CNJ COMMENT- Can going local save threatened centres for the elderly?

Published: 11 February, 2011

LOOKING back on the year 2011, local historians may focus on February as the month that shaped Camden’s future. 

This week nearly 5,000 staff at the Town Hall are being sent letters – called an “indicative ballot” – in which they are being asked whether they would consider taking industrial action to save jobs and council services.

About one job in five at the Town Hall is at risk between now and 2014.

If they say “Yes” then they will be properly balloted under the aegis of the Electoral Reform Society.

Next week teachers at the borough’s schools will be asked similar questions in a final ballot.

If in Camden a fifth of Town Hall posts may be wound up, in Islington nearly a third – about 900 out of 3,000 – are expected to be lost.

But if these authorities feel they will still be able to perform their responsibilities with such depleted staffing, doesn’t this question the level of under-employment today?

But, as Helen Marcus pointed out at a meeting on libraries (see page 11), the elephant in the room is the council’s seemingly unsustainable wage bill of 

30 per cent of turnover – a proportion along those lines would sink a private company.  

Her figures also point to the glaring inequality at the Town Hall where too many executives earn annual salaries of well in excess of  £100,000 – higher salaries than those paid to top surgeons in Britain, for instance – while at the bottom of the pile staff earn as little as £14,000.

Meanwhile, the shield to protect the defenceless elderly is being dented as luncheon clubs – a lifeline for many pensioners – face closure.

In Islington, where more than 1,000 people demonstrated in protest against the cuts on Saturday, desperate efforts are being made to soften the blows.

Instead of closing a popular luncheon club, Sotheby Mews, Islington council are considering overtures from local community bodies who might be able to run it at an annual cost of £40,000 – in contrast with Age Concern who charged £140,000.

As a national institution with ramified and costly administrative tiers Age Concern would be expected to charge more. A group of local people will probably run the same club for a third of Age Concern’s bill. 

Why doesn’t Camden follow Islington in going local to keep open Henderson Court, Great Croft and Millman Street centres?