Comhairle nan Eilean Siar

2016-18 Budget Consultation

January 2016

This document sets out the background to, and proposals for, the Comhairle’s 2016-18 budget. As well as consulting with Community Planning Partners and Trade Unions the Comhairle is holding six public consultation meetings which anyone may attend:

Monday 18 January	Sir E Scott School, Tarbert	at 7.00pm

Sgoil an Taobh Siar, Barvas	at 7.00pm

Tuesday 19 January	Castlebay School, Barra	at 7.00pm

Wednesday 20 January	Daliburgh School, South Uist	at 7.00pm

Paible School, North Uist	at 7.00pm

Thursday 21 January	Council Chamber, Stornoway	at 7.00pm

Friday 22 January	Facebook Chat with the Comhairle Leader (7.00pm-8.30pm)

Comments, views or alternative budget proposals are welcomed either at the meetings, through the Comhairle’s website http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/fcr/budgetstrategy.asp or in writing by email to budgetconsultation@cne-siar.gov.uk or by post to Robert Emmott, Director of Finance and Corporate Resources, Comhairle nan Eilean Siar, Sandwick Road, Stornoway, Isle of Lewis, HS1 2BW. To enable them to be considered and reflected in the next budget report to the Comhairle submissions should be received by 29 January 2016.

Introduction

The Comhairle’s 2016-18 budget strategy was set in the context of uncertainty around the General Election in May 2015.

The return of a majority Conservative Government was followed by a Summer Budget on 8 July. However, the Scottish allocations for 2016-20 were not published until the Autumn Statement on 25 November 2015.

These timings meant that the Scottish Budget and Local Government Settlement were only announced on 16 December 2015.

The Local Government Settlement for 2016/17 is a one year proposal that includes a commitment to maintaining teacher numbers and continuing the Council Tax freeze.

Overall Local Government funding will fall by £350m (3.5%) in cash terms compared with 2015/16. The impact on Local Government may be partly offset by an additional £250m the Scottish Government has allocated for Social Care. However, the terms under which this funding can be used are still under discussion.

Due to the way the funding is distributed between authorities the consequence for the Comhairle is a £4.5m reduction in grant. Taken together with the budget deficit carried over from 2015/16 (£1.5m), inflationary pressures (£1m), additional National Insurance pension related costs (£1.5m) and pressures in Health and Social Care (£1.3m), the Comhairle is faced with an overall budget gap of £9.8m in 2016/17.

It is difficult to determine what the position might be in 2017/18 but a further 3% fall in funding would leave the Comhairle with an additional £4.5m to find the following year.

The Comhairle’s 2016/17 budget will be around £15m less than it was in 2010/11 and the workforce has seen a corresponding reduction in size.

Work started on identifying potential budget savings in April 2015 and this included an extensive workforce planning exercise that identified efficiencies that the Comhairle has already approved. In total £6.3m of savings for 2016/17 and £1.7m for 2017/18 have been agreed.

The table below sets out the current position and shows how, even if all the budget choices were to be agreed, the Comhairle would be left with shortfalls of £1.5m in 2016/17 and £3.6m in 2017/18.

2016/17 £m	2017/18 £m
Deficit brought forward	1.50	1.50
In year deficit (excluding Health and Social Care)	7.00	4.50
Health and Social Care pressures	1.30	?
Total deficit	9.80	6.00
Savings identified	(6.30)	(1.70)
Remaining deficit	3.50	4.30
Other potential Savings	(0.60)	-
Budget Choices	(1.40)	(0.70)
Budget shortfall	1.50	3.60

Effective forward planning and prudent decision making means the Comhairle has £5.4m of uncommitted funds that can be used to offset the shortfall in the short term. The Comhairle has already agreed to use such balances across its term in office.

The impact of using balances to address the shortfall is shown in the table below.

Comhairle balances	2016/17 £m	2017/18 £m
Available balances	5.40	3.90
If budget balanced from balances	(1.50)	(3.60)
Balances carried forward	3.90	0.30

It should be noted that the consequence of such an approach is a deficit carried forward into 2018/19 of £3.6m. This may be off set to a limited extent if the Comhairle is able to use the Western Isles share of the £250m of Social Care funding to meet demand pressures.

