Enough of this Tories are bad with railfare BS

With my book deadline pushed ack to the end of the month and still a lot of work to do but I have taken ten minutes (odd) to question this latest Labour Tweet, the second of which I've seen in the last two weeks:

Rail season tickets in Chatham have gone up by 100% since 95. Tory complacency on economy as real pplfeel sting >> http://t.co/fkBTzUDAd2
— TrisOsborne (@cllrtrisosborne) March 18, 2015

Firstly I should state when it comes to rail fare I am completely neutral as I have been commuting for the last seven years and have watched my monthly Season ticket raise exponentially to the point that I am losing 33% of my wage which is somewhat unsupportable. It is something I have written about at length over the last five years feel free to browse.

I, like many commuters (the people that the tweet is aimed at in the hope of garnering support) know the history of the rising railfare.

The good ol' days of Cheap travel only 20 years ago!

Yes - the Tories privatised the railway. Was that a good move? Debateable. The people of Kent have had some bad franchises - Connex were awful and Southeastern, although debatably  *improving*, are still not a British company and a lot of their profits are being ploughed into the German railways and seemingly not into ours. Other franchises have been more successful on other networks. The reason for privatisation are at this exact moment beyond my memory and as mentioned earlier if it involves reading something that doesn't have a vessel sailing under a flag with an Iron Cross and Eagle on it then it is a waste of my time until the 2nd April.

The big point is that yes since 1994 the fare rise has gone up a significant rate but is it the Tories fault?

Let's consider who was running the country between 1995-2015. So John Major was Prime Minister up until 1997 (2 years) and the Coalition from 2010-2015 (5 years) which comes to 7 years of Conservative rule. From 1997-2010 we had 13 years of Labour Government in which the fares really started to go up with the introduction of RPI+3

Now when the government decided to construct HS1 from Ashford to St Pancras, you know that really expensive way to get to the wrong side of London that wasn't quicker than the other services from Medway (that's why the fast service to Victoria now stops at Meopham), you know the one that you can always get a seat on as it is too pricey? Anyway, they decided to spread the costs and so Labour came up with the escalator of RPI+3 (like they did for petrol) which ultimately is the Rate of inflation plus 3% so roughly your train fare would come up by 8% a year and they wrote it into the franchise contract so it could not be easily removed.

There was a fare freeze in 2010 (election year) I grant them. What did the Gillingham-Rainham MP do about it? Bugger and all as Paul Clarke (their candidate for 2015 for the same seat by the way) was a junior transport minister at the time. Thanks.

I'm not saying this government has been perfect either. Despite the remonstrations of Mark Reckless, Tracey Crouch and Rehman Chishti the government has done not much to improve it. Indeed the letter I received form the minister at the time Theresa Villiers basically was the written version of a shrug and a meh.

Yes prices have still gone up (though not always at the full RPI+3) this government but it hasn't been as bad. In fact for a percentage break down of 2004-12 which is telling check this out.

Basically to effect a movie/Star Wars metaphor ->

John Major's government came up with the idea of making Prequels to the popular Star Wars trilogy an arguably good/bad idea but sadly we got Phantom Menace.

Tony Blair/Gordon Brown's regime came up with the idea to make Phantom Menace that bit more appealing and make more money to fund episode II so they came up with the idea of the highly marketable Jar Jar Binks which ultimately made everybody's life gradually more unbearable.

Cameron's government have basically said Well it is made now  and we're releasing this but we'll throw in some more R2D2 will that make it better? No ah well....


So what are the solutions? I have no answers the only thing I can say is that;

1. This is a problem that ALL governments, both Labour and Tory, are responsible for this mess and something needs to be done and agreed on by Parliament as a whole before everyone but the rich are priced off the railways.

2. This kind of patronising political comment not only insults commuters, who are painfully aware of how we've got to this level of pricing, and is so opportunistic it actually stings my eyes to read it.

I had responded to a similar tweet a week ago asking about RPI but got no response. There is no need for this kind of BS and it is why people are turning away from blame the others style of politics of the big parties and turning to *Shudder* UKIP...

Right back to work, I have 6000 words on SMS Konigsberg to write before Saturday.

Local Tories fudge Nursery budget

Woodlands School, Gillingham

As I write this it occurs to me that there may be more to this story than meets the eye. Unfortunately I am not in the possession of all the facts but welcome any illuminating info from the other side. Until then I can only go on the information I have gained.

A few months ago the Head teacher of Woodlands Road School called a meeting of parents who attend the nursery to inform us what is going on and how Council cuts will affect the children and fees. Unfortunately I was unable to attend. My wife, who knows more about the child care and our house hold funds went and made some notes.

The Nursery has had it's budget cut by 40%

Not 4, not 20, but 40%

Further to this the Nursery will not be able to accept any children under 2 years old which will have a negative affect on mothers going back to work. This has been the case for my family and after several months of stress and viewing nurseries we've managed to get Oliver into a Private sector nursery that seems good. (it isn't Woodlands but it suits our needs at the moment.) Other parents are still looking.

There hangs a certain amount of uncertainty over the nursery as the 40% will come into being next April and will undoubtedly force prices up for those still at the nursery but there is a massive uncertainty as to by how much as it all depends on the amount of Pupil Premium money that will come into the Nursery and as yet that amount is unknown.

I have spoken with a couple of the staff who have looked after my daughter and they have told me that they have been told there is a probability of redundancies (which the Council will have to pay for) and of staff having to reapply for their jobs. This will rise unemployment and I am exceptionally sorry to say, lower quality at the nursery as I can not speak more highly of the quality of care and support that they give to the kids in their charge. Any loss will be a loss keenly felt. Further to that as Nick Clegg and the Libdems have vetoed the proposed ratio changes the Nursery will not be able to trim off as many staff leaving them possibly out of pocket.

The Nursery is also moving to sessional care (8.30-12:00 and 12:30-15:30) over wrap-around care (7:00-18:00) which restricts how many hours a secondary income earner can work and may mean that they have to give up work altogether if the nursery cannot provide a lunch time supervisor for the kids. How many employers would be happy with members of staff only working school hours? Be they retail workers, shift workers or clerical? Many parents are forced to look to the Private sector or bite the bullet and give up work altogether.

