What Denbighshire County Council aren't telling us

The recent cuts to public services proposed, and in many instances agreed, by Denbighshire county council have caused palpable anger among the residents of the county. The leader of the cabinet charged with making these decisions has repeatedly referred people like me to the Denbighshire county council website to find the information we are seeking. That information is not available on the website as he suggests so for the benefit of anyone living in Denbighshire who really would like to know more about what these cuts will mean, I have spent some time doing the council's job for them. Before I do that though, I wish to be crystal clear about something. I am not disputing that the council has to make savings of approximately £17 million over the next two years. Those cuts have to made and whether I or anyone else disagrees is largely irrelevant. That amount needs to be saved.

In Phase 1 of their cuts, Denbighshire county council cabinet has already agreed to making the cuts as proposed so let me start with the first cut and make my way down the list. I will leave no stone unturned in my quest for honesty, transparency and openness.

The first cut on the DCC list is the proposal to charge to manage the financial affairs of people when appointed to do so by the courts. In order for the Local Authority to successfully apply to the Court of Protection to become a Deputy for Property and Affairs, certain criteria must apply:

The individual must have been assessed as lacking capacity to deal with their finances, using the criteria laid down in the Mental Capacity Act 2005 and the Code of Practice.

There must be no appropriate family able or willing to deal with their affairs.

It may be appropriate for a solicitor or Panel Deputy to deal with their affairs if the individual has significant or complex capital assets.

Anyone wishing to discuss this matter further needs to speak to the clients’ social worker in the first instance and they will then discuss this further with the Clients Finance Team. 

Social Workers who require further information regarding this matter can follow the guidelines on their internal website. The referral must be agreed by the Clients Finance Team before any Court documentation is completed.

It is clear then that the proposed saving of just £13,000 probably relates to the part time salary of someone charged with providing free advice to a group of people who find themselves in a very vulnerable position as detailed in the points above. This seems a rather Draconian approach to save a mere £13,000 in the context of £17 million. In the small amount of information they do share, DCC state that the fees they charge are to cover the full cost of providing this service. But remember, someone lacking in capacity will very often be the type of person already dependent on the state for their income.

The next cut on the DCC list is to restructure local community support by increasing the number of front line workers and reducing the number of managers. This sounds like a good idea in principle only we are not actually given any specific information. They suggest that this proposal could save £100,000. They don't tell us how. How many managers will be lost? How many more front line workers will there be? What will be the effect in terms of the local community on the ground? Again, they don't tell us. As I say, it sounds good in principle but the lack of specific information means we don't get to know the facts.

The next cut on the DCC list is to find a more effective way of providing benefits and welfare advice. They seek to combine three separate services into a contract with a single provider to reduce duplication and make the best use of resources. Again, this sounds great on the face of it. But, which exactly are the three services they seek to streamline? Once again, they don't actually tell us. Who will the new provider be and what is their proven track record in this area. Let's not forget about the type of people we are talking about here. How accessible is benefits advice now through the local authority? If you know someone who has recently had to go through the ignominy of claiming job seekers allowance, you will get my point. Equally, if you know someone who has received a terminal diagnosis in respect of an illness like cancer or motor neurone disease, you will be painfully aware of just how difficult a time this can be. Will they be able to access the support they need on benefits and welfare at a time in their lives when their whole world is falling down around them? I certainly hope so but fear that streamlining this service will compromise such people. We are told this proposal could save £200,000 but once again, we are not told where that figure has come from. It is a lovely round, neat number and that is what raises my index of suspicion. This saving will account for a shade over 1% of the total savings needed over the next two years but it will impact on people whose lives in a place most of us can barely guess at.

The next proposal is cut the opening hours of the County Archives in the Old Gaol in Ruthin. A few years ago, I had the pleasure of working there on a research project centred around the former North Wales Hospital in Denbigh and I can tell you, it is a truly fantastic resource for anyone with an interest in the history of the locality. That said, as long as it will be open for at least two days per week, there is room to be pragmatic. Two days is better than none and it will be able to plan research projects around the days when it will be open. If staff were to offer to come in on a voluntary basis on other days, that would be a matter for them but neither would it be fair to expect them to. This could save £42,000 so I have to assume that this amounts to salaries being saved in the absence of greater information. That is about 0.25% of the amount needed over the two years.

