency of a single officer structure and shared services. The thorny issue of what happens if the politics change is answered by the simple truth that once an arrangement is in place, any change requested by any of the partners would need to justify the cost and disruption of creating a parallel structure. In the current climate, local taxpayers are hardly likely to be positive about this. In our Adur/Worthing partnership we have always recognised that each new joint arrangement is probably a one-way door.

Ian Lowrie

Chief executive, Adur district council/Worthing borough council   

 • There have been many times during my years as a headteacher that I have been left bewildered by government policy; however this week's announcement truly surpassed all others. Every school-age child in the country has benefited hugely from their local School Sports Partnership in creating collaborative working between schools, community coaches and specialist providers based on the Olympic values. 

They have increased engagement with sport for pupils and staff and provided a wealth of opportunities. In my own school, involvement in the School Sports Partnership has had a direct impact on raising standards annually, has enabled us to develop an increasingly creative curriculum and to ensure that all pupils, parents and staff appreciate the value of committing to a healthier lifestyle as well as instilling the values of excellence, inspiration, courage, determination, respect, friendship and equality.

However, the coalition government will cease all direct funding for PE and school sport from 31 August 2011, less than one year before the Olympics. The legacy that these games should have will now be in doubt as the funding ends and the systems that have become very well established are left to fragment. 

READ WHAT: ERIC PICKLES ‘SECRETARY OF STATE’ SAYS ABOUT OVER-CHARGED COUNCIL TAX.

ARE YOU PAYING TOO MUCH COUNCIL TAX - CHECK HERE? 

COUNCIL TAX REVALUATION 'WOULD HIT POOREST THE HARDEST'

First published by: The Guardian

COMMUNITIES SECRETARY, ERIC PICKLES, DEFENDS GOVERNMENT DECISION NOT TO REVALUE COUNCIL TAX BANDS

Eric Pickles said based on a revaluation in Wales, 7m households would be worse off from a similar exercise in England. The government today defended its decision not to revalue Council Tax bands during the current parliament, claiming the exercise would hit the poorest the hardest. The communities secretary, Eric Pickles, announced the move last night, saying families would be up to £320 better off than if a planned revaluation by Labour had taken place. 

Labour said the announcement was "cynical and misleading" as the party had pledged in its election manifesto that it would not have held a Council Tax revaluation in the next parliament. Today Pickles acknowledged that current Council Tax bands were based on dated information, but said there was no need to conduct a revaluation because the current system was fair. In an interview on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Pickles said that, based on an unpopular revaluation in Wales, 7m households would be worse off from a similar exercise in England. "Let's go back to Wales. 

The people who were hit the hardest were those on the lowest bands, A to C. Something like two-thirds of the increases occurred in those bands in Wales. This would actually hit poorer people harder than it would hit richer people." He said a planned revaluation by the Labour government would have meant the average Band D tax bill would rise by £1,600 a year. "What we want to do is offer some degree of stability. Just coming out a recession I don't really think we should be imposing an extra £1,600 worth of taxation on them," he told Today. Plans for a revaluation of 22m homes in 2007 were postponed by the Labour government in 2005, after the Welsh revaluation prompted anger over Council Tax rises.

Pickles also denied the government was being centrist by denying councils the scope to revalue bands in their areas. "They can raise their Council Tax. We are going to remove capping and allow local people to decide the level of their Council Tax by way of a referendum. So we are taking power away from the centre and giving it to local people," he said. He insisted the current system was fair. "It is the relationship between the top and the bottom bands that's important and the relationship between the north of England and the south of England. They are roughly in the same position that they were 20 years ago. So there is actually no need for a revaluation."

Pickles also announced an independent review of Council Tax inspections, which he said would "rein in intrusive snooping" by restricting the data gathered and stored about people's homes. Inspectors from the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) assess the value of properties for Council Tax purposes, and there has been controversy over their collection of data on features of homes such as the number of bedrooms or bathrooms, whether it has a patio and whether it enjoys a nice view or is in a good neighbourhood. An independent data audit of the VOA would protect privacy and civil liberties as part of the government's agenda of dismantling the "database state", Pickles said.

