Why take cuts axe to already overstretched noise patrols?

Published: 19 February 2010

• THE proposed £120,000 “savings” on noise patrols in next year’s council budget need a detailed explanation, with warm weather and open windows not too far away.

How many fewer officers will be deployed, if there is to be a reduction – £120,000 could mean three fewer? Why is a cut proposed at all, the patrols already being overstretched in view of the time often taken to attend disturbances? The proposal is for a “joint noise patrol team with Homes for Islington”.

Will the 21,000 Homes for Islington properties get priority, residents in housing association and private homes will want to know?

I tried to ask council leader Councillor Terry Stacy at the executive meeting on February 9, but he would accept no questions on the budget proposals, one of the council’s more important annual documents.

LEO CHAPMAN
Dufferin Street, EC1

Lib Dem councillor John Gilbert talks about  back-office efficiencies, yet goes on to say that “There are plans to cut £120,000 from the council’s noise patrol team... The plan is to merge the Town Hall’s noise team with that of Homes for Islington, which focuses on complaints on estates.”

 What this means in reality is either that council tenants (and leaseholders) will not be receiving a service their council tax funds (the council’s noise patrol team) or Homes for Islington’s service, paid for out of what’s left of tenants’ rent (after government and council stealth taxes), will be shared with the general council tax payer.

NAME AND ADDRESS SUPLIED