Local Authorities 'no choice'

[0bserver]

30 minutes ago, Kopek said:

Great idea, get fewer people to do the work of 5 or so! Even private industry would benefit from that??? You volunteering?

If all LA's employ, say, 1000 people, bringing all their services under one Dept would not mean that 200 could replace them! Douglas seems to need twice that number.

If Central Govt took on that role it is highly likely that the numbers would increase along with wage bill? Because that's what Govts do.

The workers on the ground would still be needed. But you would centralise their contracts to make more efficient use of the workers available, holiday cover etc. 

Efficiencies can be made at management level, collecting rents etc. The admin staff employed in (for example) Peel, Ramsey, Douglas and Port Erin could be replaced by one central office. 

The same goes for refuse collection. Better management of resources, central procurement of vehicles. 

[Roger Mexico]

6 hours ago, 0bserver said:

Simplify it down to one all-island local authority (or even 4+1 if you must) and have some streamlining of what goes on and push for efficiencies to save the ratepayers (who are taxpayers at the end of the day) some money. 

Yes that'll be why Douglas (pop 26,677) has 20 employees on over £50K while Onchan (pop 9,039) has only 1 rather than 7.  Even on a smaller level, when Arbory and Rushen merged, rather than sharing the same Clerk, they suddenly discovered they needed a Deputy Clerk as well.

Yet the same people endlessly repeat that bigger must automatically be more efficient, no matter how many times counter-examples are pointed out to them

[offshoremanxman]

7 minutes ago, 0bserver said:

The workers on the ground would still be needed. But you would centralise their contracts to make more efficient use of the workers available, holiday cover etc. 

You only have to look at DBC - over 400 staff and if you don’t live in a council house you will generally never come into contact with any of them at all. They will never successfully do anything for you on a day to day basis over and above ensuring your bins are emptied (a service now being reduced, which they won’t talk to you about even if you try) or if you have a street light broken. Every time you see a flower bed being weeded there’s 5 blokes there scratching their hoop making a 2 hour job for one person last 4 days. Bye laws officers sat drinking tea all day. There is just so much waste on absolutely every level. Then there’s the DDP that’s done nothing for Douglas for 23 years now since Douglas 2000 with a load of staff sat in the office on the corner of the Rovers playing pocket billiards all day. You’re talking about tens of millions of annual savings. 

[genericUserName]

7 hours ago, 0bserver said:

Simplify it down to one all-island local authority (or even 4+1 if you must) and have some streamlining of what goes on and push for efficiencies to save the ratepayers (who are taxpayers at the end of the day) some money. 

Building a centralised local government bureacracy would be a terrible idea. The idea smacks of 1970s socialist idealism - perhaps a good idea in theory but awful in practice.

Smaller and more localised teams are invariably far more effective, efficient and agile. We know this from business. 

[0bserver]

24 minutes ago, genericUserName said:

Building a centralised local government bureacracy would be a terrible idea. The idea smacks of 1970s socialist idealism - perhaps a good idea in theory but awful in practice.

Smaller and more localised teams are invariably far more effective, efficient and agile. We know this from business. 

Thanks, Phil.

[0bserver]

26 minutes ago, genericUserName said:

Building a centralised local government bureacracy would be a terrible idea. The idea smacks of 1970s socialist idealism - perhaps a good idea in theory but awful in practice.

How is centralised local government in any way a socialist idea?

[genericUserName]

9 minutes ago, 0bserver said:

How is centralised local government in any way a socialist idea?

Centralisation is an inherent characteristic of old fashioned socialist planning - that old idea of economies of scale. It alway results in slower decision making, greater bureacracy, more meetings etc. 

Smaller teams are, almost invariably, more agile. In smaller teams people have much more opportunity to positively take ownership of problems and solutions. And much less opportunity to fall back on collective responsibility. And the meetings are shorter.

[genericUserName]

18 minutes ago, 0bserver said:

Thanks, Phil.

Yes. When I am not being all of Douglas Council, the Eco people, Tescos and MT I like to be Phil. Whoever the heck Phil is.

Get over the idea that everyone who does not agree with you must have some kind of vested interest.

[0bserver]

16 minutes ago, genericUserName said:

Yes. When I am not being all of Douglas Council, the Eco people, Tescos and MT I like to be Phil. Whoever the heck Phil is.

Get over the idea that everyone who does not agree with you must have some kind of vested interest.

 

[genericUserName]

I'm none the wiser who Phil is. Fortunately I do not care either  

Edited January 29, 2023 by genericUserName

[Omobono]

1 hour ago, 0bserver said:

The workers on the ground would still be needed. But you would centralise their contracts to make more efficient use of the workers available, holiday cover etc. 

Efficiencies can be made at management level, collecting rents etc. The admin staff employed in (for example) Peel, Ramsey, Douglas and Port Erin could be replaced by one central office. 

The same goes for refuse collection. Better management of resources, central procurement of vehicles. 

its a well known fact one well managed and organised refuse authority could collect all the Islands waste , I would love to see the printouts from the trackers fitted to the refuse collection vehicles ,  I would bet the men and lorries are only working a few hours a day , not their fault just piss poor management , and empire building   by the local authorities

[ellanvannin2010]

1 hour ago, 0bserver said:

The workers on the ground would still be needed. But you would centralise their contracts to make more efficient use of the workers available, holiday cover etc. 

Efficiencies can be made at management level, collecting rents etc. The admin staff employed in (for example) Peel, Ramsey, Douglas and Port Erin could be replaced by one central office. 

The same goes for refuse collection. Better management of resources, central procurement of vehicles. 

Merge Douglas/Onchan/Braddan and show the rest of us how efficient the super authority will be.

Those of us who live under efficient and cheap rural authorities have no desire to subsidise city authorities 

Edited January 29, 2023 by ellanvannin2010

[Kopek]

Stay out of 'our' City then!!!! Get back to your own district and do your weekly shop in the Andreas corner shop!!!

It's probably you 'out of towners' that cause the long queues in 'our' Tesco? Should be higher prices for you lot!

You come into our City with your mud covered Lada doing 18mph everywhere running over cyclists because you've never seen a lycra covered bum before!

50k people from Dlas and 'suburbs' contribute to Dlas rates, shopping, commuting to work and seeking entertainment, we don't need you Govvags?

Get back to your own district!!!

 

Tongue in cheek?   Maybe?

[hissingsid]

Do not even consider merging Onchan with Douglas we are happy as we are, Douglas would love Braddan then they could mess it up just as they have their own patch.

[finlo]

8 minutes ago, hissingsid said:

Do not even consider merging Onchan with Douglas we are happy as we are, Douglas would love Braddan then they could mess it up just as they have their own patch.

Well they'd certainly like the business rates of all those escapees!