"We have cancelled Labour's plans for a Council Tax revaluation which would have hiked up taxes on people's homes," he said. "The new government will protect the privacy of law-abiding citizens from intrusive spies-in-the-sky and halt state inspectors from barging into England's bedrooms and gardens. "We are standing up for the people who have pride in their home, and calling time on Labour's state snoopers and surveillance state. "Hefty Council Tax bills are a constant financial worry for many people. Today we are setting their minds at ease, and protecting the interests of the less well-off in particular who were the hardest hit from Labour's Council Tax revaluation in Wales."

A Labour spokesman said the party "made an unequivocal commitment that there would be no Council Tax revaluation in this parliament". "This is a cynical and misleading manipulation of facts," he said. A spokeswoman for the VOA said it was "absolutely not the case" that its inspectors' work amounted to snooping on householders. She said the agency has never exercised its legal right to enter a home since it was introduced by legislation in the early 1990s.

Consumer expert Martin Lewis, of moneysavingexpert.com, said the failure to hold a revaluation would mean 400,000 homes remaining in the wrong Council Tax bands.

READ WHAT: ERIC PICKLES ‘SECRETARY OF STATE’ SAYS ABOUT OVER-CHARGED COUNCIL TAX. 

ARE YOU PAYING TOO MUCH COUNCIL TAX - CHECK HERE? 

THE COUNCIL TAX SHOCK OF LIVING ALONE

FIRST PUBLISHED BY: THE GUARDIAN

LOCAL AUTHORITIES ARE USING PRIVATE COMPANIES TO TRACK DOWN PEOPLE WRONGLY CLAIMING SINGLE-PERSON DISCOUNT, BUT THE INNOCENT ARE ALSO BEING CAUGHT

When Sarah Dodds received a letter from Bristol city council demanding £3,000 in unpaid Council Tax, she assumed there had been a mistake. However, things got worse when she called to find out what was going on. The council, she was told, was accusing her of fraudulently claiming the 25% Council Tax discount given to those living alone. It wanted its money, backdated to 2002, and there was apparently no appeal.

Her "crime" was allowing her estranged son to have his bank statements and other letters sent to her home. By doing so, the semi-retired civil servant has become caught up in a campaign adopted by councils across the country to reduce single-person discount fraud, which is estimated to be costing around £100m a year. 

Guardian Money has learned that a growing number of local authorities are handing over lists of residents receiving the discount to credit reference companies so they can grade each according to the potential risk of fraud. If you claim the 25% discount and allow anyone else to have a financial link with your home, which might include having bank or credit card statements sent there, you can expect a letter asking whether you are entitled to the discount, typically worth around £300 a year. 

It appears you are particularly likely to receive a letter if you have a student living with you. Full-time students on qualifying courses and student nurses are among those disregarded for Council Tax purposes.

"My son and I are virtually estranged and I do not know where he lives," Dodds says. "He sometimes stays with his father, the rest of the time he couch surfs. He turns up occasionally to pick up his mail. Apart from that, our paths rarely cross." She has told Bristol council this, but staff are adamant she must pay or tell them where her son lives. "I am unable to do this. I have tried to get a message to him but to no joy," she says.

Dodds used to work for the Department for Work and Pensions, and part of her job involved trying to catch those committing benefit fraud. She regularly had to make surprise visits to claimants' homes to establish whether other people were also living there. "I've suggested to the council that it can send someone round to check I live alone but it has declined. Anyone visiting would soon establish that my son doesn't live here. I feel the council is bullying me. Faced with this debt, of course, I would tell the council where my son lives if I could. It won't listen," she says.

The action taken by Bristol and other local authorities is prompted in part by the Audit Commission, which has highlighted that councils are losing as much as £100m a year to single-person discount fraud. Last month it said councils had detected more than £22m of false claims for student and single-person Council Tax discounts.

Bruno Rost, a spokesman for credit reference agency Experian, which conducts checks for local authorities, says this has become a significant part of the company's business. "We take the council's list of residents claiming the discount, cross-reference it against our databases and then grade each one according to the potential risk of fraud." He says Experian is looking for evidence of financial activity by people other than those who claim to be living alone – such as evidence of shared bank accounts or utility bills.

