Monmouthshire council home care review to be discussed
Due to anger at the changes the council's combined opposition , at a meetng picketed by carers and supporters including clients, forced a review of the contract process and how decisions were made.
County councillors will consider a report giving an overview of the process, and lessons already learnt, at a special scrutiny meeting on Wednesday, July 9.
The Labour-led council said it retendered domiciliary care contracts as part of a revamp of how care at home is provided and to try better manage costs as well as provide common employment terms for care workers.
It divided the south of the county into three areas; Chepstow town and rural, Caldicot town and The Levels and rural with firms awarded one area each as it wanted to move away from buying care packages on an ad-hoc basis.
Magor-based Lougher Home Care, which had operated across the area, was awarded the The Levels and rural area which meant it would no longer operate in Caldicot and Chepstow and clients would be allocated new providers.
Under the contracts staff are able to transfer with existing terms and conditions protected but many working for Lougher said they didn't want to join either Radis Community Care, that holds the Chepstow contracts, or Care Quality Services that will operate in Calidicot and would likely look for alternative employment outside of care.
The council's Conservative opposition also said the changes had resulted in a locally based firm losing contracts to national firms and questioned if the council's procurement process disadvantaged small businesses.
No formal challenges to the contract decisions were made under the procurement process by any of the 13 bidders.
The council's performance and overview scrutiny committee will consider the report by social services' commissioning manager, Ceri York, at the special meeting.
Her report states when contracts were awarded 161 people were written to advising them of a change to their existing provider and 35, or 22 per cent, have since asked about direct payments which allow people to employ the carer of their choice.
It also identified ways the procurement process, which was run in partnership with Ardal the body that buys services and products for Monmouthshire, Torfaen, Cardiff and the Vale of Glamorgan councils, could be simplified and run to 'more realistic timescales'.
Increased engagement with people using the service could be built into the timeline, the report has suggested, so they would have a say in how the contract process is decided, and it also identified there has been a negative impact on them.
It has said earlier engagement with existing providers during the second phase of the process 'may improve cooperation and reduce anxiety'.
The report states: 'A robust procurement process has been carried out overseen by Ardal Procurement to ensure that all contract and procurement legislation has been adhered to.'
Contracts were awarded in March but service providers aren't due to change until August 19.
In line with the full council's decision a review of the council's procurement process in general still has to be carried out.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Mayors to be given powers to fast track planning permission
Mayors will get sweeping powers to grant upfront planning permission in Labour's drive to speed up development. Angela Rayner, the deputy prime minister, has promised more 'large-scale projects' as she grants mayors greater control over what is built locally. An English devolution bill published last week set out Rayner's plan for all areas of the country to have a mayor with greater powers over areas such as transport, skills and housing. The bill will give mayors far wider power over local planning applications as Rayner and Sir Keir Starmer aim to kickstart homebuilding and other development that will spur the economy. Labour is promising to build 1.5 million homes over the parliament, but numbers have slumped to record lows under rules introduced by the previous government.
Telegraph
2 hours ago
- Telegraph
The 1970s are back, but we're still waiting for our Thatcher moment
The 1970s, it seems, are back. A scorching summer and a teetering economy evoke memories of 50 years ago. A Labour Chancellor mulls how best to soak the rich; beyond Westminster, state authority crumbles. Rachel Reeves has not yet gone to the IMF like Denis Healey did. But there is a sense on the British Right that the UK is facing a fresh '1976 moment' as the old unsustainable order gives way to something new. Both the Tories and Reform are keen to embrace that narrative. Jim Callaghan's remark that 'If I were a young man, I would emigrate' is reflective of the mood of many voters today. 'Broken' is the most commonly used word to describe the country in focus groups. Yet while Kemi Badenoch and Nigel Farage agree that Britain in 2025 faces real national decline, they differ on who will be its saviour come 2029. In the fight for the future, a proxy war is being fought over the past. A century after Margaret Thatcher's birth, both Badenoch and Farage claim her legacy for their respective parties. The Tory leader points to Thatcher's seriousness and sense of purpose; the upcoming party conference will stress her Conservative core. Farage meanwhile is urging think tanks to work with him, publicly praising 'the great revolution that took place from 1979' as a lodestar for a Reform-led government. It is not yet clear who will win out in the battle of the Right. But there are encouraging signs that members of both parties appreciate the scale of the problems facing Britain. Some within Reform are keen to look Stateside; one senior figure dined with a member of the Trump transition team last week. Among Conservatives, there is a keen sense of 'getting things right next time.' One Tory MP likens the experience of the last parliament to that of Ted Heath's government. Past failure will, hopefully, inform future success. Both are correct to recognise that preparation and a sense of purpose will be key to the success of the next government of the Right. If national decline is to be reversed, then a clear plan is essential to succeed. An example of this is offered by the Coalition's school reforms. Consultation had been done in opposition; relevant bills drafted before entering office, ensuring