Why the North East has been left behind

I have a great amount of respect for the leader of council, unlike some in his party, but to hear him complain about the state of devolution in the region, when he and 5 other Labour council leaders completely failed to agree a meaningful devolution deal 5 years ago is a bit galling. That is why we have been left behind, Councillor Phil Hall told Newcastle City Council last night .

I have stood here for several years now, in these budget meetings, and urged the council to fix the distribution of investment in this city. In the figures in this budget, and in the minds of residents, over £100 million a year is invested by the council each year and all the money is spent on the city centre.

We don't need to look very far. Multiple re-developments at Haymarket, the refurbishment of the civic centre, new advertising screens, Blackett street, Grey street, capital money is poured into the city centre. By contrast, where people live in this city, we now have massive backlogs in road maintenance, pavement maintenance, tree maintenance, high streets are under-utilised and in disrepair, bins overflowing.

We must redress the balance. That is why we, in amendment 1, are proposing the instatement of area committees, ensuring that the extra money for neighbourhood services is actually spent in local neighbourhoods, and that decision making is devolved out of the city centre. Strategic thinking driven by local priorities and not failed by an increasingly distant Labour cabinet.

Under Labour, the funding for individual wards has been slashed to almost nothing, and we still have no clue if or when officer support to wards will be reinstated. We want to see this trend reversed, and this is a realistic first step in that direction, with areas controlling significant enough funding to make a real difference to our residents. Most admin costs are easily met by removing ridiculous party political motivated cabinet positions introduced by Labour, for Labour.

This is about fairness. A fairness that we must extend to blue badge residents in this city. We are an inclusive city that charges disabled people for essential travel when we don't need to. I cannot imagine many, if any, residents would disagree with 10p extra for their parking, so blue badge holders don't have to pay. Liberal Democrats, again, would immediately reverse this unfair Labour decision.

The ruling party will say "we need more money, it's all the government's fault". I agree that the government's settlement remains woefully inadequate, but political choices have been made, and the Liberal Democrats have demonstrated again and again that there is another way.

We recently proposed capital spending to deal with the near £200m road and pavement backlog, a proven scheme in other authorities that has been rejected. I must caution colleagues what voting against our amendments tonight actually means:

It means a vote against devolution, and in favour of transparent, party political appointments.

It means a vote against support for jobs through SME seeding.

It means a vote against new revenue to help protect local bus services.

It means, disgracefully, a vote to allow blue badge holders to pay for cheaper parking for all.

The choice is yours.