Whitby defends budget as Birmingham City Council approves £212m cuts

Protesters gather in Victoria Square as Birmingham City Council meets to vote on the budget
Protesters gather in Victoria Square as Birmingham City Council meets to vote on the budget

The harshest spending cuts in Birmingham City Council’s 173-year history have been approved as Conservative and Liberal Democrat councillors agreed to slash public services by £212 million.

A long and rowdy council meeting heard claims that next year’s budget would unfairly hit pensioners, children and the poor, while leaving thousands of vulnerable elderly people to rely on the private and voluntary sectors for social care in future.

But the council’s Conservative leader, Mike Whitby, said the massive national debt, huge Government borrowing costs and the pressure on local authorities to reduce spending meant that an austerity budget was inevitable.

The tough financial package puts the council on course to reduce spending by about £330 million over four years – equivalent to a third of the total budget.

Birmingham City Council leader Mike Whitby and deputy council leader Paul Tilsley

At least 2,500 full-time council jobs are set to go over the next year, while staff also face pay freezes or cuts.

By 2015, more than 10,000 full and part time council employees can expect to have lost their jobs or have been transferred to work for co-operatives.

The city’s back office army of administrators – clerks and finance officers – will be cut by a third as improved new technology makes their jobs redundant.

But council tax bills will be frozen this year, bringing some relief to hard-pressed householders.

Trade union members and council staff staged a noisy anti-cuts demonstration in Victoria Square at the front of the Council
House, their chants clearly audible in the council chamber.

Coun Whitby (Con Harborne) drew jeers from a packed public gallery when he insisted that cutting spending would not necessarily lead to poorer services.

Describing the budget as a cuts package was wrong because it implied “callous insensitivity”, he said.

Share