Budget Choices Consultation

This consultation is concerned with seeking views on the £2.1m of proposed budget choices across 2016-18.

Set out below is a summary of each of the 29 proposals that the Comhairle have agreed to consult on.

Responses to the consultation are invited from individuals, groups, Trade Unions and Community Planning partners and can be submitted in the following ways:

on a printed copy of this paper;

by completing the online version of this form which can be found at http://www.cne-siar.gov.uk/fcr/budgetstrategy.asp; or

through the submission of written comments by letter or email as detailed on the front page of this document.

For each of the budget choices views are sought on what support there is for the proposal and the relative importance of the service area.

At the end of the survey there is an opportunity to make any additional suggestions or comments.

Summary of Proposals

There are 29 proposals on which views are invited which are listed below. Further details on each of the proposals are set out in the following pages.

Once you have considered each proposal you are invited to indicate on this page the 5 services that are most important to you (write 1 against the most important, 2 against the next, and so on).

Potential Savings	Priority
C-1	Use Comhairle capital and appropriate external funding streams to support community groups on procurement	Choose an item.
C-2	Reduce Community Council Social Grants by 50%	Choose an item.
C-3	Reduction of the Local Housing Strategy Budget	Choose an item.
C-4	Reduction in the funding to The Energy Advisory Services	Choose an item.
C-5	Discontinue Small Arts Revenue Grants Scheme	Choose an item.
C-6	Review Library Coffee Shop provision	Choose an item.
C-7	Discontinue with the use of all Itinerants in Primary Schools	Choose an item.
C-8	Implement Shared Headship in Lionel / Sgoil an Taobh Siar	Choose an item.
C-9	Review arrangements for residential care for children	Choose an item.
C-11	Reduction in high cost care packages	Choose an item.
C-12	Self Directed Support (Purchasing Budget)	Choose an item.
C-13	Cessation of MOSS	Choose an item.
C-14	Repatriation of mainland placements	Choose an item.
C-15	Redesign of Grianan Day Centre	Choose an item.
C-16	Redesign of laundry services	Choose an item.
C-17	Increase Slàinte Mhath membership fees	Choose an item.
C-18	Reduce the scope of Grounds Maintenance Contract	Choose an item.
C-19	Reduce the ad hoc roads maintenance budgets	Choose an item.
C-20	Reduce the street lighting budget	Choose an item.
C-21	Reduce ongoing Projects budget	Choose an item.
C-22	Reduce the Surface Dressing budget	Choose an item.
C-24	Review Concessionary Fares on Inter-Island Ferry Services	Choose an item.
C-25	Review of Stornoway Abattoir	Choose an item.
C-26	Review of Stornoway Bus Station	Choose an item.
C-27	Review the provision of Public Conveniences	Choose an item.
C-28	Increased income through Pier and Harbour Dues	Choose an item.
C-29	Extend/Increase charging for car parking in Stornoway	Choose an item.
C-30	Review Comhairle run and evening bus services	Choose an item.
C-31	Review of waste services	Choose an item.