There is also the fact that any babies who have been put into the private sector through necessity, such as my son, may not come back to the nursery when they hit two years old. Although there will be some, who sadly have fallen into average nurseries through necessity, whose parents will swiftly move them when they get the first chance, there are also those who will stick with what they've got especially if they haven't seen Woodlands before. Why would you move your child if they are settled and you don't know that there is an excellent Nursery on your doorstep?

So there is more money not coming into Woodlands on top of the 40% cut and no paying parents for children under two. Whack on the fact that the School (now an Academy) cannot support the nursery financially in any way makes it even more dicey.

The Tory Council is banking on the fact that the Pupil premium and some trimming of "fat" will be enough to cover the costs and it is an exceptionally risky gamble to take with our Children's first steps into education and care as well as with the low income working families of Gillingham South ward and the hard working staff.

It really feels like Cllr Jarrett has got his sums and financial planning horribly wrong and it is the tax payer and working families etc who are going to pick up the brunt again.

I implore Councillor O'Brien, portfolio holder for education and early years, to look at this situation before it spirals out of control and leaves Woodlands either going belly up (in the long run) or forcing privatisation through the back door.


 

Privitisation of services just not affordable

A few weeks ago Libdem Council group leader Geoff Juby had this to say in his Party People column for the Medway Messenger.

I went on a day trip to France to visit friends living in a tiny hamlet in the countryside. What an eye

opener.

Britain is part of Europe but we don't enjoy the same economic benefits as our partners. First, utilities - water rates where they pay in a year what I pay in a month, and their equivalent of council tax is £140 per year (including TV licence).

As many of our utilities are now provided by French-owned companies, I wonder why there is such an enormous price differential - perhaps we are paying for cheaper service for the French.

It makes one wonder if privatisation has really benefited us, as both Conservative and Labour governments have pursued privatisation with enthusiasm.

Thirteen years of Labour Government forgot the working population as it created a cosy relationship with big business and multiple money-gobbling quangos.

Our NHS is wonderful for many things, but the dental service seems to be cheaper in Europe and much more patient focused - I know of cases where friends travel to Europe for dental treatment rather than pay NHS charges.
In France, electricity is cheap, with lots of wind farms serving small villages (the village is allowed to keep some of the profits). Planning is much easier, but i think this probably because local government MEANS local - a mayor for any settlement of more than 20 people, and has decision making powers.

Here, we seem to going for ever bigger councils and decision-making has to pass through so many layers of officialdom. Also, nobody seems to be accountable for misinformation, as purchaser of blue badges are finding out when they apply for renewals within the two months specified, only to find out it takes weeks longer and they are left stranded.

Indeed, privatisation is forcing average working families into a forced servitude. With ever increasing bills for utilities and even commuting to and from work and with the average wage rising by one or two percent people are getting priced out and have to wonder whether or not to put the heating on or draw a bath.

With the 40% cut to Council nurseries in Medway the fees ware likely to rise by a similar amount which will price many working families out of child care. It will become uneconomic for one partner to work part time as they're wages may not cover the bill of one child and especially not two. This will leave many working families in the Medway towns reduced to one wage and having to make some very real choices as to what they can and cannot afford including utility bills.

What will our Government or Local council do to help us or will we remain as indentured customers to big business.

Medway Council and unfair taxes

On the day the Liberal Democrats across the country are campaigning for fairer taxes we are faced with silly and unfair taxes here in Medway as this press release shows;

It was disappointing to learn from the Council, in response to my question last Thursday, that they are intent on pursuing a council tax policy which will result in an enormous waste of taxpayers money.  Charging council tax to the poorest in our community, and then pursuing those who cannot pay with the resultant magistrates court costs and officers time, may result in those who have low paid jobs, and stay put, being sent to prison, and those without jobs simply ‘disappearing’.


The Tories don’t seem to have learnt the lesson from the days of the iniquitous

 ‘Poll Tax’ when large numbers of ordinary citizens were sent to prison for short periods, thus gaining a criminal record, and councils still had the costs of trying to collect arrears which could paid off at the princely rate of 50p a week!


The councils own reports freely admit that the cost of collection will probably be more than the monies collected, so the council tax for the rest of us will have to increase to make up the deficit.  Mickey Mouse economics or what?  There are other options, such as raising tax on second homes and empty properties – this could not only increase revenue but bring back into use many of  the empty, neglected properties which blight our towns and deprive families of much needed homes.  Why can’t the council pursue this ‘win-win’ option rather than using time and resources to make the situation worse?

This was a matter raised at Full council the other week by Vivienne Parker of Rochester South and Horsted Liberal Democrats who posed a question on the night.

With the Cut from central government coming down to the local authorities many councils will have to look at raising the local taxes. According to a report in the Medway Messenger there could be as many as 14,000 households across the towns will have to cough up 25% of the new bill even though they were exempt due to low earnings in the past - 700 homes will have an extra £400 a year just to fill the void of the £4million hole.

I understand that the Council needs money but to strike the poor like this seems somewhat uncaring and ill thought out. Surely there must be another way?

Cllr Stamp (Ind) said For someone on a fixed low income it will just plunge them further into debt and they will have to make difficult decisions whether to buy food or put the heating on.

Made even more poignant when you realise the average reported (To the CAB) debt in the Medway towns is around £40k!!!!

It wouldn't seem so bad if the council weren't seen to be wasting money on vanity projects and overspends with poor planning - money just poured down the drain with the knowledge that there would come cuts one day from central government. It all seems very Victorian.

What did Conservative Councillor Jarrett portfolio holder for Finance have to say?

He began by blaming Labour's economic mess, which frankly is an over used argument considering the fact that this council has been wasteful and could have seen this cut on the horizon for years - I know I have and I'm just some bloke on the street!

Also the courts have the right to write off debts people can't pay for... Great! So we have to take people to court to find they can't pay and then let them off.
Let me get this straight... we spend money to get money out of people we already know don't have it and then write off the original debt... but still spending money on taking them to court... Brilliance!

To the concerns of rising poverty he said;
I do share some of the concerns but we are where we are. - Thanks Al.

Labour split over EU budget?

It is interesting as a somewhat neutral in this debate. I say neutral as I'm fairly torn.

