May 09

Lets reach for the suicide pill

The recent elections were pretty bad for the Coalition government and especially the Lib Dems.

In Ipswich their vote collapsed and those Lib Dems who did vote seemed to switch to Labour whilst the majority of Tories stayed at home.

However even in Ipswich the Labour Party can take little comfort from its gains. With 70% of the electorate not bothering to vote, it is clear that the vast majority of voters support none of the above.

Most voters probably continue to support reducing the Public Sector deficit and accept the need for cuts in spending. However they also want to see signs of a return to some kind of economic growth and at least the prospect of a better future. They also want to see that everyone is sharing the pain equally and some of the Coalitions policy decisions such as the scrapping of the 50p tax rate hardly encourage that belief.

However the most depressing picture for most voters is the alternatives now being offered by all the main parties.

The Coalitions relaunch this week was a continuing picture of misery. Both David Cameron and Nick Clegg painted a future of cuts and more cuts. No Let Up in Tough Decisions

David Cameron said “I am afraid we can’t let up on the difficult decisions we have made to cut public spending and to get our deficit under control,” he said. “I know it is hard and difficult but when you have a debt problem the one thing you must not do is to keep adding endlessly to that debt.”

Deputy Nick Clegg said the economy could not be fixed “overnight” and the process could take many years.

By the end of their relaunch anyone could be forgiven from thinking that the future is a black hole of pain and misery.

But voters do not even have the alternative of a bright future from Labour.

As Ed Balls Labour Shadow Chancellor put it in January “My starting point is, I am afraid, we are going to have keep all these cuts. There is a big squeeze happening on budgets across the piece. The squeeze on defence spending, for instance, is £15bn by 2015. We are going to have to start from that being the baseline. At this stage, we can make no commitments to reverse any of that, on spending or on tax. So I am being absolutely clear about that.”

In an excellent blog by Brett Leppard in the Huffington post entitled Labour -What good are they he challenges the myth that Labour are offering a real alternative to the Coalition.

Yes it may be that they would make the cuts more slowly, but as Ed Balls knows only too well the current deficit was caused by the Labour Governments failure to control the economy in the latter years of their Government.

Indeed Ed Balls had intimate knowledge of those failings having spent a decade as Gordon Brown’s chief economic adviser.

So why should people trust Labour to deliver on the economy when they are offering broadly the same economic future as the Coalition.

So for voters, all three parties seem only to be offering a future vision of pain and suffering.

It is little wonder that voters don’t want to vote.

However as we are seeing in Europe as unemployment rockets above 20% in countries like Spain, voters expect their political leadership to offer some future hope of an economic improvement. If Governments in Europe fail both to deal with the deficit and to also offer some prospects of growth then voters will increasingly either refuse to vote or more worryingly switch to extremes like the Neo_Nazi Golden Dawn which polled 7% in Greek Elections at the weekend. Indeed history shows that the Great Depression of the 1930′s was a major factor in the rise of the Nazi party in Germany

It is not enough for the Coalition and the Labour Opposition is say there is no alternative to the cuts.

What is needed is vision and pragmatism of the kind that typified Roosevelt New Deal in 1930′s America which enabled the American economy to escape from the Great Depression.

We need some vision of a better tomorrow, one that offers hope for voters and their families. David Cameron may think he is being honest with the electorate. However his blind faith that only cuts can solve our economic problems is both a dangerous and foolish approach.

We all need a little bit of hope otherwise we will all be reaching for that suicide pill.

 

May 08

Moscow. A Communist Nightmare

I have just returned from a visit to Moscow. Its only the 2nd time I have been to Russia.

The last time was a long time ago just as the Soviet Union had invaded Afghanistan. I was part of a small union delegation invited to Leningrad, now St Petersburg.