C1	To use Comhairle capital and appropriate external funding streams to generate income to support community groups on procurement. This could save £20k from 2016/17.
What is proposed:	Legal Services would provide support to assist community groups to package their projects and award contracts with a view to achieving best value as well as compliance with legal requirements and terms and conditions of external funders.
What would the impact be?	This would reduce the level of grant funding available for distribution but this could be offset by community groups to whom the Comhairle can provide services not requiring to engage private sector support.
Are there any material risks?	There may be insufficient projects to achieve required income.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C2	To reduce Community Council Social Grants by 50%. This could save £7k from 2016/17.
What is proposed:	To reduce social grant to community councils by 50% from £500 to £250 per annum.
What would the impact be?	This may reduce the number of social events in communities or increase costs to participants.
Are there any material risks?	No.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C3	A reduction of the Housing Services Local Housing Strategy Budget. This could save £20k in 2017/18.
What is proposed:	The Comhairle revenue budget to support the Development of the Local Housing Strategy (LHS) is £100k. £80k is used to support TEAS (see proposal C4) and £20K is used to support the development and information needs of the LHS process e.g. survey information, small scale consultancy work etc. The proposal relates to the removal of the £20k from the budget which will mean that there will be no revenue budget to support the LHS preparation process. Implementing this in 2017/18 should allow for the development of the LHS for 2017-2022 to be completed.
What would the impact be?	The Comhairle would have a reduced capacity to assess and address the introduction of new national housing policy and to take account of legislative changes in the preparation of the LHS. The LHS process would rely on the availability of one off uses of underspends or the use of any ad hoc funding that may become available to complete the LHS process. Such funding may not be available within the Department. The LHS process may take longer and will put more pressure on a reduced Housing Services Team.
Are there any material risks?	Reduced capacity to deliver an up to date LHS, to take account of legislative changes and National Housing Policy and to consult as part of the LHS.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C4	A reduction in the level of funding to The Energy Advisory Services (TEAS). This could save £41k in 2017/18.
What is proposed:	The proposal is to reduce the annual funding available to Tighean Innse Gall (TIG) (under Service Level Agreement) by slightly over 50%; from £80k to £39k.
What would the impact be?	The scope and amount of work undertaken by TEAS would be reduced, limiting the opportunities to attract funding and to develop projects. This may have an impact on addressing fuel poverty. A reduction in project staff within TEAS can be anticipated meaning a reduction in activity. This would mean direct support and home visits in relation to energy efficiency would be available to a smaller group of people.
Are there any material risks?	The Islands might miss out on funding opportunities related to new and emerging energy efficiency initiatives. Fuel poverty might increase in the long term.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C5	To discontinue Small Arts Revenue Grants Scheme from March 2016. This could save £20k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	To discontinue the provision of small arts grants to groups and individuals.
What would the impact be?	There will be an impact on individual artists and groups. For example, in relation to support for travel, equipment and exhibitions. The Comhairle received £5k annually from Creative Scotland to match eligible small arts grants. If this Creative Scotland funding was to continue Comhairle officers would work with partners such as An Lanntair and Taigh Chearsabhagh to deliver support for the sector.
Are there any material risks?	No.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C6	To review the Library Coffee Shop provision. This could save £20k (£10k in 2016/17 and £10k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	To close the Library Coffee Shop from 31 March 2016 and to consider options for cross-departmental efficiencies for use of the vacant space.
What would the impact be?	The facility has run at a cumulative loss of £48k over the last four years and is forecasting a deficit of £15k this year. It is not possible within the current model for income to meet expenditure and it is therefore proposed to close the Coffee Shop but continue to provide some light refreshments. There will be no impact on Library opening hours.
Are there any material risks?	A reduction in number of visitors to the Library and additional costs associated with any staff not agreeing to redeployment.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C7	To discontinue with the use of all Itinerant Teachers in Primary Schools. This could save £465k (£232k in 2016/17 and £233k in 2017/18)
What is proposed:	All primary teaching staff are trained, qualified and General Teaching Council registered to teach art, music and PE from nursery to P7. All experiences and outcomes required by Curriculum for Excellence are being met although previous budget choices have reduced itinerant provision in primary. The current policy is to provide limited resource allocated pro rata across all schools in P4-P7. Teachers have had significant opportunities to build their confidence and skills in these areas working alongside itinerant specialists and have themselves been responsible for stages P1-P3 for a number of years now. Most authorities have withdrawn itinerant specialist provision in Primary.
What would the impact be?	Current specialist itinerant provision for P4-7 would be removed. Other input in terms of active schools and music instruction would continue.
Are there any material risks?	Reduced overall teaching capacity.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C8	To implement Shared Headship in Lionel School / Sgoil an Taobh Siar. This could save £10k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	There is further capacity for a shared headship in Lionel/Sgoil an Taobh Siar.
What would the impact be?	This the most effective way of providing both schools effective management with a non-teaching commitment.
Are there any material risks?	No.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C9	To review arrangements for residential care for children. This could save £350k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	This proposal is dependent on being able to appropriately place all children currently in residential care in foster care. The Comhairle has taken steps to expand its foster care provision. Foster care has improved outcomes over residential care and the current range of services within the Comhairle provides for local crisis accommodation for up to three months in local authority provision.
What would the impact be?	Children would be provided with an improved family place setting where there is good research evidence of positive outcomes. There is no impact on other Comhairle services. However, this would reduce significantly the service requirements of Action for Children.