On the one hand I'm pro Europe and understand that countries like Greece, Spain and Italy need shoring up with cash BUT at a time when the UK economy and services need money it seems crazy to pay more money out.

In a way, I guess I back the motion's principle.

The Labour party have been very vocal in their criticism of the Government position to pay up. They've also been keen to stir up the anti Europe wing of the Tory party, knowing that is their big weakness.

However, there is another interesting facet that's not been considered in Labour's motives. Just ten days ago Labour's MEPs in Brussels voted in favour of implementing the rise that Ed Miliband is desperate to overturn.

This could mean one of two things;

1. The Labour party have some serious problems with the London branch saying one thing and the Brussels bunch another. As leader Ed should be making sure everyone is singing from the same song sheet.
Is there a division between the two limbs of the party?
Are the MEPs not representing their constituencies properly?

2. As the Prime minister stated in PMQs; This is playing politics and rank opportunism.

Either way I think they should go away and look at themselves in the mirror and do some soul searching.

Although saying that, it was Mr Cameron who said that Labour's MEPs voted that way so I'm trusting his researchers. If I'm wrong blame them!

George Osborne out; Vince Cable in?

So the original call for the removal of George Osborne has become a clamour.

I'm not an economist and a lot of the information and stands washed over me, I'm also not about to score political points for my party by touting our virtues and saying that;

Doctor Vince was right and he should be made Chancellor.

It is not my style and I don't think that is what Politics is about.

I was thinking about the drop in GDP and the failure of plan A and wondered what my heroes would do about it.

Then as the thought of Darth Vader muttering Apology accepted as he force choked Mr Osborne sailed through my mind I decided that a more practical solution was needed.

I understand David Cameron's backing of the Chancellor and his faith that things will turn around but things are mounting up and I shudder to say this... maybe Ed Balls was right.

Despite Government cuts - and lets face it the previous Government were pouring money down the drain on a lot of pointless crap that needed jettisoning, i.e. as nice as it is for every child born to get a government grant it was an overly expensive move that we all survived without before and will do now, or those damn costly ID cards... the economy isn't recovering as it should.

The list of excuses like the weather, the Royal wedding, the Jubilee, the Tsunami, Clegg stole my biscuits... just aren't cutting the mustard for a lot of people. Action needs to be taken and the Prime Minister has to act for the benefit of everyone.

If George Osborne was to take all the plaudits for success so must he take the blame for failure.



The future's bright... the future's Yellow



With two years to go and with so much riding on economic recovery surely a new team or chancellor should be appointed?

Go on Dave, be selfish, don't just do it for the economy, the people and the nation but do it for your party - after all if you want to be reelected in 2015 you'll need to show the nation that you guys got it right. After all the Conservatives are the party for good economic management right?

So who to chose? Well... I'd suggest Vince Cable - he's an economist, he knows what he's talking about and could really make a difference. Though it doesn't matter what I, any Libdem or even the Daily Mirror thinks because Dr Vince won't get the job. Despite Coalition niceties there is no way that the Conservative backbenchers will sit still whilst a great and well respected position gets given to a Libdem and not one of their own. It is a sad state of affairs but it is probably the truth.

There are other good choices within the Conservative party and others who are well placed to take the position or to bring fresh ideas to the table but will they get their chance?

It isn't to late to change things or for the economy to move up a notch just now is the time before its too late. With Germany set to lose its AAA status and the rest of Europe's economies hemorrhaging money it is only going to get worse.

Shuffling out George Osborne

I was thumbing through the paper last Monday and found a couple of comments about whether or not George Osborne should be shuffled out of the Chancellorship in a front bench reshuffle.

The Sun's Trevor Kavanagh was quoted as suggesting that his unseemly bust ups with Ed Balls were distracting and even damaging his credibility as the man for the job and even suggesting that it was causing a lack of credibility and public esteem (and not us!).

Yes, I agree duelling with Ed Balls is unseemly but to be honest it would happen with whomever was Chancellor. Ed Balls is somewhat of a blunt instrument whose boorish manner acts like a battering ram and can easily get a rise from anyone.

But lets be honest;  Ed Balls can protest all he likes but he was buried in the treasury when all this rubbish with the banks happened in the first place.

The Newstatesman's George Eaton played down the talk of a reshuffle but suggested that the fact that it is being talked about and considered shows how much his stock has fallen.

However Christine Lagarde, the head of the IMF has criticised the Treasury saying that the outlook is not great and that Osborne has until next year to see if "Plan A" can come to fruition, if not its time for "Plan B." The IMF points to the deep downturn in the economy, deeper than the Eurozone and indeed the USA, recovery has been weak and austerity has knocked 2.5% off the GDP. To cap it off Government borrowing is also up.

This may be why George Osborne is being asked to give up his position as Conservative planner and mastermind for strategy in 2015 by former Chancellor and well respected Conservative Lord Lawson in a Radio 4 interview;


I do think it might be sensible to give up the formal (strategy) role and focus exclusively on his job as Chancellor of the Exchequer which is a tremendously important job.
I think his last budget was not his biggest success but I think he should continue in that job,. But I do think... that it would be sensible for him to set aside his second job. 


So could George's time be up?

I don't think so yet. The pressure is mounting though, after all the strength of this government was always going to be on tackling the deficit and at the moment it has hit a bit of a pothole. Although replacing the Chancellor is not the solution (unless it is with David Lawes) at this time, serious thought needs to be directed to the situation and further to that 100% concentration on the matter so I agree with Lord Lawson on this.

The Economy and its recovery should be his priority and if it gets back on track the Conservatives won't need a strategy to win the next election but should it fail...

Coalition is Listening not U-turning

You just can't win, can you?  Said Nick Clegg this week. No he wasn't talking about the upcoming general election but the accusations from Labour of policy U-turns and climb downs from the proposals in the budget.

Are they U-turns or are they listening exercises?

The Government has made some "embarrassing" climb downs this week over Pasty tax, VAT on static caravans and Charitable donations but is it as bad as the media and of course the Labour party are saying?

I think it;s quite right for a government when people say, 'Look something's not going to work' or 'We really don't think this is right' to listen and adapt it. That's what we've done. Claims Nick.