last reform. A similar body of work will be necessary if issues such as Britain's creaking asylum system are to be overhauled in the next parliament. Badenoch has handed policy review to Alex Burghart, who is regularly spotted around parliament clutching a copy of Keith Joseph's The Right Approach. Zia Yusuf will perform a similar role for Reform, working with Simon Marcus, the party's head of research. Yet planning alone will not be sufficient. As the unhappy experience of this current government shows, ministers are always susceptible to being blown off course by events. Having an intellectual core will be necessary for continued renewal in office. Charles Moore's magisterial biography of Thatcher notes how her policy-making was an iterative process. Constant memos were circulated in written form. This ensured the detail of any policy, not merely the theory, was subject to scrutiny prior to implementation. A similar robustness could help the Right avoid many of the stupid fights that have plagued more recent leaders. Thatcher's success was built on a shrewd sense of her electoral coalition. In the 1980s, this was achieved by peeling off a sufficient chunk of the old working class vote with houses, shares and economic prosperity. In the 2020s, new loyalties must be affirmed. For the Right, this will likely include marrying 'Thatcher's children' – economic winners of her era – with those who lost out in her era. Strikingly, Reform is now targeting ex-coal mining areas like South Wales and the East Midlands. To bind this coalition together, a new economic model will likely have to be forged. 'Culture wars are not enough' admits one Tory frontbencher. Farage has shown a willingness to nationalise British Steel and Thames Water; members of Badenoch's team are critical of Beijing deliberately crippling Western industries. Both leaders appreciate that the sickness benefits bill – set to rise to £100bn by 2030 – is completely unsustainable. Both will have to find a way to sell welfare reform and palatable spending cuts to an electorate that is wary of both. 'We all know the state needs to do less,' says one former Tory minister. 'But where does the axe fall? Thatcher barely touched the welfare state.' She chose to privatise state liabilities; liberalising state commitments on areas like Net Zero could offer the equivalent answer in 2029. Opinions differ on the Right as to whether the challenges facing Britain now are greater than those 50 years ago. Back then, there was union militancy, the Soviet threat and IRA terror; now there is a demographic time bomb, a febrile electorate and two decades of stagnant growth. In looking to the future, the spirit, if not the means, of Thatcher will animate those wrestling to resolve the nation's problems – regardless of which party they are in.
The Guardian
3 hours ago
- The Guardian
Proper support for children with special educational needs can lead to successful outcomes
I have two children, both autistic. One does well in mainstream school, with adaptations; the other cannot survive in a mainstream environment at all – everything about it triggers him. Any minister who wants to do away with special educational needs and disabilities (Send) settings should be required to leave their quiet office and spend a week conducting their duties in a busy secondary school (After disability benefits, is Labour really about to target the educational rights of special needs children?, 7 July). Every 55 minutes they must drop what they are doing and move to a different room to work on a completely different ministerial portfolio, regardless of their interest in or aptitude for it. A few times a week, they will be required change for PE in a room full of people. Why is it so hard for government to understand that 'inclusion' does not mean 'force everyone into a single framework regardless how unsuitable it is'? It means understanding, respecting and acting appropriately, as everyone has different TaylorLewes, East Sussex The battle to acquire an education, health and care plan (EHCP) is not easily won. All too frequently it requires tenacity, resilience and no small measure of confidence and skill to negotiate the appeal and tribunal process. As a teacher, barrister and former representative of Independent Provider of Special Education Advice, the leading charity in the field of Send law in England, I know this from first-hand experience. My own child had complex medical needs and I was astounded when my local authority said that they did not meet the threshold (clearly defined in the Children and Families Act 2014). I appealed, successfully, but had to attend a hearing at a magistrates court. I understand why local authorities are not supportive of EHCP applications; they know they do not have the funds to meet the plans. Watering down, or removing children's rights to support can never be the answer. Adequately funded Send support enables children to be successful. My own child, with a plan in place throughout secondary school, was able to go on to achieve a first‑class degree. I fear that this might not be the outcome for our next generation of HailesFowlmere, Cambridgeshire Your correspondents (Letters, 6 July) make a powerful case for the need to support children with additional educational needs, but I feel that they are mistaken in trying to perpetuate the current use of EHCPs. I was, for many years, a governor of two secondary schools and witnessed the problems with the EHCP 'system' with mounting despair. The processes have become so complex that they are almost inaccessible to parents who lack the skills to navigate an administrative labyrinth, which discriminates against some of the neediest. The time taken to secure a plan can be so protracted that it is pointless for junior schools to initiate a request late in the child's time with them; the secondary school may struggle to support the child for their first year and only get a plan by the end of year 8 – meaning that children at a crucial stage in their school life lack additional support for as much as three years. Any system with these features needs replacement, and I would urge your readers to welcome the opportunity to achieve QuibellLondon Have an opinion on anything you've read in the Guardian today? Please email us your letter and it will be considered for publication in our letters section.
