Officers highlighted they would be speaking with each organisation individually on the budget proposals. Twoof the organisations mentioned had been funded by the Learning Disability Development Fund which had ceased two or three years ago. Most other councils had ceased funding at that point although Thurrock had continued to fund from their own resources. In the present situation, it seemed Thurrock should also cease this support.

Following a question officers stated that it was very difficult to differentiate between non-statutory and statutory duties within some of these organisations but by and large the organisations affected had been assessed as providing a non-statutory service. It was added that legislation did not prescribe the amount or level of statutory service so the volume of statutory service was also being reassessed.

Councillor Gupta stated that non-statutory services played an important role within the community and that these services had not received any feedback from the Council as to the criteria used to decide which organisations were affected. Councillor Rice replied that budget decisions had to be made and that if these services were not affected others would. She asked the Committee to comment on the mitigation factors within the report.

Thurrock Coalition raised the issue that all the organisations were interdependent so the failure of one group to pay rent at the Beehive, for example, could jeopardise the wider sector. The representative added that budget reductions would be more manageable if they were 20% rather than 100% to each organisation. Officers stated that a certain level of saving had to be made within this sector but the way in which that was made was still open to debate. There was a possibility of bridging loans and all support necessary would be provided by the Council to ensure organisations accessed new funding or other arrangements.

The Committee began to comment on the mitigation section of each proposal and the following was noted:

·         Kim James of HealthWatch stated that the mitigation for BATIAS which proposed the engagement of the Community Safety Partnership (CSP) would also be in jeopardy because the CSP was also facing cuts. Likewise the use of volunteers would not wholly replace the skills and expertise of staff.

·         Councillor Halden felt HealthWatch was in need of greater support as it could prevent additional costs on the department through its work. Likewise, the reduction for Age Concern seemed to have a disproportionately negative effect. He felt that other organisations listed did not have a direct effect on the health of residents and could legitimately be reduced. He queried whether organisations offering similar services could be merged or work in collaboration and officers responded that this was being considered at present. 

·         Councillor Gray was concerned that volunteers would not be able to provide a consistent and reliable service in comparison to a funded professional body of workers.

·         Councillor Key also highlighted the need for the HealthWatch mitigation to be more robust before Cabinet made a final decision on its funding future. 

RESOLVED:  That:

1.         The committee note the impact assessments and proposed savings.

2.         The comments made above are taken into consideration by Cabinet and any other future meetings on this topic.