Lifeline to youngsters threatened by sweeping budget cuts

Lifeline to youngsters threatened by sweeping budget cuts Lifeline to youngsters threatened by sweeping budget cuts

THEY have 150 vulnerable children on their books who spend their spare time caring for poorly mums, dads, brothers and sisters at home.

Many are as young as eight and for just two hours a fortnight they get to escape their duties at home and be children once again, sharing their stories and getting support from other youngsters just like them.

For the older carers, aged between 12 and 16, a couple of hours a month going out for a milkshake or to the bowling alley is nothing less than a lifeline.

Such is the success of Southampton’s Young Carers Project (YCP), run by a group of 18 volunteers, that countless more children are on a waiting list desperate for a place.

But in just a few weeks’ time the organisation, run by Southampton Voluntary Services, could well be no more if plans to axe their annual £89,000 grant are steamrolled through.

They are just one of dozens of groups used by children in the city that will lose some, if not all, of the money they have been receiving to provide vital schemes for youngsters in need.

So deep are the cutbacks to help the council save £20m it is estimated that, under the current proposals, almost 1,000 children’s places will be lost at charity-run groups and organisations, who will no longer receive some of the vital cash that helped them to exist.

They are startling figures produced by opposition party chiefs who, unsurprisingly, say they would have done things differently if they’d been in charge – and certainly never have made the “crazy” decision to pull the plug on funding for the YCP.

Today the Tory party has revealed it is throwing its weight behind a bid to get those holding the purse strings to change their minds and save the YCP – something they say is “vital” in the city.

Jeremy Moulton, deputy leader of the Tory party, responsible for children’s services, said: “Our view is simple – we don’t think there should be any cuts to this service because what it provides for our most vulnerable children is absolutely essential.

“We urge Labour to rethink their plan and if they are refusing to back down then they should at least take time to work with the group to find other solutions that don’t involve cutting them off at the knees. To not at least meet them halfway and spare them time would be quite cruel.”

Julie Marron, team leader for the YCP, said morale with volunteers and staff was understandably low but people only had to meet the youngsters they support and listen to them to understand how important it was.

She said: “It is truly inspirational and humbling when you stop and listen to these children’s stories.

When you see them go and enjoy themselves just for a couple of hours you know that we are providing a vital service for children who don’t have the opportunities that so many do.

“Young Carers is about giving them a sense of purpose, a sense of themselves. We make them realise they are not there just to do that job at home, that there is something else out there for them and we can show them what they can have and achieve.”

The city council is understood to have received dozens of representations from under-threat organisations fighting for their survival including the YCP.

And today, the councillor responsible for children’s services gave her biggest hint yet that the group could “possibly” be saved after calculations were made on the actual grant received from the government this year.

Sarah Bogle, Cabinet member for children’s services, said: “We have met with the young carers and it was a very passionate meeting and there was a very good explanation of what exactly they provide. This was very much a proposal and we have now got some alternative proposals to take forward – and young carers is one that we have looked at.”

She added that “there is a possibility”

the group could be saved but said it was “all in the melting pot”. A decision will be made next month.

Comments(15)

good-gosh says...
11:29am Sun 13 Jan 13

Why is it that Southampton seems to be the only local authority for miles around that regularly threatens to cut support to those most deserving? Other authorities, many with only of fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income, are not riddled with this sensationalistic weekly drama over cuts.

southy says...
1:03pm Sun 13 Jan 13

On weds there is a council meeting in the evening about cuts to services

thinklikealocal says...
2:22pm Sun 13 Jan 13

good-gosh wrote:
Why is it that Southampton seems to be the only local authority for miles around that regularly threatens to cut support to those most deserving? Other authorities, many with only of fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income, are not riddled with this sensationalistic weekly drama over cuts.
I am absolutely 'intrigued' to know who these Councils are that have only a fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income? I'm afraid to say your post is by far the most ridiculous I have ever read on here. You clearly either do not gave a clue or are being deliberately provocative.

good-gosh says...
3:52pm Sun 13 Jan 13

southy wrote:
On weds there is a council meeting in the evening about cuts to services
Good. No excuse after that for not getting it sorted.

good-gosh says...
3:54pm Sun 13 Jan 13

thinklikealocal wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
Why is it that Southampton seems to be the only local authority for miles around that regularly threatens to cut support to those most deserving? Other authorities, many with only of fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income, are not riddled with this sensationalistic weekly drama over cuts.
I am absolutely 'intrigued' to know who these Councils are that have only a fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income? I'm afraid to say your post is by far the most ridiculous I have ever read on here. You clearly either do not gave a clue or are being deliberately provocative.
New Forest, Test Valley & Eastleigh have less than half Southampton's income. They cope with the cuts along with Hampshire (big income for big population) without spitting out their dummy ever week.