Experian promotes a "three-letter approach" to be used when a council suspects a householder is wrongly claiming the discount. A first letter makes them aware of the circumstances in which the discount can be claimed. A second asks householders whether they believe they should be receiving it, and in a third letter the council says it believes the householder may not be entitled to the discount. "Since we started working in this area in 2006-07 we have saved local authority clients around £100m. This is money that can go back into frontline services," Rost says.

In October, Rushmoor borough council, which covers Aldershot and Farnborough in Hampshire, warned its residents that it was tackling the issue alongside all other councils in the county. The exercise is being carried out by a company called Northgate Information Solutions. Residents who receive a letter asking for further details are required to complete a form and return it to Northgate.

"Residents should make sure they reply to the letter, otherwise their discount may end," the council warns on its website. A similar move has just been announced by the district councils of Lincolnshire. The councils say the law allows them to contract out this function. Checking entitlement to discounts is covered in section 12 of the Local Authorities (Contracting Out of Tax Billing, Collection and Enforcement Functions) Order 1996.

Peter Wood, a spokesman for Bristol city council, refused to discuss Dodds's case in detail, and declined to say what appeal options were open to Bristol residents caught up in her situation.

In a statement, he said: "To resolve situations where customers claim they are still entitled to a discount, we would request evidence of the present address of any named third party in order to support their claim. This evidence must be in the form of an official document. It is important to note that financial data held by credit agencies does not include addresses used purely for the delivery of post. The financial data relates to addresses where individuals live, or where they say they live."

He said that since the council started the review, it had removed discounts to the total value of £650,000. "Savings in excess of £1m are expected. Only a very small number have been backdated as far back as 2002," he added.

Experian's website was more forthcoming. It says if you are no longer linked to a person who is registered to your address, you should contact it and explain the situation. "If you are no longer connected, we will be able to break the link between you," it says.

READ WHAT: ERIC PICKLES ‘SECRETARY OF STATE’ SAYS ABOUT OVER-CHARGED COUNCIL TAX. 


ARE YOU PAYING TOO MUCH COUNCIL TAX - CHECK HERE?

UK AUTHORITIES ATTACKED FOR ISSUING 1.2M COUNCIL TAX SUMMONSES

FIRST PUBLISHED BY: THE GUARDIAN

1.2 MILLION PEOPLE RECEIVED A COURT SUMMONS LAST YEAR FOR COUNCIL TAX

Local authorities have been criticised for using heavy-handed tactics to recover Council Tax arrears after the Liberal Democrats published figures today showing that more than 1.2 million people received a court summons last year, with nearly 600,000 visited by bailiffs after falling behind with payments. The data, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, showed councils filed for bankruptcy against 1,706 people.

The Lib Dems' local government secretary, Julia Goldsworthy, said public bodies had a duty to mitigate "the devastating effect that failing to pay Council Tax can have on families", particularly those already struggling under the burden of mortgage payments and rising bills. "Just as lenders are being asked to reduce repossessions, public bodies should do everything they can to ensure that bankruptcy is only ever a last resort," she said.

"This is not a licence to avoid paying bills, it is about ensuring that court appearances and bankruptcy are avoided where possible." The Lib Dems received responses from more than 170 local authorities. The data showed that 1.23m summons were issued in 2007/08, with 570,500 bailiff visits during the same period.

The most common method to try to recover Council Tax was an attachment of earnings order, in which a debtor's employer is asked to deduct the money from their salary and pay it directly to the council. Authorities can launch a bankruptcy petition where more than £750 is owed. The Local Government Association (LGA) confirmed the Lib Dem figures but said 99% of people who received a summons or were referred to bailiffs did not actually end up in court or have any goods seized.

"Town halls only take measures such as bankruptcy as an absolute last resort and with people who have a history of non-payment," said the LGA vice-chairman, Sir Jeremy Beecham. "People struggling to pay bills are given as much leeway as possible." A spokesman for the Department of Communities and Local Government said it was "only fair" that councils pursued Council Tax debts as not doing so would increase bills for others. "Our existing guidance makes clear that they should only consider court action as a last resort for collecting Council Tax," he said.