Are there any material risks?	Recruitment of appropriate foster carers; matching children to foster carers; and managing the transition in the timescale identified.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C11	A reduction in high cost care packages. This could save £70k (£20k in 2016/17 and £50k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	To consider alternative ways of meeting and improving the outcomes for individuals through the redesign of care packages.
What would the impact be?	The Comhairle will continue to meet the assessed needs of individuals but there may be changes in the way that care packages are commissioned and delivered. This might include care being provided in different locations and by different providers or across Comhairle departments.
Are there any material risks?	Developing and implementing alternative models may take more time than anticipated, especially if capital works are necessary. Service demand and staff vacancies may delay implementation.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C12	To reduce Self Directed Support (SDS) Budget. This could save £50k (£25k in 2016/17 and £25k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	To reduce the budgetary provision for SDS through the reduction in resources in line with eligibility criteria and the Strategic Plan. The 2015/16 budget for SDS is £550k actual spend is forecast at £800k.
What would the impact be?	The Comhairle will continue to meet the assessed needs of individuals, within available resource.
Are there any material risks?	The reduction in resources will place increased demand on direct payment budgets. The opportunity to engage in elements of preventative activity within services may be compromised. The growth arising from assessed need ill require spot purchase budgets, increase spend and reduce efficiencies.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C13	The cessation of the Mobile Overnight Support Service (MOSS). This could save £180k (£90k in 2016/17 and £90k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	To discontinue the MOSS and provide appropriate alternative arrangements for the existing service users.
What would the impact be?	There would be a change to the way care is provided to existing service users. An individual plan would be drawn up and implemented for each client. These could range from the use of evening and home care to residential care.
Are there any material risks?	There may be insufficient space in care homes for any individuals who require a residential place and avoidable emergency admissions to hospital may increase.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C14	The repatriation of mainland placements. This could save £105k (£55k in 2016/17 and £50k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	To reduce the investment in off island placements. This service currently has a budget of £1.5m which provides a service for 21 clients. The cost of individual placements varies from £30k to £220k per annum.
What would the impact be?	Where appropriate the assessed needs of individuals would be met locally.
Are there any material risks?	There may be a need for up-front investment to realise savings in the longer term. Implementing any proposals may be delayed due to staff vacancies and / or the need for Capital development.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C15	The redesign of Grianan Day Centre. This could save £50k in 2017/18.
What is proposed:	There is potential for Grianan Resource Centre to provide an outreach level of care and support to existing clients via alternative community resources and Ardseileach Day Centre. This could include the use of Ionad Spòrs Leòdhais (ISL), An Lanntair, The University of the Highlands and Islands (UHI), etc. Establishment of a Third Sector Hub would reduce the pressure on the Integrated Joint Board (IJB) budget to provide funding to organisations to pay for office rental and administration functions. By working with these Third Sector providers and sharing accommodation and resources more effectively, as part of contractual arrangements, economies of scale could be achieved. Delivering this would require negotiation of new terms, operational options appraisal and a withdrawal from the facility. Areas in current use such as the hydrotherapy pool and gym could be considered for community/ISL management. The building of Grianan has opportunity for capital redesign that a spend to save approach in the physical improvement and layout of the building could benefit from.
What would the impact be?	None anticipated.
Are there any material risks?	Resistance in resettlement from existing arrangements from Third Sector agencies. The possible need for capital expenditure to make optimal use of the building having initial cost pressures.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C16	The redesign of laundry services. This could save £50k in £2016/17.
What is proposed:	Laundry service for Dun Berisay, Dun Eisdean and Ardseileach and currently provided by NHS Western Isles. It is proposed that a review of the service be undertaken with a view to provide an extension to this contract for Harris House, Trianaid, and Taigh a' Chridhe Uile Naomh.
What would the impact be?	There would be no impact on services.
Are there any material risks?	There may not be sufficient capacity in the hospital facility and there may be an impact on staff that cannot be redeployed.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C17	To increase Slàinte Mhath membership fees. This could save £86k (£72k in 2016/17 and £14k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	Increase monthly membership fees for Sport and Health facilities across the Western Isles from 1 June 2016.
What would the impact be?	Prices have not risen since the scheme was introduced. The proposed rates are: Family - £25.00 (currently £20.00), Individual - £18.75 (currently £15.00), Family Concession - £18.75 (currently £15.00) and Individual Concession - £12.50 (currently £10.00).
Are there any material risks?	Loss of membership (although likely to be low as scheme will remain competitively priced and affordable). Reduction in the number of our population who are physically active.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C18	To reduce the scope of Grounds Maintenance Contract. This could save £25k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	There is an option within the current grounds maintenance contract to provide a reduced service to the maintained sites.
What would the impact be?	Grass length on sports pitches and amenity areas will be allowed to grow longer between visits. This may affect sports activities. Time between visits will be longer therefore the aesthetic appearance of the areas will be of a lower standard than at present.
Are there any material risks?	No.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C19	Reduce the ad hoc roads maintenance budgets. This could save £211k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	A reduction of nearly 30% of the ad-hoc roads maintenance budget which is used to undertake emergency and planned pothole/patching, small scale repairs and drainage programmes on the roads network.
What would the impact be?	Over time there would be a deterioration in the roads network surface condition.
Are there any material risks?	An increased level of defects in the road network. A possible increase in claims against the Comhairle. The viability of the local tar plant may be affected (if it closes for longer periods during the year there would be an increase in the cost of all surfacing works).