And so to the fifth proposal on the list. As I write, this is the one which is causing more anger than any other and when I tell you what it relates to, you will be shocked. In a bid to save £306,000, Denbighshire County Council has agreed to reduce costs around staffing, technology and contributions to the following areas:-

• Young carers service
• Children with disabilities equipment
• Adoption support costs
• National Youth Advocacy contract
• External fostering costs 

Once again, we are given no breakdown of the figures so we are none the wiser. So what does the Young carers service do? Let me tell you what a young carer does. These are children or young people (under 18) who look after someone in their family who has an illness, a disability, a mental health problem or a substance misuse problem. They frequently take on emotional or practical caring responsibilities that an adult would normally do. Young carers have to deal with all this while somehow managing to get on with school work and all their other responsibilities. Very often, young carers find themselves thrust in to their new role with little or no warning and are expected to just get on with it - and very often they do just that at great cost to themselves. 13,000 of the young carers in the UK provide care to a family member for more than 50 hours per week (BBC, 2010). Young adult carers between the ages of 16 and 18 are twice as likely to be not in education, employment or training. 11,000 of the carers in Wales are children. Wales has the highest percentage of young carers providing unpaid care (Office for National Statistics, 2013). Many do not receive the benefits to which they are entitled and many get in to debt just to try and keep their loved ones cared for. Their life chances after their caring role has ended are considerably compromised by their lack of education, training and employment. This is avoidable and this should be avoided. I am utterly appalled that in a civilised country, we can even consider cutting funding to people like this. In a civilised country, young people like this would be supported to the hilt.

Children with disabilities equipment. Putting aside the poor grammar, I assume that Denbighshire county council refer to equipment provided for children with disabilities. I find it too difficult to even continue writing about this. Shame!

Cutting funding for adoption support is worthy of further analysis. In a report to the partnerships scrutiny committee in December 2013, the functional model proposes five Regional Adoption Collaboratives to deliver the functions of the National Adoption Service. These are:-

• Ensure compliance with regulation, legislation and the performance management framework.
• Recruitment and assessment of prospective adopters.
• Ensuring appropriate matching of children.
• Provision of the whole range of support services.
• Ensure effective links are maintained with local authorities Children's Social Services.

Clearly, a cut to funding for adoption support is both detrimental to the chance of finding an appropriate home and ignoring the recommendations of their own scrutiny committee chaired by the Council Lead member for Social Care, Adult and Children's Services, Bobby Feeley. It begs the question why committees are set up and charged with making common sense recommendations if those same recommendations are treated with such indifference. Ensuring effective links with local authority Children's Social Services will clearly be compromised at the very least when the Denbighshire County Council cuts are started. But once again, they refrain from telling us the extent of the cut in this area so once again, we are left guessing.

The National Youth Advocacy Service offers information, advice, advocacy and legal representation to children, young people and vulnerable adults. In short, it provides a safety net for those with nowhere else to turn. I can barely guess at the impact of reducing funding to this service. But once again, it has targeted the most vulnerable and once again, Denbighshire County Council gives us no  breakdown of the figures so we don't even know the extent to which this lifeline will suffer. Again, it is vulnerable young people, children and young adults in dire straits who will suffer. I wonder what the cost impact of this will be? Incalculable I would suggest.

The decision to target external fostering costs is frankly baffling. I could go on here but the important point is this: Why is our council choosing to target the most vulnerable members of our society when other options are clearly available? Their decision not to share these alternatives with us is both arrogant and inflammatory. If, as the Chief Executive claimed this week, Denbighshire County Council stands on the cliff edge, I can only conclude that a gentle push would be no bad thing because there is little about the current council which persuades me it is any longer fit for purpose.