Tom Clarke, MP for Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill, House of Commons.

Well, he would say that, wouldn't he.
Unless Mr Clarke has a crystal ball he has no way of knowing how much cash will be allocated.
I would much rather trust Mr Watter's opinion than this placeman.

Curley Bill wrote:

Tom Clarke, MP for Coatbridge, Chryston & Bellshill, House of Commons.

Well, he would say that, wouldn't he. Unless Mr Clarke has a crystal ball he has no way of knowing how much cash will be allocated. I would much rather trust Mr Watter's opinion than this placeman.

"placeman" is being kind ;) The Labour Party is obsessed by micromanagement and soviet-style remote control.

I think I know what is bothering Clarke, Boyack, Chisholm and Gray over the ring-fencing issue. As one man once remarked : "you end in the grotesque chaos of a Labour council - a Labour council - hiring taxis to scuttle round a city handing out redundancy notices to its own workers." Tom Clarke is simply concerned about his Labour colleagues who are still administering some Scottish Councils.

He need not worry as I am sure both the voters and Scottish Government will be monitoring the provision of local services very closely until 2011 :D

Ring fencing of funds has never worked because there is zero enforcement. Where an individual might have the resources (time, money, energy and intellectual) to mount a legal challenge, they are denied the legal aid to make this a possibility - hence the absence of accountability in service provision for people with disabilities and their families in Scotland. Unless and until all the criteria are fulfilled to force local authorities to make provision of services that are appropriate to the individual needs of disabled people, the scandalous treatment of people with disabilities will continue.

We need services that are appropriate to needs; that are accountable to service users; that are enforced and assessed independently of service providers; that operate to standards that are set by central government which are appropriate to the specific needs of each disability and that these standards are set in collaboration with service users, not disability charities, which are themselves service providers for local and central government.. Oh, and we need to be able to exercise legal rights in a court of law where there is procrastination or refusal in providing a service.

My experience as a parent of a disabled child is that MPs like Tom Clarke are well aware through their constituency caseload of the scandalous treatment of people with disabilities and their families by local authorities. They don't need a committee to investigate what their constituents ask them to help with on a regular basis - their disinterest is palpable and their excuse is always that they can do nothing to force local authorities to meet their legal obligations. I had this excuse from the then Minister for Education, Cathy Jamieson.

It is really quite sickening how often parents of disabled children are told by these self-same politicians that they will have to `fight` for what we regard as basic services for our children - services such as school education, that the bulk of the population take for granted. Their hypocrisy is stunning.

Having lent our vote to the SNP as the only viable opposition to the Labour Party in Scotland, we will not do so a second time if we continue to face the same contemptuous treatment by local government - with the Scottish Government using the arguments of `flexibility` and `local democracy` to defend their refusal to intervene on our behalf.

The Scottish Government is also going to have to repeal or amend a whole raft of legislation passed by the previous Scottish Executive that was designed to extinguish demand for service improvements through the use of intimidation. See:-

http://www.autismrig

hts.org.uk/BriefingP

aperIndex.html

re: Tom Clarke, "The government's considered response was to allocate, in terms of the Barnett formula, an additional £340m to England, £34m to Scotland and £21m to Wales."

This is not how the Barnett formula works or is calculated according to the Treasury. Expenditure is allocated en bloc, not per-service (health, transport, etc.) and this gives the devolved executives the opportunity to reallocate funds between services to suit their needs. The formula does not reallocate existing expenditure, merely any changes made that year.

re: Fiona Clarke, "Having lent our vote to the SNP as the only viable opposition to the Labour Party in Scotland, we will not do so a second time if we continue to face the same contemptuous treatment by local government - with the Scottish Government using the arguments of `flexibility` and `local democracy` to defend their refusal to intervene on our behalf."

You yourself have noted that 'centralist' ring-fencing iniatives do not work, so the only alternative is a local approach that meets need over the long term. That approach requires flexibility in local public spending plans.

Centralist dictats, policies, tragets and aspirations as espoused by New Labour have failed in education and on health because local decision making have been removed from the people who are supposed to deliver these services and the local communties have deen disenfranchised in which these services are meant to operate.

Localism brings empowerment and responsibility.

It amazes me, whenever there are any concerns expressed about what the Scottish Government is doing is just the other parties, particularly labour and labour supporters who are bashing the SNP lead Government...just because they are SNP......where has the voice of democracy gone...were people can openly voice their concerns, views, opinions and they are not " slagged off " for them.
And to the matter voiced...this time.....ANYONE who has been involved in any voluntary organistaion, group or committee knows from ongoing experience if any of the funding is not ring fenced it will get used for other purposes.

Tom Clarke, eh?
He thinks that Kenneth Gibson is wrong and that Wendy Alexander is right? Well that is a real surprise!
Don't the years roll back ?
Wasn't Tom Clarke a former Secretary of State for Scotland or was he merely a Shadow Secretary of State for Scotland in the good old days when Scots knew their place and did what they were telt?
If you seek his monument look around you at Coatbridge.

Labour and their supporters are storing up ammunition here, so that if stories emerge, as they certainly will, about resources being short and clients facing waits for services, they can point the finger and shout we told you so, big bad SNP. That argument would only work if we presuppose that the status quo has an abundence of resources allocated very fairly and that no one in need is left without. That is clearly rubbish.

Committeeman gives the game away. He says that without ring fencing voluntary groups may not get the resources they have previously taken for granted. The howls of protest here are from the voluntary sector you will notice, not Local Authorities. Some organisations are going to miss the gravy train. Well tough it's not about them, it's about the people who receive services, not those that provide them.

I am amazed that someone like Fiona Sinclair does not see the opportunity here to have genuine joined up working on a local level to make the best use of resources to meet local need. Intereference from the Centre is a hindrance to service delivery, not an enhancement.

If Fiona Sinclair is unhappy with the service the local authority presents to her then she should speak to her local councillors and has the opportunity to kick them out at thenext election if she fells they should be. local democracy is important

I'm afraid that the posters above have absolutely no idea what it is like to try to get services, even those as basic as school education for children with disabilities. It is evident that they simply have not bothered to read my posting - they have just read the bit where the SNP government is mentioned!!

You are extraordinarily ignorant and/ or naive if you think that local authority officials are accountable to service users like me - they aren't, because the legal and regulatory frameworks do not exist for children with disabilities. If you have a genuine desire to look outwith party politics and to improvement of services for people with disabilities, I suggest you read the Autism Rights Briefing Paper - just a few of the links to the news articles (e.g. the Sunday Times article on SEN provision) will give you the necessary background.

If you're not prepared to do this, I can only conclude that equal rights is perceived by you only in terms of race, gender, sexual preferences - but not in terms of disability.

When the central government puts in place the kind of regressive legislation that the previous Scottish Executive did, there is no hope of getting appropriate services. See the links to the Additional Support for Learning Act (absolutely appalling piece of legislation that removed the last few rights to an appropriate education for children with Special Educational Needs) and the Mental Health Act (which permits the forced drugging of people with `mental disorders` in the community). These dreadful pieces of legislation, together with the absence of accountability, which I explained in my first post, means that it is impossible to force or persuade local officials or politicians to do anything about the scandalous treatment of people with disabilities.