🧾🔍Falkirk, Stirling and Clackmannanshire Councils approved a budget in March 2023 that looked duller than a damp ballot paper — but beneath the sterile spreadsheets lay a masterclass in polite omission, bureaucratic backflips, and staff-stretching worthy of a Cirque du Soleil audition.
🪙 “Efficiency Savings” or Just Starving the Service in a Fancy Suit?
Ah yes, the magic trick every public body loves to perform: make the money disappear, then clap politely as everything keeps going — just slower, thinner, and more exhausted. 🪄🎩
Let’s be clear. When the Valuation Joint Board said it was spending £3 million on “services,” it wasn’t for golden printers or ergonomic beanbags. No — 79% of that money was spent on humans, because the humans are the service. Every property valued, every electoral roll updated, every appeal handled — it’s people, not pixies, doing the job.
So when they “saved money,” they didn’t shave fluff off the top.
They shaved the actual service down to the bone.
But that’s not how it was presented. Instead, the councils were handed a neatly ironed budget, with just enough strategic vagueness to avoid admitting that quality and capacity were being quietly traded for the illusion of balance. The magic words? Vacancy management, restructuring, premises relocation — all code for “doing more with fewer people until something breaks.” 🫠
The known pressures? Gigantic.
The matched funding? Missing.
The staffing assumptions? Conservative.
The actual risk? Red alert.
And the reserves? Already spoken for — because plugging gaps with rainy-day money is apparently the new norm, even in a monsoon.
Let’s call it what it is:
Not mismanagement — just chronic underfunding with a polite smile.
Like handing someone a candle, blowing it out, then applauding them for still trying to read.
⚠️ Challenges⚠️
How long can services keep running on fumes before we stop pretending this is sustainable? Why are councils agreeing to budgets built on whisper-thin margins and magical thinking? And most importantly: why are staff expected to absorb the consequences of cuts that no one dares to name out loud? 😤
🔥 Got a take? Drop it in the comments on the blog (not just Facebook, you rebels).
💬 Let us know how you’d explain a “2.7% reduction in expenditure” to someone waiting on a property appeal decision for six months.
👇 Comment, like, and share — especially if you’ve ever been told to “do more with less.”
The best clapbacks and insights will be featured in the next issue of the magazine. 🗞️💣
Chameleon Magazine 
Leave a comment