lisa whitemore says...
5:32pm Sun 13 Jan 13

good-gosh wrote:
thinklikealocal wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
Why is it that Southampton seems to be the only local authority for miles around that regularly threatens to cut support to those most deserving? Other authorities, many with only of fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income, are not riddled with this sensationalistic weekly drama over cuts.
I am absolutely 'intrigued' to know who these Councils are that have only a fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income? I'm afraid to say your post is by far the most ridiculous I have ever read on here. You clearly either do not gave a clue or are being deliberately provocative.
New Forest, Test Valley & Eastleigh have less than half Southampton's income. They cope with the cuts along with Hampshire (big income for big population) without spitting out their dummy ever week.
well said good-gosh,quite agree.

thinklikealocal says...
6:13pm Sun 13 Jan 13

lisa whitemore wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
thinklikealocal wrote:
good-gosh wrote:
Why is it that Southampton seems to be the only local authority for miles around that regularly threatens to cut support to those most deserving? Other authorities, many with only of fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income, are not riddled with this sensationalistic weekly drama over cuts.
I am absolutely 'intrigued' to know who these Councils are that have only a fraction of Southampton's vast wealth and income? I'm afraid to say your post is by far the most ridiculous I have ever read on here. You clearly either do not gave a clue or are being deliberately provocative.
New Forest, Test Valley & Eastleigh have less than half Southampton's income. They cope with the cuts along with Hampshire (big income for big population) without spitting out their dummy ever week.
well said good-gosh,quite agree.
The Council's you mention are District Councils. They do not provide. The same services. They don't even have a children's services dept! HCC are cutting children's centres etc. I'm sorry but your post is ill informed rubbish.

good-gosh says...
6:53pm Sun 13 Jan 13

The Echo report is about a total wipe-out, not some modest reduction.

thinklikealocal says...
7:01pm Sun 13 Jan 13

good-gosh wrote:
The Echo report is about a total wipe-out, not some modest reduction.
Oh, so The Echo is the bible now is it? Have you not noticed that the 'anti Labour' Echo reports everything the current Administration is doing in Southampton as a disaster? Truth is these cuts are inevitable following the huge cuts central govt (Con/LibbDem) are forcing on Councils. If you want to truly contribute to the debate, tell us, if this service is kept, which service would you like to see cut?

good-gosh says...
7:29pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Echo is anti-labour? Never noticed, but quite understandable.

thinklikealocal says...
8:17pm Sun 13 Jan 13

good-gosh wrote:
Echo is anti-labour? Never noticed, but quite understandable.
So, come on then, which service would you like to see cut as an alternative? By god, the very heart of local government is being ripped out, the implications for the most vulnerable, and for communities as a whole in the future is quite frankly bleak. The nation (you included) is sleepwalking into this disaster. Truth is, you have absolutely no idea what local govt us, or what it does. You have been brainwashed by the Con/Dems!

good-gosh says...
9:10pm Sun 13 Jan 13

I've had a look at the SCC website. Unlike other council sites I have looked at, there is no link to budgets under their letter index for B. I poked about on their site for a while and stumbled on a few wordy references about how difficult everything is, but found no concise table of costs, so I gave up, assuming that we are not supposed to get to the bottom of anything. In the absence of such detail, I would revert to cold suggestions, as follows: Cut capital spending, non-essential maintenance, council consumption and workforce overtime. That should cut a big lump out of the budget for a few years.

thinklikealocal says...
9:24pm Sun 13 Jan 13

good-gosh wrote:
I've had a look at the SCC website. Unlike other council sites I have looked at, there is no link to budgets under their letter index for B. I poked about on their site for a while and stumbled on a few wordy references about how difficult everything is, but found no concise table of costs, so I gave up, assuming that we are not supposed to get to the bottom of anything. In the absence of such detail, I would revert to cold suggestions, as follows: Cut capital spending, non-essential maintenance, council consumption and workforce overtime. That should cut a big lump out of the budget for a few years.
Erm, front page of the website, latest news, budget proposals/consultati
on. As I thought, you can't see what is staring you in the face. The cuts you suggest either weren't there to be made or were made years ago. What the hell is Council consumption?

good-gosh says...
9:28pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Look, my friend. I don’t have an office with a clock tower housing a staff of hundreds to work their budget out. If I did, it would have been done and dusted in a month, one year in advance.

thinklikealocal says...
9:41pm Sun 13 Jan 13

Not if you didn't know what your income was going to be till a few weeks ago :) The more you post, the clearer it becomes how little you know :)

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree