Scarey or what

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) suggests that the public debt of the ten richest countries will rise from 78% of gross domestic product (GDP) in 2007 to 114% by 2014. These governments will then owe around $50,000 for every one of us
They add that this crisis has not run its full course, with the likely addition of a minimum $3 trillion write-down of the banks. This destruction of bank capital – paid for, ultimately, by taxes on the working and middle classes – this will be added to by reduction household wealth.
The OECD, says: “The crisis will wipe out 3% of rich countries output for ever”. This is a conservative estimate
What then is the scenario for the poorest countries - Asia, Africa and Latin America.
Tinkering around with insignificant possible policy will not help when you are looking at global impacts.
WAG needs to be taking advice from macro - economists who understand these trends and how to sandbag us in the most effective way from the consequences.It is the cavalier way the Banks have operated that has put us in this situation.
It should be much more than strict regulation, it should be castration.

Quote of yesterdays

“A Brown government could be overwhelmed by an avalanche of the stoked-up discontent of the working class, manifested through trade union struggle… A Brown government could also face a crisis of legitimacy… If he delays too long, he could suffer the fate of the other ‘mid-term’ replacement prime ministers, like Callaghan in 1979…The far-right can make significant gains, particularly with the rise in unemployment clearly taking place and the deterioration of social conditions, especially if a left fighting alternative is not provided”. (The Coronation of Gordon Brown, Socialism Today No.110, June 2007)
I found this to day in a file where I keep bits and pieces that I want to look back on , reflect on or just that interest me.

Transport ,what a mess ,what a cost

There is a big fuss over the expenses claimed now by civil servants in Wales International, all of which we are assured have been carefully scrutinised.To me much more of a concern is the following that was raised with me this week by a concerned reader of this blog
Since the Welsh rail franchise was devolved to WAG, there has been disarray.people taken on initially to monitor and run the franchise, all recruited from private sector rail and engaged at higher rates than those paid to civil servants - have left within 18 months of taking up their posts.
Apparently all posts have been re- advertised and are yet to be filled.
The Head of Rail is now filled on a consultancy basis at £1k a day for a 4 day week, another consultant on similar money also starting shortly.I do not have any information on what this persons background is.
Also worth noting is that the retiring Head of Transport is also allegedly being brought back as a consultant as soon as he has retired.That is something to watch for.
There are several issues here, including some serious HR ones. I think there needs to be some questions asked of the transport minister and also some further digging to be done to find out why such a vital service is in such a mess.
Where does this fit with the Transport Strategy that came out this week.
How up to speed are the other so called transport experts?

Christopher Hitchens writes in Vanity Fair

http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2009/08/hitchens200908
very interesting article

Madano report -The class of 2010

Around third of new MPs elected next year will be from private schools while among Conservatives, the figure is closer to 50 per cent.The Class of 2010 report, compiled by the Madano Partnership, a communications consultancy, is a detailed analysis of 242 parliamentary candidates who have a good chance of becoming MPs at the next election.The overwhelming majority, 165, are Conservatives.
The Madano study draws on forecasts by Colin Rallings and Michael Thrasher of Plymouth University identifying the parliamentary seats most likely to change hands at the next election. It is based on a 7 per cent swing to the Tories, delivering only a small Commons majority for Mr Cameron.
The research also includes candidates selected to replace 82 sitting MPs who are standing down, a figure that is constantly rising because of the MPs' expenses scandal.
Mr Cameron, an Old Etonian, has tried to broaden the range of educational backgrounds from which Tory MPs are drawn.However, the study suggests his future parliamentary party will still be heavily slanted towards those who went to independent schools.In all, 43 per cent of the likely new Tory MPs whose schooling is known went to fee-paying schools. By contrast, a third of the small group of new Tory MPs elected in 1997 were privately educated.
Figures for all 242 candidates also show a shift towards private education. Some 13 per cent of the new intake of MPs in 1997 were privately educated. At the next election, the figure is likely to be around a third.
The rise is not caused only by the large number of Tories in the sample group: the proportion of Labour candidates who went to private schools has also risen from around 7 per cent in 1997 to as much as 14 per cent at this election.
"The overall trends of the figures do suggest there has been massive shift over the last 12 years towards the private and independent sector," the Madano report says.
The report also suggests that new MPs are likely to be relatively young: 29 per cent of candidates are in their 30s. Another 45 per cent are in their 40s. Eight of the candidates assessed in the report are currently in their 20s.
If he is elected, Peter Lyburn, the 24-year-old Tory candidate in Perth and North Perthshire would become the youngest MP in the Commons.
The Tory candidates in winnable seats are marginally older than the average: 49 per cent are in their 40s.
The Madano report suggests that 44 of the new Tories likely to enter the Commons next year are women. That means the Tories could have almost 60 women in Parliament, up from only 17 now.
Lets see if that follows through

Another one bites the dust - - - - -

Labour will have quite a few vacant seats coming up to the next elections
So far Jane Davidson, Lorraine Barrett and Irene James,have said they wont stand for a further term.And of course Rhodri M will have gone by then , may be.There are also a number of rumours around Glenda Thomas and whether she will stand again.
Jane Davidson says she wants a life in the countryside and more time with her family, we wait to see what awaits her.Labour have their candidate in place there Mick Antoniw, well known solicitor with Thompson's very closely associated with the TUs.

Lorraine wants to be a Humanist celebrant, a sort of atheist vicarette.Irene well she says to spend time with her family, OK we will wear that one.We know too that

Mick bates is retiring from the Bay, so one Lib Dem on his way.
I wonder who else in Cardiff Bay will jump ship before the next election, I don't think we have seen the end of the line on that one yet.There are a few Tories who may call it a day, and Plaid may have one who is on the uncertain list.

News is also out that Paul Starling a former BBC and HTV journalist who was also political editor of the Welsh Mirror,he was also the first director of the Bevan Foundation, is to contest Torfaen for Peoples Voice against Paul Murphy, that should be interesting.I wonder if Paul will be elevated to the Lords , or just decode to spend more time in his place in Tuscany.
Is the job getting harder, or the perks less or may be just time has caught up with some AMs of late.

Communities First - never really given a chance

The auditor general for Wales has made some stinging criticisms of Communities First.His report makes 11 recommendations for improvement. They include making Communities First a clearer priority across its own departments;like everything else certain words in a programme automatically pigeon hole it. Community is one of those words.
The programme needs to provide additional support, such as developing skills in writing bids, to those partnerships likely to find it more difficult to access the Outcomes Fund. There is also need to work with partnerships to develop a small set of common indicators of the extent to which the programme is contributing to improving outcomes for people living in Communities First areas.
The programme had sporadic success,having seen quite a few at first hand and the much wider neighbourhood renewal programme in England,CF could learn a lot.
The main problem with it is most of the money is spent on administration and process.
This goes back to its launch where good practise and recommendations from a pilot programme were literally binned by the then minister Edwina Hart ,who wanted quick wins.The programme had never recovered.
Things have improved , but we are eight years into the ten year programme.You ask what the outcomes are, they cannot tell you ,why , because they failed to put robust monitoring and evaluation criteria in place when the programme started. Local Authorities have never played a full part either
Blaenau Gwent ,passed their part over to an outside body ,as it couldn't get a grip on the programme.
The turnover in assembly staff who ran the programme was also amazing.
The chair of the National Assembly’s audit committee, AM Jonathan Morgan,pounced on the report and said: “No-one can deny that tackling deprivation in the poorest areas of Wales should be a priority – particularly in these tough times. The Communities First programme has already ploughed £214m into a number of initiatives and it is good to see that there have been some benefits.“But what is unacceptable is that, eight years on, there are still serious weaknesses with the way the programme is being run. The Assembly Government cannot demonstrate the overall impact of the programme and is not doing enough to encourage public bodies, including its own departments, to prioritise and focus more of their work on Communities First areas.“Without some fundamental improvements, this flagship scheme will not achieve what it has set out to do. This report makes some important recommendations which should be urgently addressed.”
The programme I fear will never do that, its flawed and has history. There are gems and may be WAG should look at those examples and find out from the development staff why they have succeeded, and not rely so much on the machinations and ideas from in -house civil servants.

Tory Shadow Social Justice Minister Mark Isherwood said: “While there has been a huge amount of public investment in this vital area this report confirms our worst fears about outcomes and delivery. Despite promises to the contrary, significant amounts of money earmarked for this programme have been swallowed up in administration costs.“Sustainable community regeneration will require a complete re-appraisal of the scheme, replacing rhetoric with investment and engagement with local people and local projects. Doing so will deliver real outcomes on the ground and tackle some of the root causes of poverty and deprivation.”
Easily said,can it be turned around at this late stage or should it be lessons learned and a new fresh and deliverable programme generated,informed by very different motives and method.

Way to keep jobs - ATR - thats a new one.

The CBI says struggling firms should be allowed to suspend employees’ contracts for up to six months and pay them the equivalent of twice the rate of jobseeker’s allowance, to stay employed.They are calling for the introduction of an Alternative to Redundancy (ATR) scheme, warning that failure to take action now could see the jobless total rise to more than three million by next summer.
The ATR would allow cash-strapped firms to cut their wage bills but keep a skilled workforce for when demand increases.
Employees would not work while on the redundancy ‘register’ but would be able to seek new employment. Half of their allowance would be paid by the government and half by the employer.
John Cridland, CBI deputy director-general, said: ‘This is not about businesses ducking their redundancy responsibility – in fact if a scheme runs for six months and a redundancy is still made then the business will end up paying more.’
Apparently employment regulation which has added £70bn to business costs since 1998.
The Unions seem to be backing the scheme. TUC general-secretary Brendan Barber said: ‘It is better to keep people in work and training with their employer even if on short-term working, rather than sitting at home, which is why unions and other employer groups are campaigning for the kind of wage subsidies that are now common in the rest of Europe.’
I am sure some will say its the employers being cynical or grabbing, I think that as long as the workers are OK with it , its got to be better than signing on the dole.
Wage subsidies are common in Europe, I have often wondered why in the UK we would rather pay someone to be unemployed rather than be employed.