Police boss calls on council to keep key domestic abuse job

Police boss calls on council to keep key domestic abuse job

Police boss calls on council to keep key domestic abuse job

First published in Local News

THE new Essex Police & Crime Commissioner has criticised plans to scrap a key figure in Southend’s fight against domestic abuse.

Southend Council wants to do away with its domestic abuse partnership manager in a bid to cut costs but Nick Alston voiced his concerns during his first ever “public engagement” meeting held at the town’s civic centre.

It comes after he revealed a four-year policing and crime plan which has tackling domestic abuse at its heart.

On hearing the role was in jeopardy, Mr Alston said: “I’m disappointed to hear it sounds as though we will be losing that in Southend. “I will certainly be arguing against that.”

He said he had been trying to find money specifically for more domestic violence advisors, as there are 44,000 victims of domestic abuse in Essex every year.

The role of domestic abuse partnership manager, held by Althea Cribb, is financed by Southend Council. They say scrapping it will save £105,000 from the budget.

However, Simon Ford, Southend Council’s community safety partnership manager, said the loss of the job was not a done deal. He said: “That’s just a proposal at the moment. There’s a whole consultation going through.”

Lib Dem councillor Graham Longley said they were in talks about whether there were other options.

To have your say on the police and crime plan go to http://www.essex.pcc.police.uk/2013/01/the-draft-police-and-crime-plan-for-essex/

Comments (8)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

10:51am Mon 4 Feb 13

stopmoaning1 says...

I expect a good percentage of the 44,000 victims will be in Southend which means that Althea Cribb is obviously not doing a very good job so therefore should go. If the union reps jobs went aswell (rather than funding halved) that would be even more of a saving
I expect a good percentage of the 44,000 victims will be in Southend which means that Althea Cribb is obviously not doing a very good job so therefore should go. If the union reps jobs went aswell (rather than funding halved) that would be even more of a saving stopmoaning1
  • Score: 0

12:09pm Mon 4 Feb 13

GrumpyofLeigh says...

"Partnership manager". Sounds like the sort of nonsense found only in the public sector - that can go.
"Partnership manager". Sounds like the sort of nonsense found only in the public sector - that can go. GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 0

1:23pm Mon 4 Feb 13

emcee says...

If this post is important, why not cut the salary instead (along with the salary of all the overpaid managers). If this post was not important why was it created in the first place? This is the bit I do not get. Why create posts in the first place if the council could afford to get rid of them on a whim?
If the EPCC thinks the council should keep the post and he thinks it's crucial as part of his crime plan then Essex Police should pay for that person. Why should it come out of council budgets?
If this post is important, why not cut the salary instead (along with the salary of all the overpaid managers). If this post was not important why was it created in the first place? This is the bit I do not get. Why create posts in the first place if the council could afford to get rid of them on a whim? If the EPCC thinks the council should keep the post and he thinks it's crucial as part of his crime plan then Essex Police should pay for that person. Why should it come out of council budgets? emcee
  • Score: 0

2:22pm Mon 4 Feb 13

GrumpyofLeigh says...

'Cos the post probably does a good slug of work you might think falls to the Police but without it appearing in their budgets: thats why they are so keen.
'Cos the post probably does a good slug of work you might think falls to the Police but without it appearing in their budgets: thats why they are so keen. GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 0

4:54pm Mon 4 Feb 13

stopmoaning1 says...

GrumpyofLeigh wrote:
'Cos the post probably does a good slug of work you might think falls to the Police but without it appearing in their budgets: thats why they are so keen.
That’s a worthless argument. We pay for the post either through Council Tax or the Police Authority portion of our Council Tax bill. Have a look at your Council Tax bill and you’ll see how we pay either way
[quote][p][bold]GrumpyofLeigh[/bold] wrote: 'Cos the post probably does a good slug of work you might think falls to the Police but without it appearing in their budgets: thats why they are so keen.[/p][/quote]That’s a worthless argument. We pay for the post either through Council Tax or the Police Authority portion of our Council Tax bill. Have a look at your Council Tax bill and you’ll see how we pay either way stopmoaning1
  • Score: 0

5:43pm Mon 4 Feb 13

GrumpyofLeigh says...

re SM1 - the arguments for scrapping the job are separate from the Police's arguments here which are about which public sector body coughs up. Ask the police to pay for it if it is so important and the answer will doubtless be "no".
At my end, I dont wish to pay for anything called "partnership manager" - its a wishy-washy bit of public sector nonsense brought about because a process clearly doesnt work and needs coordination. Thats regardless of whether that goes through the police element of local tax or council bit.
re SM1 - the arguments for scrapping the job are separate from the Police's arguments here which are about which public sector body coughs up. Ask the police to pay for it if it is so important and the answer will doubtless be "no". At my end, I dont wish to pay for anything called "partnership manager" - its a wishy-washy bit of public sector nonsense brought about because a process clearly doesnt work and needs coordination. Thats regardless of whether that goes through the police element of local tax or council bit. GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 0

8:06pm Mon 4 Feb 13

stopmoaning1 says...

GrumpyofLeigh wrote:
re SM1 - the arguments for scrapping the job are separate from the Police's arguments here which are about which public sector body coughs up. Ask the police to pay for it if it is so important and the answer will doubtless be "no".
At my end, I dont wish to pay for anything called "partnership manager" - its a wishy-washy bit of public sector nonsense brought about because a process clearly doesnt work and needs coordination. Thats regardless of whether that goes through the police element of local tax or council bit.
Yes, you've just said the same as me. i don't want to pay for it either through the SBC Council Tax or the Council Tax contribution to the Police Authority
[quote][p][bold]GrumpyofLeigh[/bold] wrote: re SM1 - the arguments for scrapping the job are separate from the Police's arguments here which are about which public sector body coughs up. Ask the police to pay for it if it is so important and the answer will doubtless be "no". At my end, I dont wish to pay for anything called "partnership manager" - its a wishy-washy bit of public sector nonsense brought about because a process clearly doesnt work and needs coordination. Thats regardless of whether that goes through the police element of local tax or council bit.[/p][/quote]Yes, you've just said the same as me. i don't want to pay for it either through the SBC Council Tax or the Council Tax contribution to the Police Authority stopmoaning1
  • Score: 0

10:17pm Mon 4 Feb 13

GrumpyofLeigh says...

You could have said that first time round
You could have said that first time round GrumpyofLeigh
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

Send us your news, pictures and videos

Most read stories

Local Info

Enter your postcode, town or place name

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