Opinion: Ensuring best value for the customer - Peterborough residents

That is why prudent public spending combined with an emphasis on growth is best done early to prevent a more severe and forced approach further down the line.

Even a labour government back in 1976 reconciled with the fact that no longer could we “spend our way out of a recession and increase employment by both cutting taxes and boosting government spending”.

This is why Peterborough Conservatives have been prepared to make the early difficult decisions. There is a responsibility to provide value for money for all residents whilst ensuring services and needs of the vulnerable are fit for purpose. Of course, this can be controversial and unpopular, but where real leadership is demonstrated.

One concern already with the new Peterborough First administration is the lack of focus and scrutiny being given to council officers decisions. This was evident when signing off the Sales, Fees and Charges Review at full council recently.

The previous Conservative cabinet had amended the additional brown bin charge from a proposed 100% to be more in line with other increases. As well as the unfairness, concerns being that the charges would lead to increased fly-tipping. And so, the reduced rise was to be funded by other balanced increases elsewhere in the review. Whether opportunistic or not, this was not presented by officers and missed by the new cabinet. Detail is key in scrutiny and leadership.

So that is one reason why the new administration is already raising concerns. What do they stand for? Do they have a vision?

Or is it that they are content with the status of their positions and simply box-ticking decisions made by the previous administration. Most after all were only recently elected as Conservatives until personal standing took over from collective will.

Concerning going forward is whether leadership and any said vision is shown, or whether they simply follow council officer directions without raising any challenge or giving guidance and direction. Previous experience sadly points to the latter.

It was only after the current leader left the board of Peterborough Limited (the councils independent arm’s length company running Waste, Leisure and Culture services) that a culture of open challenge, scrutiny and innovation was able to be realised with a new strategy. Positively the team embraced an innovative and more commercial approach, presenting projects with a financial return such as the now delivered gym refurbishment at Vivacity.

Yes, there should be sensitivity analysis in any business case, however slow decision making and delayed implementation costs money, when not realising savings and benefits soon enough. This must be balanced with detailed evaluation of all potential options.

The Regional Pool project is a case in point. This is not just a straight replacement decision, but one that must take in much wider considerations. Such as the viability of other leisure provisions in the city and the balancing of operational cost efficiencies of larger facilities with the benefits of geographical position.

And there is the consideration for sustainable transport, the long-term vision for the city, and so forth. With a business minded focus this is something the Conservatives have been constantly leading on.

There is now also talk again of bringing the waste, leisure and culture services back directly under council control. Having recently reviewed this, one has to question if the council can make this viable and ensure efficiency and value for money. If up until recently the council has struggled to evaluate the service provision as a customer, then it must be a concern whether it can run it better itself.

There is no right or wrong for private services provision, just when those contracts are in place they need to be managed and monitored. Where an independent company will challenge the need to do things, or inefficiencies in service, this should lead to root cause evaluation and the opportunity to fix. The danger in the public sector is that these issues just get hidden.

We can only hope that the Peterborough First group will ensure full scrutiny before any decisions are made.

The opposition ‘coalition’ in Peterborough we all know are committed to strict environmental policies, irrespective of the damage and economic hardship they might cause. ULEZ has been well covered elsewhere, proven as their policy by looking at London and Wales.

Whereas the Peterborough Conservative group believes in the long-held first principal that environmental sustainability should be financially sustainable. Take for instance the recent proposal for the use of hydronated vegetable oils as a fuel in the waste collection fleet.

Far from a new idea but an admirable consideration; though should we implement at all costs as part of our ‘Net Zero commitment’? Trials demonstrate a notable loss in vehicle efficiency and so increased cost for waste collections. It is these debates and scrutiny that must continue, and not net-zero at any cost. And that is the view of someone with 20 years of environmental management experience.

In line with these themes, we must guard against diverting, by taxation, resources from the productive sectors of the local economy to the unproductive ones.

Public services should never exist more for the benefit of those working in them than for the taxpayer that funds them.

It is the detailed challenge and scrutiny of this that the Conservative group is committed to maintaining. So that the best value is ensured for the customer, every single resident.