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C20	To reduce the Street Lighting budget. This could save £20k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	To reduce the budget available to maintain the street lighting assets by 6%. One option would be to switch all street lights off during the summer months.
What would the impact be?	Response times for fault repair could be longer than at present (currently four week maintenance cycle per area). Lights may require de-commissioning rather than repair.
Are there any material risks?	Extended periods between routine inspections. Resources would likely have to focus on road and public safety.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C21	To reduce the ongoing Projects budget. This could save £50k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	To reduce the budget used for participation in Hi-Trans, SCOTS and ROADEX projects including roads condition surveys and Roads Asset Management.
What would the impact be?	Cannot maintain participation in national and regional roads related collaboration projects at current levels.
Are there any material risks?	No.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C22	To reduce the Surface Dressing budget. This could save £20k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	A 10% reduction in the revenue surface dressing budget.
What would the impact be?	The extent of surface dressing undertaken per annum will decrease and the rate of road surface deterioration will increase, resulting in greater levels of capital intervention required.
Are there any material risks?	Rate of road condition deterioration increases resulting in increased defects (including reduced skid resistance) and greater capital intervention required. Possible increase in claims from road users.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C24	To review Concessionary Fares Provision on Inter-Island Ferry Services. This could save £25k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	Provide increased control measure to ensure that Inter-island concessionary ferry fare provision only applies to resident cardholders of the Western Isles. This scheme was introduced in 2006 as a Local Authority enhancement to the National Concessionary Travel Scheme.
What would the impact be?	Additional administration burden. (Transport across the sounds is provided free to concessionary card holders from the Western Isles. Under RET the current single fares for foot passengers are £2.95 for the Sound of Barra and £3.45 for the Sound of Harris).
Are there any material risks?	No.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C25	A review of Stornoway Abattoir. This could save £40k (£10k in 2016/17 and £30k in 2017/18)
What is proposed:	Phased approach comprising: 2016/17 Review of Stornoway Abattoir - e.g. length of opening season, pricing structure, efficiencies in the use of consumables etc. 2017/18: Closure of Abattoir unless an alternative operating model with butchers/farms/crofting representatives operating the facility can be agreed.
What would the impact be?	In 2016/17: A shorter season (by 2-3 weeks) and increased charges for slaughtering (+50p/sheep, +£1 for cattle and pigs). In 2017/18: Closure of the facility. Users would have to make alternative arrangements.
Are there any material risks?	Possible increased home kill with consequential risk of incorrect/illegal disposal of wastes. Consequential negative impact on local farming and crofting.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C26	A review of Stornoway Bus Station. This could save £30k in 2016/17.
What is proposed:	The closure of Stornoway Bus station premises.
What would the impact be?	This proposal would retain the use of the bus lane stances and drivers’ mess room but close the waiting room, toilets, left-luggage and travel enquiry facilities. There would likely be an increased volume of travel and tourism related enquires to Customer Services, Transport Office staff, the library and the Tourist Information Centre.
Are there any material risks?	No.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C27	A review the provision of Public Conveniences. This could save £65k (£10k in 2016/17 and £55k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	Phased approach comprising: In 2016/17 a revision of Public Convenience provision including a return to seasonal closure, where appropriate, and efficiencies in current operations. In 2017/18 the closure of all Comhairle operated public conveniences and withdrawal of funding to community facilities.
What would the impact be?	In 2016/17 there would be restricted access to some facilities in winter months. In 2017/18 all funding would be removed and Comhairle facilities would close. It is likely community facilities would also be withdrawn.
Are there any material risks?	An increased public health risk at popular locations.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C28	To increase income through Pier and Harbour Dues. This could realize additional income of £50k (£25k in 2016/17 and £25k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	A review of Pier and Harbour Dues, including wharfage charges for Lochmaddy.
