WE’VE now had a couple of days to digest the news that one of our main charities is currently working out how it is going to operate with around 30% less funding from the Government.
So, what have we learned? Firstly, let’s deal with the word “overspend” which regretfully found its way into the government’s communications on the topic yesterday. When challenged on it by the Jersey Employment Trust, the Minister swiftly accepted it wasn’t precise, as the sum in question (around £800k) would actually be better described as, “…agreed top-up funding to account for increasing demand and the pressures of inflation”. In other words, JET was spending what was agreed.
Breaking that down, it tells us firstly that this is not a new issue. And following the path a little further, it also suggests that the fundamental problem of delivering the required services within the main budget provided is a problem which has remained unresolved for a while; instead, it seems it has been dealt with simply by regular funding “top-ups”. Until, of course, it wasn’t.
It also suggests that the Government was well aware that demand for JET’s services was increasing, and it clearly knew that inflation was driving up the costs still further; put simply, it knew that tension was steadily, and rapidly, building. Where was the issue going? What was the plan, as we must assume it wasn’t for it to erupt this week with 38 jobs being put at risk, and apparently, up to half the 516 people supported by JET potentially being helped by other branches of government instead?
We’re told that discussions continue around long-term funding, with the implication that some of the services provided by JET could be delivered more cheaply, or perhaps are unnecessary? The Minister expressed it thus, saying her team have been “working with JET to understand their client base and whether there is any duplication with existing services, to ensure people are provided the best targeted support they require.”
Those discussions have apparently been going on for a year – so presumably there is clarity, somewhere, on exactly what duplication the Minister’s team might have in mind, and how that might match up against an “agreed top-up” of around £800k.
What is clear is that the demand for JET’s services was increasing, and that the cost of providing those services was also going up; but the pressure that all put on the available funding remained unresolved.
Readers may be forgiven for wondering whether other local charities are in exactly the same boat.