I suspect I was invited as I was a strong critic of the Soviet system and the Afghan invasion. I was accompanied by two staunch Communists who had never been to the Soviet Union but really believed it was a workers paradise. It was February and -30% not a great time to go. My overriding impression was how tough life was for ordinary Russians. The great Gum department store had practically no goods, Russians were banned from the hotel bars as they were foreign currency only aimed at the week-ending Finns who came over in Coachloads from Helsinki to get drunk. The week was spent being followed by our KGB minders who tried to make sure I saw the right things. And yes I saw the Hermitage and the Summer Palace which was still being restored from war damage and the Kirov Ballet.

Hermitage

 

Summer Palace

And to the great disapproval of my communist colleagues, I spent the last night at dinner in a lengthy and heated debate with the Head of the Leningrad Politburo, a formidable women. Our discussion probably covered everything from the Afghan invasion, the Prague spring, Northern Ireland and the Salt arms treaty. Neither of us gave an inch and whilst we may have enjoyed it, I suspect the rest of the guests thought I was probably quite mad. Apparently my opponent had a reputation that implied that tolerance for dissent was not one of her great skills.

So I visited Moscow last week wondering how much Russia had changed since the fall of the Soviet Union.

Well just as my first visit to Russia was a major shock so was Moscow. The traffic is horrendous, even late on a Saturday evening the roads from the Airport was clogged with traffic. And for the rest of my week there the only real way you can get around is by the metro. It appears everyone in Moscow wants and has a car and will happily sit in 10 mile queues going nowhere. The air pollution is very bad and as the summer heat starts to arrive the air is full of a fine red dust that covers everything.

The shops unlike my time in Leningrad are full of goods. Every imaginable thing from electrical goods to the widest range of food is available. But the prices in Moscow are crazy. Even basic food stuffs are very expensive The only cheap items are bread and the metro which is the equivalent of 50p per journey.

And don’t try and eat in a Moscow restaurant. Just a middle range restaurant will require a second mortgage.

The Gum store facing Red Square is now a luxury shopping center selling goods of the kind even Harrods can’t afford. And this being Russia someone in the Moscow planning department has clearly increased their bank balance by allowing this  advertising monstrosity to be built directly facing the Kremlin.

Advertising site

But the overriding impression is that Moscow is now no different from most big American cities. On every street corner there are 4 or 5 people trying to give you the latest advertising leaflet for some new phone, car or camera. And I cannot count the number of times I was stopped by a beautiful young lady trying to sell me the latest watch.

Muscovites only aim seems to have or make money and in this relentless push for commercialism the ordinary Russians are losing out. It is understandable why quietly some older Russians bemoan the good old days of communism when people cared for their neighbours and life seemed simple.

On my way back to the airport my driver pointed out the new multimillion dollar houses being built close to the airport. Very different from the concrete blocks most Moscow residents live in. I asked him if he would like to buy one. He said no way. Apparently the area on which these houses are being built for the Russian middle classes was the site for the testing of rocket motors during the Soviet era. And of course the millions of gallons of rocket fuel and other chemicals which leached into the ground have never been removed.

As he put it Moscow is a place to work, not live and once you’ve made your money its time to leave.

Certainly my old Communist colleague’s would turn in their graves. Ronald Regan’s “Evil Empire” has turned into America mark 2.

Red Square

 

May 05

Drugs, The NHS Disease

My blog has been quiet for a long time.

About a year ago I was surprised to find that I had been diagnosed with Diabetes.

Which was a shock as I thought I had a pretty healthy lifestyle. Lots of pasta and rice and plenty of exercise.

At first I attempted to control it with diet, but this seemed to have limited effect and my blood sugar count kept rising.

After discussion with my doctor he insisted that the solution was medication and recommended the drug “Metformin

I was reluctant to take it but he said I had no real alternative.

However I have a medical history. When I was 17 as an avid Manchester United fan I would go to every match home and away. After a match at Wolverhampton, the police decided for security reasons to divert the special trains to a minor station close to the ground. With three thousand United fans waiting for trains, the platform was packed and as a train came in I was pushed and fell between two of the trains carriages with my back on the platform. I sustained a back injury that left me paralysed for 2 weeks and with warnings from the doctors that I would suffer back pain for the rest of my life.

Its something I have managed to live with and generally it has not been a problem.

However after taking “metformin” I suffered bone pain of the kind I have never experienced before. It was like someone was sticking a knife in my back and slowly turning it.

The doctor was not particularly sympathetic even though bone pain is a side effect of the drug in a limited number of cases.

He gave me a choice. Take alternative medication or reduce my life expectancy very quickly.

He was not impressed when I said no and that I would find a way to control the disease myself.

So for the last few months I have been experimenting with my diet trying to find a way to reduce my blood sugar count.

And slowly it seems to be working. By adopting a very low carb diet, it has over the last few weeks brought my blood sugar levels down.

However its not very easy and sometimes it goes wrong. The diets pretty boring and sometimes I cannot resist a binge which wrecks the whole diet for a few days.

So hopefully my choice is working. However it does raise the fundamental question of why the medical profession and the NHS are obsessed with drugs as the only real solution to medical problems.

Of course drugs have a role to play and are in some situations the only real choice.

Last year an NHS audit report said that the NHS faced a Diabetes time bomb.

The NHS already spends, according to PharmaTimes £8.81 billion on prescription drugs. And those costs will inevitability increase if the solution to the Diabetes time bomb is greater use of prescription drugs

There has always been an unhealthy relationship between the Medical profession and the pharmaceutical industry. An industry expert at rewarding doctors in a variety of ways for using its products.

And that situation will only worsen when G P’s take control of NHS budgets under the Governments health reforms.

At a time when the medical profession should be encouraging greater attempts by patients to control diet and change lifestyles, it appears that instead we are moving toward a regime in the UK where the very industry who profit from the sale of drugs will actually control the NHS budget

 

 

May 03

Back Again

My Blog has been very quiet for the last few months due to several factors.

 

However now I am back and raring to go

May 02

Andrea Hill

As Andrea Hill walks off into the sunset with her nice £218,000 cheque following her negotiated resignation as Chief Executive of Suffolk County Council, their will be a number of people sad to see her go.

Because the Andrea saga has been a “Nice Little Earner” for a surprising mixed bag of people.

Andrea of course who since her appointment as Suffolk Chief Executive back in 2008, has been paid by the taxpayers of Suffolk the staggering sum of £872,000 plus perks.

The Ipswich Labour Party who ran 2 borough election campaigns on the Andrea factor winning a number of council seats as a consequence.  Which is bizarre considering that the borough council had no ability to influence her salary.

And the Ipswich Evening Star who have devoted hundreds of pages to Andrea and her salary. Admittedly the stars continuing campaign kept the pressure up on local MP’s and the conservative party who controlled the County Council.

And Kathy Pollard the Lib Dem leader on the County Council who actually sat on the appointments panel which gave Andrea her £218,000 a year salary and then became the taxpayers champion against it.

There have of course been losers.

The taxpayers of Suffolk who as well as giving £872,000 of their money to enrich Andrea, have seen many millions wasted on the abortive New Strategic Direction which Andrea championed.

Those like myself who actively opposed Andrea’s salary when it was first offered to her and ironically lost our council seats due not to the Andrea factor but to the MP’s expenses fiasco.

But the biggest winner of all has been Mark Bee, the new Conservative leader of Suffolk County Council.  Now Mark has to be congratulated for actually negotiating the termination of Andrea’s contract.  However the fact that the County Council wasted another £250,000  on pointless external enquiries into Andrea adding to the already exorbitant costs of the Andrea saga is hardly a ringing endorsement of his handling of the affair.

And back in 2008, at the Council meeting when Andrea was appointed, Mark could have prevented this whole fiasco from ever starting.

Because as the Council minutes record when

Councillor Kevan Lim, moved as an amendment to Recommendation (a) to the report, that the decision taken in respect of the salary package for the post of Chief Executive be referred back to the Staff Appointments Committee for further consideration.

who Voted Against the Amendment

Councillors Clare Aitchison, Eddy Alcock,Mark Bee, Peter Beer, Peter Bellfield, Bill Bishop, Lisa Chambers, Rosemary Clarke, Jeremy Clover, Phillip French, John Goldsmith, John Goodwin, Colin Hart, Rebecca Hopfensperger, Steven Hudson, John Klaschka, Tim Marks, Wendy Mawer, Guy McGregor, Charles Michell, Jane Midwood, Graham Newman, Colin Noble, Patricia O’Brien, Stefan Oliver, Jeremy Pembroke, Ben Redsell, Ann Rodwell, Morris Rose, Bill Sadler, Ken Sale, Colin Spence, Joanna Spicer, Jane Storey, Ron Ward, Anne Whybrow and David Yorke-Edwards.

Isn’t life ironic

Apr 05

Going in the Wrong Direction

A new Leader will shortly take over control of Suffolk County Council. As highlighted in the East Anglian Daily Times, so far 3 Candidates have emerged. Who ever is elected one of their first tasks will be to determine how they proceed with the implementation of their New Strategic Direction.

This is an open letter to all the candidates asking them to think again about the impact this strategy will have on the people of Suffolk.

When the strategy was launched last November the Council said

In the face of a 28% reduction in funding for local government over the next four years (around £110 million for Suffolk County Council) the council faces some difficult decisions. Doing nothing is not an option, if we don’t face up to the problem we will make the situation worse and if we just cut the costs of services, the most vulnerable in our communities will suffer. This leaves us with the option of finding another way to cut the cost of delivering services so that we can maintain as many services as possible – particularly for those who need them the most. The New Strategic Direction is our new way of working.”

However the reality seems to be that it is the very front line services that are being put at risk and not the bureaucracy of the county council itself.

In a pre-election publication, The Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) described by many as part of the infrastructure of the conservative movement in Britain, highlighted the problems in cutting public expenditure. The paper entitled “cutting public spending by £167bn” said

As it happens, the Conservatives, if elected, will find it deeply painful to try to implement the modest cuts in spending they have proposed. History and economic theory suggest that small spending cuts will be delivered in a way that produces the maximum political pain. Cuts are administered by incumbent bureaucrats. Bureaucrats can implement spending cuts in a way that minimises the harm to themselves whilst maximising the publicity impact. Important services are cut first; cutting waste is an afterthought. We are familiar with this not just from Yes Minister – which was, in fact, based on sound economic theory well understood by at least one of the authors of the programme – but from our experience of spending cuts in the Thatcher era.”

In Suffolk the idea that their is a vast army of people able and willing to take over running of services like Libraries is nonsense. Even in the United States, most Public Libraries are funded and run by the state.

Such services are fundamental to the quality of life that all of us take for granted. Public libraries exist in most places in the world and are an essential part of having an educated and literate population.

Suffolk cannot wash it hands of providing a county wide service and such a move would hardly be in keeping with the conservatives social philosophy of the maintenance of traditional institutions and support for minimal and gradual change in society.

And the idea that the private sector is waiting with open arms is also naive. Even if they were, Suffolk has already experienced abuse by private suppliers in areas like home care which only highlights the need for effective management control and oversight.

The biggest US Corporation Wal-Mart who now owns Asda is highly efficient at cutting costs and squeezing its suppliers. However it does so also by keeping its costs low by for example choosing not to subsidise its employee’s health costs,a decision that comes at a cost to taxpayers. (taxpayers in California subsidise Wal-Mart employees health costs by more than $20 million each year.) Yes the private sector can help but theat help will often come at a price.

Everyone understands that the council faces some difficult decisions but the new Leader needs to get a grip on the “bureaucrats” at Suffolk County Council and target the waste before it targets the very services the council is their to provide

 

Apr 01

Assassin’s Creed.

As the award winning computer game “Assassin’s Creed says “Be an agent of change.”

The game is based on the history of the Hashshashin (or Assassins), a real-life group that performed politically-motivated murders between the 11th and 13th centuries during the Crusades. Shrouded in secrecy and feared for their ruthlessness, the Assassins intended to stop the hostilities by suppressing both sides of the conflict.

Seems that Assassins Creed is probably acquired playing for senior conservatives in Suffolk who with the ruthless efficiency that only the Conservative Party possess, disposed of Jeremy Pembroke as Leader of Suffolk County Council.

It was clear that the ongoing publicity over the Chief Executives salary and the perception that this issue was distracting from conservative attempts to sell the message of their New Strategic Direction forced the Conservatives hand.

I had numerous dealings with Jeremy Pembroke during my time on Suffolk County Council. I suspect that Jeremy did really believe that what he was doing was in the best interests of Suffolk.  However we came from different worlds and Jeremy’s vision for Suffolk was fundamentally different to mine.  But Jeremy’s weakness which many saw as his strength was his stubbornness.  Once he had made a decision he would not or could not change his mind.  The decision over the Chief Executive salary was not initially Jeremy’s. He was badly advised by the external recruitment consultant “Odgers Ray and Berndston” who had a vested interest in bumping up Chief Executive Salaries. However once the decision was made, Jeremy always defended it and this ultimately lead to his “forced” retirement.

However lets be clear, this is not a change of direction for Suffolk County Council. Jeremy’s likely successor Colin Noble is a true believer in the New Strategic Direction.  As he said as his blog 6 months ago It’s a programme to reduce as far as possible the Council’s role as a direct provider of services.

What might change is the willingness of the County Council to really listen to those people who have real concerns about how this programme is being implemented.

One can only hope.

Mar 25

Wrong Target

In the latest attacks on Suffolk County Council CEO Andrea Hill, Kathy Pollard and most of the media are completely missing the point.

Whilst a member of the County Council in 2008 I was not a member of the appointment panel when Andrea Hill was appointed so I have no way of knowing if she was the best candidate at the time.  Kathy Pollard was and did not oppose the appointment or the salary offered, merely abstaining. However I know I would have never agreed to the salary package Andrea Hill was offered which is why I tried to get the Council to reject the salary and why I referred the salary to the District Auditor.

Andrea Hill is high profile with the media which in my view is wrong for a Chief Executive.

However the real issue is not Andrea Hill.  As so aptly put in Wordblog, Life in the Country Why is Andrea Hill under attack rather than political leaders?.

The current County Council strategy “ the New Strategic Direction” strongly being  sold by Andrea Hill is merely a development of the original County Council strategy “Securing the Future” developed by KPMG for the Council.

Andrea Hill was not even Chief Executive when Securing the Future was developed.  Whilst her management style may be questionable and she is clearly is the figurehead for the “New Strategic Direction” the responsibility for this approach by the County is the Conservative Leader of the Council , Jeremy Pembroke.

Calls for the sacking of Andrea Hill may make good copy in the light of her strange priorities on expenditure.

However sacking her would cost the Council significant sums of money.  It will also not change the priorities of the Council and its determination to implement the New Strategic Direction.  Andrea Hill may be an enthusiastic exponent of that strategy.  However whilst Jeremy Pembroke remains Leader of the Council that strategy will continue.

So attacking Andrea Hill is the perfect cover for Jeremy Pembroke as he prepares to decimate public services in Suffolk

Mar 24

Dispose of Me, I’m Cheap

Rosehill Library sits in the centre of my old County Council seat, St Helens.  Its a very useful and important facility in an area which has a large number of families and is well used by children.  For 3 years as the local councillor it was my job to present the prizes at the annual reading game held to encourage children to learn to read.  Always well attended, its a perfect example of the importance of a facility like Rosehill.

RoseHill

But now its one of the Libraries the County Council has earmarked for closure unless local volunteers or some other simplistic solution is found to keep it open. A local campaign is now being run to keep it open at Rosehill Readers.

Unfortunately Suffolk County Council is a council that doesn’t listen even though what it proposes for Libraries is probably illegal.  For more on the legal requirements see Wordblog-Statutory requirements

According to Have your say on the future of Suffolk’s libraries

The council will be reducing the funding for libraries by greater than 30%.

So the justification for the closure is cost saving.  However this is very strange.  Firstly Suffolk Libraries cost a total of just under £9 million pound a year.  This is less than 2% of the Counties total annual Budget of £475 million.

And if its about cost savings why is it that a number of the libraries targeted for closure in 2012 including Rosehill have lower unit costs per visitor than the bigger Libraries like Bury and Ipswich.

The fact is that the County Council is taking the easy way out.  Despite their claim  that they are

Enabling and encouraging more responsive and cost effective services, this is a council who are too lazy to look for the difficult and awkward efficiencies and are simply cutting the easiest targets.

Cutting budgets is easy.  Doing it in a way that does not damage services takes time, skill and determination.  This is a council who have neither the skill or the determination to do it without hitting the very public services they were elected to provide.

As David Cameron said “We have asked local authorities to reduce their budgets. We have no choice about that, but local authorities do have a choice about how they cut their budgets,”

“We are saying to them, as vigorously as we can: Please will you make sure you cut your own bureaucracy and you cut your pay.”

Clearly Suffolk’s conservative leadership aren’t listening.  Its about time they did. And it you want to know where they can cut, I bet I could find at least £3 million in savings from the close to £40 million they are spending every year on the Joint Venture with BT.

Mar 21

Does KPMG Guarantee a Crisis

I have just watched a fascinating and scary film “Inside Job” about the global financial crisis of 2008,. This is one everyone should watch.


The world banking crisis was not an accident.  It cost the world trillions of dollars and doubled the national debt of many countries

It was caused by an out of control industry. Since the 1980′s the rise of the US financial sector has lead to a series of increasingly sever financial crisis worldwide. Each crisis has caused more damage whilst the Industry has made more and more money.

One of the worst examples of the madness was the activities of the Icelandic Banks who attempted one of the purest experiments in financial deregulation in history. The Icelandic Banks Borrowed 120 billion dollars, 10 times the size of Iceland’s economy.

The Icelandic banks were advised by companies including KPMG who audited the Icelandic banks and investment firms and found nothing wrong.

KPMG were also heavily criticised by the House of Lords last November over the UK banking crisis in 2008.

And in the US recently, KPMG LLP, and Countrywide Financial Corp., the mortgage lender acquired by Bank of America Corp., won final approval for a $601.5 million minimum settlement with Countrywide investors suing for securities fraud.

So why does this matter in Suffolk.

Well it was KPMG who advised on the contract set up with British Telecom over the CSD Joint Venture. See Is BT ripping off Suffolk

And its KPMG who devised the original Suffolk County report, “Securing the Future” which has formed the basis of the Suffolk experiment “the New Strategic Direction”.

And this brave new experiment in dismantling public services in Suffolk is now being heavily promoted by KPMG.

Jacky Ross the performance and technology partner at KPMG praises this so called innovative idea in her piece in the Guardian: Cuts needn’t hit the frontline.

Well wasn’t it innovative ideas like Credit Default Swaps and Collateralized debt obligation (CDO’s) that caused the World Banking Crisis.

And wasn’t it the failure of auditors like KPMG to properly control the banks they were supposed to be auditing that made the crisis inevitable.

So having watched “Inside Job”  forgive me but KPMG’s praise on this brave new Suffolk seems to be like a guarantee that we are all going to live to regret these changes.

 

 

 

Older posts «