What would the impact be?	To achieve a £25K saving would require an increase of approximately 4.7%. This would also mean increased charges to CalMac/Transport Scotland for ferry port use.
Are there any material risks?	Sustainability of fishing sector. Marine Operations: ability to complete and implement the current review of resources and priorities.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C29	To extend/increase charging for car parking in Stornoway. This could realise additional income of £20k in 2017/18.
What is proposed:	To extend the number of parking spaces covered by parking charges in Stornoway Town Centre. This may include revising the charging structure. The current pay and display area has proven successful in providing good turnaround of parking spaces for short term visitors/users and businesses.
What would the impact be?	Improved parking for short stay visitors as additional space will be available within the Stornoway Town Centre. Those seeking long stay parking may have to walk further. However, the new arrangements could include payment for long stay parking.
Are there any material risks?	Objections to Traffic Order cause delay or mean the proposal cannot be implemented. Parking displaced onto adjacent street parking causing congestion and inconvenience for residents.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C30	To review Comhairle run and evening bus services.
What is proposed:	The review of daytime bus services currently operated by Bus na Comhairle; on Tolsta/Back and Point to Stornoway routes; to consider if the continuation of these services, in light of current passenger usage, is feasible. Options include reduction or complete cessation of services. To consider options for renewal of Lewis and Harris evening bus services. These service contracts are due for renewal in April 2016 and have recently been tendered on a one year contract duration with an option to extend for a further year. This allows an option to review the future service. There are four potential options to consider (potential savings are based on current 2015/16 contract subsidy costs): Option 1: Continue with status quo and award contracts for the full 2 year duration Option 2: Discontinue all evening bus services - saving £213K per annum. Option 3: Award new contracts for 1 year duration at the current service level and carry out a consultation and review / redesign process with a view to reduce services - savings target £40K per annum. Option 4: Explore alternative / innovative solutions such as partnerships / collaboration with community organisations delivering community benefits.
What would the impact be?	Reduction or cessation of daytime bus services would impact on ability of rural communities to access services in Stornoway and would likely impact on employment opportunities for those living in those areas. Potential reduction or ceasing of evening bus services departing Stornoway and Tarbert after 6.30pm would have an impact on passengers accessing these services for commuting (late shift workers) and various social inclusion purposes.
Are there any material risks?	Economic impact on individuals using Comhairle run daytime and all evening bus services for travel to / from work.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

C31	To review Waste Services. This could save £40k (£10k in 2016/17 and £30k in 2017/18).
What is proposed:	Carry out a full review of waste services and operations to ensure continued compliance with legislation, maximise efficient use of resources and increase diversion of waste from landfill. The review will include assessment of collection frequencies, particularly in areas where a weekly collection service for residual waste is currently available, and will consider the guidance available from the Scottish Government Household Recycling Code of Practice. Capital funding support is likely to be available from Scottish Government where measures to comply with the Code of Practice are undertaken to improve recycling collections. Although there may be small savings generated by collection service reviews, it is anticipated that the savings will be primarily achieved by landfill tax savings from increased diversion from landfill and a reduction in overtime costs.
What would the impact be?	No impact.
Are there any material risks?	Possible increased levels of contamination of recycling collections as a result of restricted residual waste capacity.

What are your views on this proposal?

What Priority should this proposal have compared with other Comhairle Services?

Do you have any other comments?

Please provide any other comments or suggestions for savings that have not been covered in the consultation paper

If you would like to leave your name or who you are completing the survey on behalf of, please include your details in the box below

THANK YOU FOR COMPLETING THIS SURVEY