More Why Government Doesn't Matter

[ChrisJones 7,975]

Your council tax at work!

 

Council Fraud Cost £178m Last Year - Audit Commission

 

 

"Councils and taxpayers are losing £2bn a year from this criminal activity. By tackling fraud, councils can help save money to protect front-line services and keep council tax down for law-abiding citizens."

 

 

Birmingham City Council's Children's Department Could Be Taken Over By The Department For Education

 

 

The department has been rated as inadequate by Ofsted since 2009, a judgement inspectors reiterated last year.

 

 

Pay them for the service. Pay them again to fix the theft, and fraud, of the money.

 

Time for a change?

[Suzy Ross 236]

Don't worry mate, Britians problems will be solved at the next general election. Just put a cross next to your favourite colour, red, green, blue..... Problem solved.

[WILF 51,349]

In any council you have rank amatures making decisions on millions of pounds worth of public money, it's the inconsistency that baffles me.......one council in Essex spent £18 million getting some travellers off of green belt land (which they had bought and paid for by the way) but then grant permission for 800 houses all over some other green belt !!!!........tell me the logic?

 

It's either green belt or it isn't in my book

 

Of course it's all to do with revenue stream, 800 houses paying council tax so they have more money to piss away is better than 30 travellers paying nothing in the councils mind.

 

Utter bollocks

[Suzy Ross 236]

They couldn't have greased their palms enough wilf. No such thing as green belt anymore, it just stops the common man from building. Big building firm with some cash to back hand those in charge....... Sorted. If your building 800 houses, what's £100 from each one built going to bother you.

[Born Hunter 17,965]

Okay, so lets put this into perspective as all things financial are relative;

 

How much is total Council income anually? Only figure I can find is £136B, but I'm open to any others?

 

So the % of that used fraudulently is only 0.13%. Is 0.13% fraud a lot? Obviously any is too much but lets be realistic with our expectations.

[ChrisJones 7,975]

Fair comment, BH. Nobody is expecting zero corruption but just to throw a little quote from the article...

 

Some 79 district councils found no corruption at all, while 76% of instances were reported by just 25% of councils.

The total number of frauds detected was down 14% on the previous year, but the cash involved fell by just 1%. This meant the average loss from each case rose by 15% to £1,664.

 

Commission chairman Jeremy Newman questioned the patchy nature of detection across England.

 

He said: "If the other 75% councils had found as much, we would see much higher overall rates of fraud detection.

 

"Not to detect a single case of non-benefit fraud does raise concerns about the priorities and resources in those councils to tackle fraud.

 

"I would urge all councils to review their local policies to ensure they are doing all they can to detect and record fraud cases."

 

It's woefully unreported. The status quo needs to be kept, and they will brush it under the carpet. Fraud is to be expected, sadly. The problem, in my humble opinion, is the framework that they use to do it, to remain undetected, and with zero accountability, if they get caught on the off chance.

 

I don't think it's unrealistic to demand tighter control, on the public sector, by the people who pay their wages in the first place.

Edited November 15, 2013 by ChrisJones