Today's column in the Greenock Telegraph...

As readers will know, the Council has been undertaking the most wide-ranging public budget consultation that we have ever conducted. The consultation is now closed and the feedback we receive from the community will inform the difficult decisions that elected members will ultimately have to make.

In parallel a cross-party members’ budget working group has been going through the savings proposals from officers in great detail. We have met on four occasions so far to scrutinise and challenge these proposals. Our most recent meeting lasted nearly five hours, which gives an indication of how seriously we take our responsibilities to the local community.

I have been a Councillor now for a combined total of 19 years and been through many challenging budget processes. This one is certainly the most difficult I have faced to date.

The decisions that I and my Labour colleagues make will be informed by our election manifesto and by our socialist values and principles. As the great Welsh Socialist Aneurin Bevan said: “The language of priorities is the religion of socialism”.

It is relatively easy being a politician in times of plenty. It is in times of austerity that you really need to remember why you are involved in politics and - for me - why I am Labour politician.

I have been lobbied by a number of people, including local members of the Scottish Socialist Party, calling for ‘a no cuts budget’. Others have proposed that education should be excluded from any savings.

There is a legitimate argument that we should postpone some of the most difficult cuts by using reserves and sums we have set aside for other purposes to protect jobs and services for the another couple of years and that is something elected members are actively considering.

The down side is that this would reduce general economic activity and the number of private sector jobs the Council’s investment programme supports.

The difficulty with ring-fencing education is that any cuts would then fall disproportionately on other services, and in particular social work services for the most vulnerable people in our community.

A ‘no cuts budget’ could only be a short-term approach. The outlook for future years is no less bleak unless there is a willingness on the part of both the UK and Scottish Governments and taxpayers to fund the current level of local services. The outcome of May’s UK General Election will give some indication as to whether they are or not.

I did not come into local politics to cut jobs and services. My aim was to improve services and make Inverclyde a better place to live for my family and other people’s families.

If we are to face years of reduced funding, Inverclyde Council, in my opinion, is simply not sustainable in its current form. We will either have to share services with neighbouring councils and other public agencies on a significant scale or actively seek a voluntary merger with one or more Councils.

Protecting the vital services that my constituents rely on is more important than keeping a separate council in Inverclyde. Death by a thousand cuts is not a strategy that appeals to me.