scrutiny on social care

 Earlier I signed a motion to revolutionise the Green Party's social care policy.


Back in local politics, where Green Party seeks to win power and govern seriously, I've submitted a question as a member of the public.



on agenda item 6.

Does the chairman agree with me that the public could have more of a say if Barnet Council went beyond a budget consultation and gave us, the people of Barnet borough, the option of a referendum to increase the tax - which is a very small proportion of the wealth of those that own property in Barnet - in order to save social care?

Secondly

Given the fact that Barnet Council faces financial armageddon due to the mismanagement of previous administrations, would the chairman agree with me that the prudent thing to give residents a hope of free social care as enjoyed by Scotland, would be to join me in saying "yes" in such a referendum to save Barnet libraries and fully fund social care.
 
 
As the meeting clashes with Barnet Climate Action Group I shall not be submitting a supplementary system.  Councillors attending often look bored. At the best of times Barnet Council have been reluctant to bring residents in to scrutinise their decision making meetings, restricting questions to the point that we're basically gagged.  During a pandemic I resent the fact they have stopped live streaming meetings for those afraid to go out.  Live streaming was hugely popular and fits with the theme of my blog post today, about public engagement, which is one of the Council's core aims, supposedly.

No comments:

Post a Comment