Indeed these policies were not set in stone, nor ideologically driven ideas merely proposed policies to try and rise more capital for the already hard hit Public purse.

Indeed the Caravan tax climb down is by 5% to 20% and followed consultation. Nick visited business leaders in Hull personally to discuss the impact of the proposal and said at the time;
as a Government, we want to get this right and I came here to listen to what local people have to say and then extended the Consultation period.

As for the Pasty tax, well it can be seen as a victory for the Liberal Democrats in Parliament. Stephen Gilbert Libdem MP for St Austell and Newquay led a  campaign to help Pastie makers in the West Country and put a proposal to the Treasury that was accepted and being implemented.  The original aim was to level the playing field of all hot food providers but after consultation a new policy has been developed that takes in what they have learnt. This has all been done very openly unlike Gordon Brown's attempt to sneak in the abolition of the 10p tax rate which took 18 months and Billions to rectify when they realised it wouldn't work.

The same is true for the Charitable donations cap.

‘The Government will explore with philanthropists ways to ensure this new limit of uncapped reliefs will not impact significantly on charities that depend on large donations.’ Red book, 2.40, pg59

It came about to, again, stop the rich from avoiding taxes and has undergone a lot of consultation as the proposed Cap would unnecessarily hinder charities and donations would dry up. However there will be an implementation of a cap on tax relief which excludes charitable donations that will go into action this summer and when combined with Mansion purchase tax, changes to stamp duty avoidance will net the treasury a projected £700m in 2015/6 (where as the 50p tax rate was only raising £100m) - The Government is doing its bit against the rich too.

I just hope that kind of give and take is something that most people will accept is a sign of a listening government, not a government just charging a head, not listening to anyone at all. Concluded Nick.

Is this the "New Politics" that I feared was dead? Governments are no longer seemingly plowing ahead with their own notions of what is right by some divine right of Governance and the Coalition appears to be listening on issues that cause concern. No one wants a repeat of the 10p rate fiasco or War with Iraq or even the Tuition fees debacle. Governments need to be listening and adapt their ideas but the opposition seem to happy to score points and shout "U-turn". Why worry about the truth when there are points to be scored eh?

I'd rather have a Government that listened and thought its proposals through than one that did just blaze ahead and make a hash of it all.

Dave agrees with Nick on growth

"Yes, of course I agree with Nick"

The fluidic nature of the European economic crisis has led to a change in tack by the Coalition as David Cameron finally remembers that he agrees with Nick and moves away from the harsh reality of Austerity and moves to increase growth and central Government investment.

It was started by European leaders (including Mr Cameron) trying to convince Chancellor Merkel that Europe needs to change its options and Germany should realise that the Greeks and other nations are not going to be able to repay all their debts to them and that the debts should be consolidated into Eurobonds and the Central bank should be more interventionist. She has, naturally, preferred to defend her position stating The treaties forbid taking on a mutual liability, that includes in our opinion also Eurobonds.

Still, as contingency plans are being drawn up across Europe for all the possibilities including the probable Greek exit Dave has agreed with Nick yet again.

The Deputy Prime Minister has been pushing for the Treasury to release money for investment in projects and try and kick start the economy with projects and now Dave has added his voice much to Ed Miliband's joy.

For two years you have been the high priest of Austerity, you have been telling the world that austerity alone is the answer. But now the recognition has dawned that it isn't working and you find yourself on the wrong side of the argument.

Ok, he has a point but you'd also think that at least the right move is being made now?

The next few months will see Massive governmental investment in projects like housing and infrastructure said Nick yesterday. An architect friend of mine said that you can never underestimate the importance of infrastructure and it is indeed so damnably important and is often underfunded.

Britain never really modernised post War and where as Germany modernised and improved Britain settled back to business as usual and struggled with the Austerity of the 50s and the collapse of Empire and we are still reaping that. However the State has the Golden opportunity to invest internally and bring roads, railways and motorways up to scratch creating jobs. As people earn more money they will spend more money.
There is also the question of housing. With a growing population our cities are becoming more and more crowded. I know that building on green spaces is never ideal but the simple truth is either we home people or stop having kids. However affordable and greener houses can be built and free up the overcrowding and frankly squalid housing in urban city centres that can date back to the 50's and further which are in serious need of rebuilds and again provides work and money to already bypassed areas that are in dire need of investment.

This may seem like Plan B, or Plan A+ but to be brutally honest I am just glad that the Government are now taking steps to try and turn this all around and encourage growth as well as inject money into projects that have been ignored for far too long and all because Dave remembered he should agree with Nick.

Culture in the UK needs to change for new age of Austerity

There has been a definite change in the Social approach to Austerity and personal finance over the last century.

Really Chris in a whole century? Through changing times of War and prosperity as well as vast social upheaval and change?

Well yes, obviously things have changed but if you scratch away at the surface the same pressures that threatened our Great-great Grandparents are the same as today yet approaches have changed.

A level of greed and a "Something for nothing" culture have developed as more people believe that they the state will, and should, help them out.

An acceptance of the Nanny state and having everything done for them has led to people not being able to do things for themselves.

For example if a child is failing at School parents are quick to point at the school and ask what they are doing rather than asking what, if anything, can be done at home to help.

Capitalism and mass marketing has affected us all and the need for bigger and shinier stuff has lead to more of our disposable income being spent on "Luxury" items. Who really needs the new Garbage album? Or Diablo III? or War Horse on DVD?

We all know what kids are like at Christmas and Toy manufacturers have perfected their technique for for appealing to kids and parents find themselves caught by the dreaded "I wants" - believe me in four years I'm going to have my children striking me and I shall join the vast hordes of people who become indebted at Christmas.There is also Social pressure to have the "Latest thing" and not just in kids, my wife had wanted an I-phone for well over a year and kept trying to figure out where to get the money or contract.

 Banks ceased to be interested in your balance and more in the Customer's situation. Earlier in the week it was reported that one person who wrote into the Citizens advice bureau in Medway had over 60 credit cards! One load was got out to pay another loan and the debt is just moved around. It seemed that in the mid to late 90's the credit card became more and more prolific. Banks, or at least my bank, began pushing them, adverts fell out of magazines, adverts on TV with Rowan Atkinson and the message was;

"Buy now, pay later. - You can even spread the payments over time!"