READ WHAT: ERIC PICKLES ‘SECRETARY OF STATE’ SAYS ABOUT OVER-CHARGED COUNCIL TAX.


ARE YOU PAYING TOO MUCH COUNCIL TAX - CHECK HERE? 

COUNCIL TAX REVALUATION 'WOULD HIT POOREST THE HARDEST'

First published by: The Guardian

COMMUNITIES SECRETARY, ERIC PICKLES, DEFENDS GOVERNMENT DECISION NOT TO REVALUE COUNCIL TAX BANDS

Eric Pickles said based on a revaluation in Wales, 7m households would be worse off from a similar exercise in England. The government today defended its decision not to revalue Council Tax bands during the current parliament, claiming the exercise would hit the poorest the hardest. The communities secretary, Eric Pickles, announced the move last night, saying families would be up to £320 better off than if a planned revaluation by Labour had taken place. 

Labour said the announcement was "cynical and misleading" as the party had pledged in its election manifesto that it would not have held a Council Tax revaluation in the next parliament. Today Pickles acknowledged that current Council Tax bands were based on dated information, but said there was no need to conduct a revaluation because the current system was fair. In an interview on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Pickles said that, based on an unpopular revaluation in Wales, 7m households would be worse off from a similar exercise in England. "Let's go back to Wales. 

The people who were hit the hardest were those on the lowest bands, A to C. Something like two-thirds of the increases occurred in those bands in Wales. This would actually hit poorer people harder than it would hit richer people." He said a planned revaluation by the Labour government would have meant the average Band D tax bill would rise by £1,600 a year. "What we want to do is offer some degree of stability. Just coming out a recession I don't really think we should be imposing an extra £1,600 worth of taxation on them," he told Today. Plans for a revaluation of 22m homes in 2007 were postponed by the Labour government in 2005, after the Welsh revaluation prompted anger over Council Tax rises.

Pickles also denied the government was being centrist by denying councils the scope to revalue bands in their areas. "They can raise their Council Tax. We are going to remove capping and allow local people to decide the level of their Council Tax by way of a referendum. So we are taking power away from the centre and giving it to local people," he said. He insisted the current system was fair. "It is the relationship between the top and the bottom bands that's important and the relationship between the north of England and the south of England. They are roughly in the same position that they were 20 years ago. So there is actually no need for a revaluation."

Pickles also announced an independent review of Council Tax inspections, which he said would "rein in intrusive snooping" by restricting the data gathered and stored about people's homes. Inspectors from the Valuation Office Agency (VOA) assess the value of properties for Council Tax purposes, and there has been controversy over their collection of data on features of homes such as the number of bedrooms or bathrooms, whether it has a patio and whether it enjoys a nice view or is in a good neighbourhood. An independent data audit of the VOA would protect privacy and civil liberties as part of the government's agenda of dismantling the "database state", Pickles said.

"We have cancelled Labour's plans for a Council Tax revaluation which would have hiked up taxes on people's homes," he said. "The new government will protect the privacy of law-abiding citizens from intrusive spies-in-the-sky and halt state inspectors from barging into England's bedrooms and gardens. "We are standing up for the people who have pride in their home, and calling time on Labour's state snoopers and surveillance state. "Hefty Council Tax bills are a constant financial worry for many people. Today we are setting their minds at ease, and protecting the interests of the less well-off in particular who were the hardest hit from Labour's Council Tax revaluation in Wales."

A Labour spokesman said the party "made an unequivocal commitment that there would be no Council Tax revaluation in this parliament". "This is a cynical and misleading manipulation of facts," he said. A spokeswoman for the VOA said it was "absolutely not the case" that its inspectors' work amounted to snooping on householders. She said the agency has never exercised its legal right to enter a home since it was introduced by legislation in the early 1990s.

Consumer expert Martin Lewis, of moneysavingexpert.com, said the failure to hold a revaluation would mean 400,000 homes remaining in the wrong Council Tax bands.

READ WHAT: ERIC PICKLES ‘SECRETARY OF STATE’ SAYS ABOUT OVER-CHARGED COUNCIL TAX.

ARE YOU PAYING TOO MUCH COUNCIL TAX - CHECK HERE?