Thursday 31 March 2011

Cutting Chepstow Jobs Is An Expensive Political Game

Hidden away an obscure Home Office publication last month is a tiny financial detail.  It wasn't even announced to the House of Commons during George Osbourne's budget last week.  You may be forgiven for thinking that it is insignificant, a minor financial footnote.  It's not.  It's a bombshell.  What is more, it effects huge swathes of Monmouthshire and will cost the area jobs, prosperity and incomes.  The worst part of it is that it's all ideological.

The Forensic Science Service (FSS) has supplied evidence in many high profile criminal cases in recent years.  Such evidence has been key to convictions being secured in some of the most gruesome crimes committed in modern times, from Soham to Ipswich.  Despite these crucial successes, however, the Conservative led Government has announced that the service will close.  What they have not said publicly, though, is that closing the service will cost £70 million pounds.  That's right, £70 million to cut 1,600 jobs across the country, including 166 in Chepstow.

Before the last election, the Labour Government became increasingly alarmed at the costs the FSS was piling up.  Several ideas were put forward for debate, one of which was the closure of the FSS.  Ministers studied each proposal in detail, against a backdrop of the FSS losing a reported £2 million per month.  Closing the service was quite rightly considered and quite rightly ruled out.  Instead, a 'rationalisation' plan was put into place, which concentrated on how the service could save as much money as possible without harming service provision.  By consulting with management, Unions and service users, a plan was put into place which would cut the losses and maintain the FSS crucial role in the criminal justice system.

The change of Government last May, however, has dealt a severe blow to the FSS.  The Conservative led Government has announced that they would be axing the FSS, with it's functions either being privatised or bought in from the existing private sector.  Tory Ministers seized on the figure of £2 million per month to portray the service as wasteful and inefficient.  No mention was made of the restructuring plan and the savings that were coming on stream.  The Tories were determined to press ahead with another ideological privatisation, going further than Margaret Thatcher had ever dreamed.  The closure was dressed up as necessary, in relation to savings and efficiency.  But thanks to the obscure Home Office document, such claims can be seen as being a complete sham.

In trying to privatise the FSS, the Government are putting 166 people in Chepstow on the dole.  Add on the knock on effects, of 166 fewer families with incomes, spending less money in their local community and the problems grows ever bigger.  Does it have to happen?  No.  A thousand times no.  Why is it happening?  Because this Government is determined to privatise wherever it can - and as we recently saw with Nick Clegg, they will play fast and loose with the truth when trying to justify their actions.

Sneaking out unpopular news like this is no better than the 'burying bad news' scandal under Labour.  I condemned it then and I will condemn it now.  Politics must be transparent, especially where public money and people's jobs are concerned.  By trying to hide the huge cost of closing the FSS in an obscure document, the Government are taking us for fools.  Their decisions to close public services for political reasons and blame the deficit is low.  Hiding the true costs of their actions is lower still.

Thursday 24 March 2011

Tories Feed The Future On Starvation Rations

At the risk of sounding like Witney Houston, the future of Wales and the rest of the UK can be found in school, Sixth Form, FE and University classrooms up and down the country.  Nurturing talent is a long process and needs time, patience and, above all else, proper resources if it is to flourish.  Occasionally a green shoot can be spotted in a desert, but most of the time anything that grows needs the right environment if it is to reach its full potential.

Thirty years ago, Britain suffered from an extraordinary attack.  Before the Argentinian Junta even contemplated invading the Falklands, young British people were pounded mercilessly by vicious public spending cuts that damaged their primary and secondary education, closed their colleges and decimated their higher education funding.  The result of this was the biggest waste of a generations talent ever seen in this country.  Margaret Thatcher built a boom on sand, with financial traders and merchant bankers enjoying a champagne lifestyle.  At the same time, our engineers, IT innovators and inventors had to either look elsewhere for work or cope with research and development budgets slashed to ribbons.  The result of this was that innovative British companies like Acorn were starved of funding then subsequently dwarfed and swallowed up by giants such as IBM.  Fast forward to today and we face the same situation again.  Either David Cameron is determined to take up Thatcher's unfinished business, or it is an act of class warfare by the Old Etonians, trying to prevent as many working class children from getting on as possible.

As our focus shifts once more from domestic policy to military action in the Middle East, we are reminded that, whatever one may think of Tony Blair's intervention in Iraq, we can also remember that he presided over the largest increase in University places on record.  Comprehensively educated young people at last had a real chance of going on to earn a degree rather than find themselves at the back of a queue made up predominantly of privately educated pupils.  One of the reasons the staying on rate increased so dramatically was EMA, the Educational Maintenance Allowance.  No longer did young people have to give up their hopes and aspirations in order to bring a few vital extra pounds into the household.  At last, they could afford to study safe in the knowledge that were able to afford their bus fares, lunches and stationary.

Now EMA is to be no more.  This ConDem government clearly believes that 16 to 18 year olds are to blame for the country's economic ills and have punished them by removing their meagre allowance.  As for those University students, they are even more to blame - triple their fees and make sure they finish their degree £45,000 in debt.