The boom years brought economy air travel too so you could go clubbing in Ibiza for an affordable amount and pay it back slowly.

Obviously debt is not all self inflicted and situations and life can throw you a curve ball. Students studying for their finals and not able to work, long term illness, house repairs or even death within the family but they result in the same, though there is no blame and these are the people the Welfare state is meant to help. Too many people are relying on the state to pay out, true the Welfare state is there as a safety net to help those who fall and in need of assistance but it seems that more people are jumping off the cliff on purpose. These may sound like sweeping generalisations but how many people have quit their job and signed on just because they don't like their job? How many people keep having Children just for the increase in Child benefits?

I always thought Liberalism was about freedom of action from state interference and a strong belief in people being able to make their own decisions. Well we're all adults and we have to make adult decisions in life and that means sacrifices. No, I can't afford to buy Skyrim for £44 this month, I can't afford that holiday to Prague next year unless I save up and make sacrifices, our family budget cannot stretch to another child so we won't try to have another one.

The problem is debt spirals and you only need a wild month and you're up a famous creek without any oars.

Society and culture was more geared for living in the "here and now" rather than worrying about the future as the use of credit cards meant you could defer. Our parents and Grand parents who'd lived through real austerity in the 30's and 50's were a bit more sensible and stowed money away for a rainy day or leaner times. Haggling was much more common  and both my Grandfathers had a keen eye for a bargain and banter with shop owners. War time tips for making things last have long been forgotten. When was the last time you heard of someone darning a sock?
Make do and mend is a term lost to the mists of time as are the war on waste. Yes I realise that there are no longer U-boats sinking grain convoys and bread is fairly ubiquitous and cheap but pennys add up so why waste things?

Years ago we all knew our neighbours and cooperatives would help each other out. For example my Great-grandfather used to breed rabbits so during the leaner times he would trade rabbit meat for vegetables from one of the his neighbours. There were also occasions when trades would be shared for favours or discount. Now it seems we all hide behind the drawbridge of our own little castles and watch suspiciously over the ramparts. Community has died out in larger cities and towns for a lot of people and there isn't the help there was.

A new approach to Austerity needs to be taken and in some places has already begun. When I was at school the kid whose parents dressed them up in Charity shop clothes usually bore the brunt of many cruel jokes. I, a mouthy somewhat arrogant ginger kid took enough flak as it was but it was made worse by the market bought tracksuits and the lack of "named brand" trainers. There was also only a small spattering of charity shops on high streets and in towns with the charity bookshop doing very well in university towns where students could sell on their old tomes.
Now charity shops have become more and more prevalent, especially in towns like Gillingham where other larger shops can not find a market or sustain themselves. People like my family go in and pick up good quality children's clothing for our daughter, who is at the age where she grows out of things really quickly. I can assure you that she is always smartly dressed. My wife has an eye for nice clothes and we have saved a small fortune buying from Cats Protection rather than Mothercare!
We as a nation need to make things last, take better care of things and yes be prepared to mend things rather than throw out and buy new.

Keep in mind; "Can I really afford this? Do I really need this?" and if the answer is no then walk away, you'll find yourself better off in the long run.

The State does, however, need to intervene with banks and legal loan sharks though. The banking industry must again see the public as cash cows and instead see us as people who will need help. Part of this whole crash was due to over lending to people who just couldn't pay it back. Why would you keep loaning money to someone who is £43,000 in debt? Sound a ridiculous figure? Well it is in fact the AVERAGE debt of those who have contacted Medway's Citizen's Advice!
As for legal loan sharks, the APR is ridiculous and if you don't pay back in a timely fashion you could find yourself locked in spiralling debt with no way to get out of it. Government needs to cap the level of APR that they can charge so that they can at least be some hope.

Yes Culture has changed over time but there are lessons that we can adapt and adopt that were our Grandparents' to save money and resources. We also need to change our approach to life in that we need to make serious decisions and not keep thinking the state will keep bailing us out - that's not what they are there for. We're all adults and should make adult decisions. However the state must also do its part and support those who do need assistance, the elderly, the sick, those who have suffered tough times and they need to redraw the lines with banks and  legal loan sharks to make try and protect the people form predators.

New Economic Policy for Medway Council

NEP for Russia brought about regeneration

A few weeks ago my blog was mentioned in a Full Council meeting by Councillor Alan Jarrett, deputy leader of the Conservative group and portfolio holder for finance. This, as always, amazed me as I didn't think many people actually read this blog let alone that it had any clout what so ever.

I was thinking this morning about local politics and the Council's hilarious over spends that we (the Libdems) and other opposition groups (especially Labour) have been critical of. Maybe we're going about this the wrong way... Maybe we should make suggestions rather than continual criticisms and if Cllr Jarrett or one of his staff/researchers is reading this then please take this in the spirit it is suggested.

So Al, (can I call you Al?) please get comfy and prepare for some mind blowing Economic policy.

I don't know if you, or any readers are familiar with the episode "Empok Nor" from Star Trek Deep Space Nine?
The engineering crew of DS9 are preparing to go on an equipment gathering mission to a similar station Empok Nor. Chief O'Brian comes up with a list of equipment divided into three sections:

The Must haves

The Could do withs.

Would be nice.


Right, as a household on a limited income we are used to prioritising what we spend and we pretty much divide all expenditure for the household in this manner. We must pay our council tax and utilities, we must buy food, we must buy nappies. We could do with some new bookshelves to replace and reshuffle furniture, we could do with powerful weed killer for our back garden. It would be nice if I could buy those Hornby engines or those 1/72 scale German infantry men for painting.

You said in your article for "Party People" in Friday's Medway messenger that the Council is getting on with the job. Yes they have achieved some good things but at the same time the over spends have been crippling especially when compared to some of the cuts you have made. Tough decisions have to be made but selling off Nelson Court looks heartless when you've overspent on the bus station, Stoke Crossing, Roadworks, Woodlands School bail out, Photocopier contracts... people see the money you are wasting and the "price" that is being paid. Might I humbly suggest that you apply the O'Brian list to Council spending - and be brutal when applying them. It may be worth going through the upcoming budgets and prioritising in this manner because at the moment it looks like the Council is running a Coulda/woulda/shoulda style budgets.

