CHRIS Cheetham doesn't argue with the fact that he could be about to become very unpopular.
In fact, he volunteers the statement that he will be the most hated man in Lancashire without prompt.
Why? Well, he is the man spearheading a change across his department which has sent unions into a spin and left staff staggered staff by its scale.
Last October, his department announced plans to close nurseries in favour of new family resource centres which target families with specific needs, rather than catering for people en masse.
That announcement was followed last month by the decision to make nursery and family centre staff apply for new posts under a new staff structure.
Inevitably, it will lead to redundancies.
Then, last week, the biggest bombshell. A plan to close all bar 13 of the 48 county-run OAP care homes.
Talk of petitions is rife for both the homes closures and the nursery closures.
So, there isn't a hint of sarcasm in his voice when Coun Cheetham says: "I'm sure I've become the most unpopular man in Lancashire."
But if that's the case, why do it?
"Things do have to change and I accept that change upsets people," he said.
"But we can't carry on as we are. We are in a position where more and more people want to stay in their homes and not go into residential care.
"We have to look at what we are spending and see if it can be spent in a better way.
"We can't start providing more home help without cutting something else. This isn't a cost measure, we aren't saving money. It needs to be done."
While that may bode well for the future -- groups like Age Concern and even UNISON union admit people want to stay in their homes -- big question marks hang over the future of the residents already in their homes.
Sat next to his director for social services, Pauline Oliver, Coun Cheetham said: "Many of the homes we are looking to close have a high vacancy rate which indicates to us that people may not want to live there.
"There are 9,000 places in care homes, private and public sector, across Lancashire and at any one time there can be a ten per cent vacancy rate.
"We aren't just going to ship people out to any old centre. We will pick places that meet our standards, meet government standards and are places people are happy with.
"In a way, we will manage the market. I am not ashamed to say that, because it will be in the interest of our residents.
"If the private homes don't like that, that isn't our problem."
Those Government standards are what has prompted the decision now, rather than in two years time.
The standards are set to rise in 2006, and the implications would be huge to the county council -- £14.5million huge.
It is money the county doesn't have. To bring the remaining 13 up to standard will cost between £5million and £9million -- money anticipated to be raised through the sale of the empty properties.
Coun Cheetham said: "People deserve a choice on whether they stay in not-for-profit or private homes. I accept that.
"Of course I do, which is why we are looking at bringing these homes up to scratch. We aren't just talking modernisation for modernisation's sake.
"These aren't decisions we take lightly because they affect a lot of people."
UNISON is very worried by the warning that the county will be seeking to bring the cost of its own care in line with the private sector -- currently some £60 a week cheaper.
Simply, he states: "We can't justify paying more."
But Frank Hessey, chairman of the Lancashire Care Association, says the move is wrong.
"The county council is planning to rely on us for five years and reduce the number of admissions per year to 600," he said.
"That's roughly one every care home. We can't cope and weren't even informed.
"This policy is too radical. I can see it ending up in old people spending more time in hospital because there are no care homes for them.
"It costs £2,000 a week to keep people in hospital, a basic bed and breakfast costs £280.
"Lancashire Social Services spends £270 a week at most buying private care home beds. That's what they think of old people.
"We cannot see how it can be anything but cost saving. It costs less to put pensioners in our homes than it does in their own.
"We know of people in their 90s coming out of hospital, being shunted into rehabilitation centres and then forced to live in their own homes instead.
"This is wrong and needs sorting quickly. Closing the residential homes will simply unite all the private homes against the council. They are ruining us."
At the other end of the age range, the future of the county's day nurseries has been decided. Several run by social services are to close, with others set to follow.
But while the logic of both initiatives appears obvious, it won't stop the protests, and Coun Cheetham knows that.
When the last set of residential homes closed in 1999, hundreds of people, some dressed as grim reapers, marched through Preston in anger at the plans.
Coun Cheetham said: "I will be unpopular but I do believe this is the best for the future. If people have alternatives, I want to hear them.
"That is what consultation is for. We can't go on as we are."
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 hereComments are closed on this article