Naturally, Monmouth's M.P. David Davies is more than happy about this.  He has stated, on at least two occasions, that too many people are going to University, insinuating that current students study 'Mickey Mouse' courses and having an 'easy life'.  If such ignorant and misleading remarks are typical of Monmouth's Conservatives, no wonder voters are moving away from them in their droves.

Of course students do not have an easy life and it is incredibly crass and out of touch to suggest otherwise.  University life is different now.  Modern students are acutely aware of the need to compete in the job market and are far more switched on about life than students of previous eras.  That is why pass rates have soared and drop-out rates have fallen in recent years.  Students know what is important for them.  They need bone headed remarks like those of Mr Davies like they need - well, like they need a £45,000 debt.

Going back to my Witney-esque thoughts at the beginning, I will admit to being slightly confused about one thing.  We are constantly told that Bankers bonuses are justified because if they were not paid them, they would go off and work elsewhere.  But surely, if we want the best young brains to work in this country, the same logic should apply?  Obviously not.  The best Dentists, Chemists, Writers, Designers, Planners and Economists will all have to pay more and more rather than enjoy fat cat rewards.  Perhaps the logic is that, by the time they graduate, they will barely be able to afford a tank of petrol, let alone a ticket to leave the country.

Friday 11 March 2011

Charity Begins At Home - But Ends At The Bank

There once was a time when the sight of someone rattling a charity tin in the town centre or the pub would send your hands delving into your pocket or purse to fish out any loose change you might have. You knew that your money would be going to a good cause, be it Guide Dogs, Dr Barnardo or Oxfam. Most charities relied on this form of donation and I cannot remember anyone ever objecting to it.

Of course, methods changed as times changed. We are more likely to set up a Direct Debit to give Save the Children or the RNLI our five pounds per month these days, but the principle remains the same. People in Monmouthshire are like any other part of the country. We want to help fund charities and we want our money to make a difference in our chosen area.

Recently, however, a far more sinister force has entered into the equation. The so-called 'Big Society' has cast a shadow over the future of charitable donations and is seriously threatening the goodwill of the British people. Let me explain.

David Cameron has a Big Idea (which admittedly not many people understand). It involves services which were previously run in the public sector being managed by collections of volunteers, charities and 'third sector' groups. The state will not fund these services in the way it did - it will be up to the groups themselves to finance them. However, 'Call me Dave' isn't going to allow these groups to fend for themselves - he's going to set up a bank to help them.

Now, I know what you're thinking, what a wonderful idea. Given people's current attitude towards financial institutions, setting up a new bank is a bit like eating your own foot. It makes no sense and people will think there's something seriously wrong with you. Perhaps David Cameron is hoping that the Big Society Bank will generously fund the Conservative Party like so many others do!

There is something far more sinister behind these negotiations, though, something which shows the Conservative Party's real aims and desires.

The 'Big Society Bank' is funded by what we know as 'Clearing Banks' - High Street Banks, in other words. These banks are commercial entities - set up to make a profit. Recent history has shown us that they seem to be able to privatise any profit and nationalise any debt. If they make money, it funds massive bonuses for their bosses. If they make losses, we pick up the tab.

The negotiations about the 'Big Society Bank' culminated with a massive cave-in from Chancellor George Osborne. He agreed to allow the banks to charge commercial interest rates to any groups borrowing money to run services previously in the public sector. While this may not sound too horrific, consider this scenario:

Lets say Monmouth has a Youth Group called 'YP1'. Lets imagine that this used to be funded by the County Council, but funding has been withdrawn because of Central Government cuts. A registered charity called 'Young People Action' come forward and offer to run the group. To do this, YPA need to borrow £200,000 from the 'Big Society Bank'. YPA are given the loan, but charged an interest rate of 5%. Over the two years of the project, the banks charge YPA an extra £10,000 in interest. This is £10,000 which is not going into helping the young people of Monmouth, but into the profits of the banks. Even worse than this, YPA raise money from donations. The people of Monmouth are reaching into their pockets to give to charity, just to see part of that cash siphoned off to boost the profits of banks. The ultimate indignity is that many banks use their profits to pay obscene bonuses to their senior management, such as that which was widely condemned as 'pure greed' earlier this week.

In this scenario, for every £1 dropped into the charity tin, 5p goes straight into the pockets of the bankers. Of course, there is no 'YP1' and no 'YPA'. They are made up. But the scenario isn't. It is very, very real. This is not a soothsayer-style warning, but an accurate description of what is going to happen.

Of course 'The Big Society' is not just a cover for cuts in public services. It's also a cover for banks to make excessive profits, pay eye-watering bonuses and allow them to make more huge donations to the Conservative Party. We shouldn't be surprised. The Tory Government is constantly telling us that the defecit is all Labour's fault and allowing the banks to escape the blame that is rightfully theirs. In return, the banks are going to escape the regulation they deserve and be allowed to run riot once again. With this amount of back-scratching happening, I'd be very surprised if anyone in the banks or the Tory party have any fingernails left.