A council has come under fire for its handling of a vital lifeline service to the elderly and vulnerable after officers declared it was at a high risk of failing.
Great Yarmouth Borough Council (GYBC) has said it urgently needs to cut its in-house Alarm Receiving Centre and switch to a private firm due to staffing shortages reaching critical levels.
The planned switch was intended to take place in 2025 following a consultation period but it has been brought forward as an "emergency" and will be decided by the Conservative-controlled cabinet on Thursday.
But critics have accused the council of "mismanagement" after failing to advertise for the vacant posts for nine months and fear it is being pushed through without proper consideration.
GYBC has intended to cut the service and switch to Norwich-based Careline 365 ahead of the switch to digital phone lines in 2025, arguing it would be too expensive to change its current alarm systems.
The service already runs at a financial loss, with the change expected to generate £200,000 in savings annually.
At a scrutiny meeting on Tuesday, it was revealed that the council was aware of the problems a year ago but it has been claimed that even the leader of the council, Carl Smith, did not know that it was in an emergency situation until recent weeks.
Ivan Murray-Smith, Conservative councillor for Lothingland in Yarmouth, said: "I am concerned how this has been sprung on us.
"It sounds to me like a catastrophic failure in risk management and it should not have got to this position where all of a sudden emergency measures are being used to push it through."
Officers defended the handling of the service saying they had struggled to recruit staff for the highly-skilled but low-paying role for the last five years due to the unsociable hours.
They said recent retirements had led to the team to fall to only five people which triggered the call for emergency action, with the threat of the system failing causing one official to "lose sleep at night".
In addition, the current analogue equipment currently used had begun to fail.
"I'm sitting here tonight to tell you that we are carrying a severe level of risk which we are not comfortable with, hence why this has been brought forward" said one officer.
But it became apparent that the council had not advertised for vacant positions since March 2023 and current relief staff have complained they have been offered very few shifts, despite wanting to take more hours.
READ MORE: Backlash over council's plans to cut funding for lifeguards at Norfolk's busiest beaches
Trevor Wainwright, leader of the Labour group said: "Why have these critical roles not been advertised?
"Great Yarmouth has a high unemployment rate, recruiting staff should be easier. People stocking shelves at supermarkets work unsociable hours but they do it.
"There are people out there who are desperate for employment but this council doesn’t seem to be bothered. It seems to be sleep-walking into getting rid of this service."
Councillor Michael Jeal also highlighted that other roles in the planning department had been offered a £12,000 signing-on bonus and queried why the council was unable to offer a similar incentive to help with the recruitment issues.
Unison secretary Jonathan Dunning, who spoke on behalf of the staff, said: "The current workforce is not being utilised fully.
"There is a relief worker here who has seen her shifts cut in half.
"The decision is being rushed, denying the opportunity for proper evaluation."
Following a narrow vote which saw six Conservative members vote against the proposal, the scrutiny committee agreed to recommend to cabinet that it revert back to the 14-month consultation period previously agreed before it made a decision on the cut to the alarm service.
The final decision will be made at a special cabinet meeting on Thursday.
Comments: Our rules
We want our comments to be a lively and valuable part of our community - a place where readers can debate and engage with the most important local issues. The ability to comment on our stories is a privilege, not a right, however, and that privilege may be withdrawn if it is abused or misused.
Please report any comments that break our rules.
Read the rules here