OR better yet ask the populous. An information gathering exercises need not be expensive. Who needs phone polls and marketing companies, in fact you don't even need printers. Get one of the Council's many officers to draw up a table on Microsoft Word or Excel with three columns of Musts/Coulds and would be nice and then photocopy some 500 and dispatch them to the 18 local libraries and made available to users to fill out and hand back to staff.

The main drive is to live with in the Council's means. It doesn't take a Financial wizard to know that the economy is up a certain river with out a certain rowing implement and things are not going to improve greatly over the next few years. Government grants are going to get slimmer and slimmer and the day that Council taxes will be forced to rise is on its way but you will need to prove to the people that you can be trusted with their/my money.

Years ago I used to play the computer game Simcity where you build and administer your own city and generate wealth so I have a rough, simplistic idea of the current situation. Grand projects are eye catching but often the old adage spend money to make money doesn't always ring true and people will often point out great big White Elephants. It'd be an idea to get rid of all those pesky empty properties that are taking money and sitting idle and derelict - I understand there's about a hundred that could go? Housing is good so keep up the good work with the new housing in Rochester but serious steps to encourage people into the city centres to go shopping is just as good, there is a good mix of shops that are stock affordable goods its just the numbers of shoppers has dropped and is going elsewhere.

Regeneration is needed. Lets be honest, parts of the Medway Towns are run down and tired but lets not go bolting off towards big shiny things lets keep it small. What is necessary regeneration? Roads are a good start, pavements, parks, high streets, kids play areas... small jobs that paper over the cracks until real investment comes knocking or the economy pulls out of its slump. People don't care about shiny new dynamic waterfront bus facilities they want to see things they use working properly or tidy and neat. Paper over cracks as a quick fix, clean up the rubbish, licks of paint on municipal buildings, sort out the moonscape roads and paths and people will feel less down about where they live.

I'm sure you're already applying the O'Brian principles but I (and probably a great number of denizens will feel the same) not tightly enough. We know times are tough and cuts will come but you guys need to be showing that you aren't wasting the money unnecessarily (after all projects never run to time and there are always unexpected problems that require more money - may be it would be worth setting the price of a project then setting aside a further 10-15% to cover unexpected problems).

The people of Medway, and I include my self and my family in this, don't want to see the council pouring our money down the drain whilst basic services that we use all the time (roads/pavements/car parking) are not attended to. As I said - better to prioritise and explain priorities to the people than run a coulda woulda shoulda administration. It may not lead the Medway towns to economic recovery but it will certainly keep them on an even keel until the Storm passes.

Sinking of Titanic and The banking crisis.

The 15th April 1912, at 3:40 GMT (11:40 Ship's time) RMS Titanic struck the Iceberg and two hours and forty minutes later she slipped beneath the waves taking some 1500 souls with her through drowning, injuries or exposure to the freezing cold waters of the North Atlantic, only 800 survived mostly from the First Class passengers.

As I mulled over the centenary I wanted to write something about it. I decided a potted History was a waste of time, especially as Walter Lord's excellent A night to remember and The night lives on cannot be surpassed. Instead, as a trailer for Made in Chelsea came on I began to think about Class divide and differences as well as the disaster itself and there are some striking similarities between the sinking of the liner and the current banking crisis.

For example, both were predicted in advance. Titanic was in a book entitled Futility: The sinking of the Titan, and the banking crisis by economists such as Dr Vince Cable. The banking system and the Titanic were not considered infallible but it was considered that nothing could do the amount of damaged needed to cause disaster. With Titanic it was obviously the Iceberg and the banks it was Lehman brothers.
Arguably Mr William McMaster Murdoch, the First Officer from Dalbeattie in South west Scottland, who held the duty watch at the time did all that could be done to avoid the catastrophe much like his fellow Countrymen Darling and Brown did with the banks although all three's conduct is open to interpretation as to whether they did the right thing or not.

A joint effort was taken on by Mr Lightholler, 2nd Officer on the Starboard side who was professional and strict observing "Women and Children First" as "Only" and the slightly more flexible and personable Murdoch who allowed men into life boats to fill them, an interesting Coalition of ideas, however the damage was done and nothing they could do would rectify the situation.

The point of comparison that really stuck in my head is that of Class struggle. Now, I'm no Marxist, nor am I a rabid left winger who bemoans class struggle and the Rich oppression of the poor, however there are things that anger the working/middle classes. On Titanic it made logical sense to evacuate the top decks (upper classes) first and unfortunately with the lack of life boats there was always going to be a small amount of lower classes getting off the ship as she foundered. There are also rumours of doors being locked to stop the 3rd Class passengers reaching the boat deck, again this is a sensible if harsh measure to stop a rising panic and crowds rushing the boat deck and putting more people in danger.
Before the banking crisis this notion of class was slowly dwindling but since money has become scarce it has swiftly been redefined. Upper classes are no longer necessarily land owners but those with large incomes (the middle being somewhere between £20k-£40k p.a) and those at the bottom on low incomes and usually renting or living in Council properties.
It is being argued, and I do tend to agree, that the Rich are getting away with a lot more than those on a lower income and there is only so much budgeting a house hold can do before you begin to feel the bite. Thus it does tend to grate on sensibilities when ever I see a trailer for Made in Chelsea and the young rich people are off on yet another holiday or whiskey tasting in the West end, or another champagne party and my family will be lucky if we get to go away at all this year, I can't really justify the price of one bottle of beer let alone a bottle of wine.

I know the Government are putting in measures to tax the richer especially with the new budget but it does seem that yet again the Rich and upper classes are abandoning ship and leaving us, the 3rd class passengers behind to deal with the worst part.

Just to complete the analogy I need to talk of the crew. The highest percentage of those lost aboard were the Ship's company. After all 50% of the Deck officers were killed, most of the Engineers, firemen, stewards, lift attendants, 50% of the Radio operators... In the analogy it is the Civil servants who take on the position of the crew (We do help run the nation after all!) and again they are suffering too. When it comes to cuts Government automatically looks at cutting the fat from the public sector and again they need to look at what needs to be done. Who needs museums over hospitals? *cut*
Who needs x thousand waste disposal guys when Y hundred can do it *cut*
We need to change the pension scheme *Cut*
As a low level civil servant in a dicey section of the public sector, I'm waiting for the axe to fall in my direction and leave me stricken on the liner one of the many who will suffer.

