TWO years after boasting how well it was doing - and bragging about how it was one of the few local councils in the wider region not to increase council tax as a matter of policy - the wheel has turned full circle for Thurrock's ruling Conservative group this evening (Wednesday, 24 February) when it will go cap in hand to the public of Thurrock seeking a near five per cent increase in council tax.

The debate around the increase promises to be intense – and possibly fractious.

The Conservatives have enough of a majority to force through the rise of 4.99 per cent, which is opposed by Labour and some independent councillors.

There is a whisper in political circles that some Tories may rebel. If so key to the outcome is likely to be the stance of a number of Conservative members who jumped ships to join the ruling group.

Several were elected on a direct mandate not to increase council tax, but to reduce it.

Among those are councillors like Stanford-le-Hope and Corringham Town's Shane Ralph whose election message to residents last year was to cut council tax by ten per cent in the next five years.

However, he has tried to justify his apparent change of heart since his political switch by saying: "One thing I have learnt during my time as a local councillor is that there's a big difference in what you can say when you don't have the responsibility of actually doing it."

Another turncoat is Cllr Jack Duffin, one the architects of the Independents' election strategy to cut council tax that saw Cllr Ralph elected. Last year he stood in the chamber and said: "I have never voted for a council tax increase in this chamber and I am not about to start now.

"In politics it is so easy to point a finger at those in charge and say you should have done better and hold yourself completely of no blame. Whichever role you have in this council and whatever party you are in, if the answer is raising council tax we have failed our residents. It is as simple as that."

Conservative group leader Cllr Rob Gledhill says: "Tonight's meeting will be the most important budget in the history of Thurrock Council as a unitary authority. The pandemic has seen an unprecedented squeeze on the council's income and increased Covid-related costs.

"The Conservative group will deliver a responsible budget which protects essential services and invests in the care of the most vulnerable in our community, at a time when they are most at risk

"With the Conservative group thinking beyond the headlines and electioneering this evening, it is the time for all other councillors to do likewise. However, at a time when everyone in the country is working together to fight the virus, the Labour Party look set to play politics with the pandemic and all those who will feel its effects in the future.

"It's quite clear that a few potential votes mean more to Thurrock Labour than protecting vulnerable residents from the consequences of the pandemic."

Yet Cllr Geldhill's claim that the council is massively out of pocket because of Covid doesn't quite sit right with government figures.

Up to January 15, records show Thurrock had received £23 million from the government, while £28.5 million from the government passed to local businesses in the area.

Almost £2.5 million has come from central funds for rapid testing and two tranches of infection control funding.

All the work carried out on roads and pavements across the borough, including the implementation of speedbumps as a measure to encourage walking and cycling came straight out of government grant funding.

That has prompted Labour leader Cllr John Kent to say: "While nobody could have foreseen this pandemic or its consequences any effects Covid-19 may have had on the council finances has been completely overshadowed by the Conservatives' reckless borrowing and general financial incompetence."

Critics of Cllr Gledhill will also undoubtedly question why he has made no mention of the significant losses sustained by the council in playing the stockmarkets with deals that went wrong. Though the council has claimed an income of around £30 million, he and his colleagues have steadfastly refused to comment on deals that have gone wrong costing tens of millions of pounds, controversial brokers who have been paid millions and national criticism of the council's strategy in financial circles.

Even the government has come out and told the authority to cap its risk-taking. A move confirmed by the council last month.

Another likely tack that opposition councillors will take when challenging the council's financial strategy is its decision to freeze filling many posts, while at the same time building up a raft of highly paid senior officers with goal-plated pension deals.

While the council has set up plans to cut allowances and earning potential for lower paid staff like bin collectors, street sweepers and care workers – highly paid officers have pocketed bucketloads of cash.

At the last official count there were 194 staff members paid more than £50,000 a year and of those, around 20 earn more than £100,000. The chief executive's salary is in the £200,000 bracket"

Focus may also be turned on the council's controversial £10 million civic office extension currently under construction.

It has been widely criticised and unwelcomed by residents and a majority of council members, (including current Tories who switched Abbie Akinbokin, Allen Mayes, David Potter, Shane Ralph and Luke Spillman) voted against it and there was an emphatic 26-16 majority not to proceed with it because of the financial climate.

But the ruling Conservative cabinet pressed ahead regardless and committed to the spend that, given the council's recent track record of managing major projects, may yet turn out to be a lot more than the £10 million budgeted.

Related stories:

Crisis begins to bite

Genius or architect of disaster?

"We fixed the roof"