It may be a bleak analogy, but it is interesting. I don't know I may spend too much thinking about things on the train and not rationalising it all properly but that is how it feels.

This nation is sinking into the black icy waters of recession and it does seem that only the Rich and upper echelons are going to get away from it and suffer only a small amount and it is us the crew and working classes who are going to suffer.

Tracey Crouch on unfair Banking fees

"Our Woman in Westminster"

Reading through Good Friday's Medway Messenger I turned to the "letters page" - Yeah I'm one of those people... Any way, this weeks Party People was another report from Tracey Crouch MP about bank charges. *woot!!!*

The thrust was about disproportionate bank charges and Tracey cited the example of forgetting to pay her credit card subscription, something all of us forget from time to time and the charge that came with it. In this case the original fine charge was £7.75 and the additional fine was a further £12. For the benefit of Mr Balls if he's reading this, it comes to £19.75 in the red.

Ok, for an MP on lets say £48k a year (as my maths is a little slow on the uptake, even I can divide that by 12!!!) and earning some £4k a month (see!) a £20 fine is inconvenient. For someone like me on £21k it is a pain in the arse, for someone on £10k and less it can lead to more spiralling debt.

As Tracey rightly says, yes Pay day loan companies do get a lot of press and rightly so, anyone who offers you a couple of grand til pay day and then whacks 2000% interest over a year - and I wish that was an exaggeration - should be brought to light. Seriously next time there is a wonga.com advert on read the small print and look at the API and be staggered. So if you took out £100's and took a year to pay it back you could end up paying £200000s. Add this into a low salary and debts that are high enough for you to consider going to one of these companies and you are looking at a spiralling black hole that you may never get out of.
Similarly there is Brighthouse, which on the face of it offers good value. You can buy those pesky white goods and spread the cost but again check the API because its surprisingly high!

Anyway back to topic bank charges. Tracey is quite right these are a pain in the backside and one of the reasons my Wife and I closed our joint account at Natwest and joined HSBC. Every time we were but a couple of quid over the limit we got a £20 fine which was deducted the following month and because we were on a budget, which didn't include fines, would put us over the limit the following month and thus the cycle continued.
In fact, after my Grandfather died and I was waiting to see an adviser about closing his accounts I overheard a man in Chatham Natwest saying something along the lines that;

Every month I get a fresh fine that takes me over and then you fine me again! I can't afford it anymore! Do you know how much I've paid on bloody fines?

The problem is not that the bank is fining those who have maybe been a little bit flash with the cash or have had an extra expenditure this month but rather the amount that they charge you for doing so. After all £5's over should not result in a £12 fine. It can obviously trap people in a spiralling debt that is hard to get out of.

I look forward to seeing the outcome of Tracey raising this in Parliament, by removing disproportionate fines it will through another bone to the already hard pressed. The job of a bank is not to make money out of its patrons rather to be entrusted with our savings.

Do DRINK have a leg to stand on?

As the Boris Island debate rolls on between the Medway towns and London a Pro- Airport group is making it's voice heard within the towns, DRINK (Demand Regeneration In North Kent.).

The group, formed of local business personalities argue that the airport would kick start regeneration and bring money and prosperity to the region.

It is true that since the closure of the Dockyards in Gillingham and Chatham, money has slowly leached out of the area effecting wards like Gillingham North, Gillingham South and Chatham Central which have become severely run down. Gillingham High street, which I remember as a boy was diverse and teaming, has died an agonising death and businesses have struggled financially. Even the Wimpy burger has closed down.

(On paper) A large venture, such as the airport would indeed provide a wealth of jobs for the Medway town's population, whose levels of unemployment have risen during the financial crisis. More houses will need to be built for people coming to the area, hotels, rail connections, roads and money will return to the towns.

Gillingham F.C Chairman, Paul Scally wrote in Friday's Messenger;

Anything that creates tens of thousands of jobs has to be looked at, and we would be failing ourselves and our children if we didn't.
I don't know where the best place for it is. If it can be in Medway and benefit Medway, then all the better for Medway.

Chairman of the group, Neville Gaunt, similarly said;
We have been inundated by business owners who are angry that the politicians are passing up what could be the best thing to happen to North Kent in years- something that could create jobs and bring hope to the unemployed and poorly paid as well as reduce the real poverty we have in parts of the area.

Believing that there should be more of a debate and are concerned by the Political unity (Unity of parties? really?) in their opposition. They claim that local politicos and Councillors will inadvertently hurt the people they claim to represent.

They wrote an Open Letter on the subject. (View Here)

I've thought about this before, but last year when the first rumblings began to happen I asked Socialist party member Jac Berry if the airport, in her opinion, would bring affordable housing, jobs and money to the region and that could this be a good thing?
I completely agree with her answer, which ran something like this: Money and jobs is all well and good but we've only got one planet and we need to protect the environment.

After all the vast areas of green space around the Medway towns, and especially the unique Thames marshlands in Grain are areas of outstanding beauty. Also how many home owners now want to live in the flight path of one of the (hoped to be) busiest airports in the world. Its bad enough I am kept awake by my next door neighbours dance music let alone a the 3.15am flight in from Dubai! My house value would drop even more.

The estuary itself is not safe for flight with such a high chance of bird impact. During the Second World War, when large green areas were converted to Military airfields, North Kent was left alone,l (other than Gravesend - but a couple of squadrons of Single-seat fighters aren't the same as bombers or transports.) and the Luftwaffe did not operate out over the estuary in large numbers either for the same reason.

Also there is the other economic concern, that of the bottom falling out of air travel. With increasing taxation on travel and with people running out of disposable income for expensive holidays and travel as well as the fossil fuels crisis whose to say what the state of Air transport will by the time the Hub is finished?

More importantly, I can speak for Medway Libdems who have spoken to their constituents, as have local Conservatives and Labour, they're not convinced and don't want it. I take DRINK's point but I don't think anyone else agrees.

My Granddad said recently, Why trust businessmen advice? At the end of the day they want to line their own pockets rather than what's best for the people. - Indeed.

Tax the rich. Clegg vs. Cable

As the country continues to struggle to fill the deficit and as austerity measures begin the bite at the already stretched middle and working classes eyes turn to those who have plenty and call for them to pay their share and to help their country in an almost patriotic call is put out divisions on how to do it begin to show at the Libdem Spring Conference.

This all started with the 50p tax that the Conservatives desperately want to be rid of which was put in place as Super Income tax by Labour for anyone who earns £150k which is a good way of hitting those on high incomes such as executives and indeed Premiership footballers. (rumours have it that Arsenal's new signing Lucas Podolski will earn £100k a week but others earn a lot more especially with sponsorship and appearances etc.)

But what should it be replaced with?

Well, Dr Vince is in favour of the Mansion tax, something Liberals have always liked as it attacks those who do not earn and sit on their wealth rather than those who are working hard. This is why we've fought the Conservatives to raise the level of income tax to £10k so that those on low incomes can enjoy their hard earned money. This Mansion tax will be based on the value of your home and should hit anyone with a home valued at £2 million pounds.

There is a broad understanding that if the 50p rate were to go... it should be replaced by taxation of wealth because the wealthy people of the country have to pay their share, particularly at a time of economic difficulty.
The mansion tax is actually a very economically sensible way of doing it. says Dr Vince (quoted from Evening Standard Cable targeting London as price of axing 50p tax, p2 6-3-12).

Indeed it should raise £1.5bn per year - ka----ching.

Unfortunately it will hit those who live in London and other wealthy cities where house prices are pushed up by the area and may not reflect the wealth of the individual.

If this tax is coupled with Stamp duty crackdowns, which would tighten loop holes and force landlords and tycoons to keep properties in their names rather than companies (worth £1 bn) even more money for central government will become available to lessen the blow of the cuts on the individuals.
However at Conference Nick came out with a new idea; The Tycoon tax.

The tax, inspired by a similar measure put forward by Obama in the US, means that those on high income will pay a proportion of their income in tax. In the US millionaires look at paying 30% of their income to the Government coffers.

Lord Oakeshott described such a tax as; a superficially attractive measure that falls apart under scrutiny and does nothing to do with the super rich non-doms and non-residents.


To whit Nick responded;  The only person who argues against a tycoon tax is one of our very own tycoons.

According to the Guardian report (Nick Clegg and Vince Cable split on Tycoon tax 11th-3-12) Clegg's aides had briefed him that Oakeshott was isolated and that Dr Vince would back the plans - it was a gamble as Dr Vince, a brilliant economist, didn't bite and only cagily said;
I have not seen the proposals so I cannot give you a very informed comment. The idea is an interesting one.


Danny Alexander, had a slightly more pro Clegg approach;

I think it's a very interesting and goood idea. It's one that could really help to ensure the thing that we all need to do as a country, which is to make sure that the wealthiest of this country pay their fair share of tax.

The problem is Lord Oakeshott believes that a Tycoon tax will take the onus off the mansion tax (which will hit nondomicials who maintain huge houses here like the Beckhams etc). It seems that Nick has backed down on the glossy tax for this budget but will push for the next one.

Still, as Chancellor George Osborne limbers up for today's budget we will have to see if Mansion tax is on the cards.

Ed Miliband; doomed to lose the next election?

Three months on from my first blog post on Ed Miliband's leadership it is being questioned by the polls and there are warnings that 2015 won't go Labour's way in a pamphlet warning of "Cameron's Trap" unless they change tack quickly.

Lets start with the Leadership;

According to the ICBM poll carried out for the Guardian 48% of people believe David Cameron is doing a good job, second on 33% Nick Clegg is doing a good job and finally on 32% Ed Miliband.

A further blow is that 44% thought Cameron/Osborne were doing a good job of managing the economy compared to 23% who would like to see Miliband/Balls doing it, this is a gap of 21% which has grown from October's 11 % lead for Cameron/Osborne!

Could Cameron's lead have been extended by his stance over the Euro? Or the further strikes including the Tube strike on Boxing day?

All we can do is speculate but in a time when Austerity is biting down on the people of Britain and with every passing week we hear how the Chancellor is mismanaging the economy and how Vital public spending is being cut, you'd think the opposition party would be receiving more support.

Ed says; I'll carry on being what I am. I think that's what people want

I think he is right, people want substance in a leader rather than flashy showmanship, although they seem to like to vote in the showmen. I guess they're not sure that Ed has the substance but as I have said before, he is still relatively new in post and he has not been able to show any potential and leadership.

Which brings me to the Cameron Trap, no it isn't an awesome new Computer game, nor a Mills and Boon story based on a young Liberal Democrat leader joining a Coalition...

Gregg McClymont MP, the shadow pensions minister wrote in a pamphlet about the fear that Labour could easily fall into a trap that caught Neil Kinnock, Michael Foot and even the respectable Ramsey MacDonald. At times where Conservative governments have been carrying out harsh spending cuts that affect the country and rising unemployment they have won more and more elections returning Stanley Baldwin to parliament consecutively and even Margaret Thatcher offering enough prosperity for enough of a time to convince the electorate of the Government's credibility, in fact McClymont speculates that the Conservative line of;
It's tough now but under Labour it will be WORSE!!!
May have won them the 92 election!

Indeed the trap itself is that if Labour continue to support the failing Public Sector and Public spending rather than appealing to a vaster Middle ground of people they will lose public confidence.

This is true. The strikes have had a lot of public support but at the same time people are being hit in their pockets as they are forced to take days off work to look after their children or rearrange their busy lives. Other strikes like the RMT strike on Boxing Day are seen as unnecessary and Bob Crow is disliked by a vast swathe of London Commuters who face more arduous journeys as the already well paid Tube drivers seem to haggle over yet another rise. If Labour were to cling to this then they will certainly fall into a trap.

An easy Conservative retort would be that if Labour got in they would raise spending and ring fence more Public services and thus forcing other cuts over a longer period of time.
The Coalition wants to say in 2015 ; Job done. Then they can offer tax incentives and relief to people in their manifesto.

Ed Miliband has already moved to try and head for the middle ground and in a very Clegg way said;

We need a more responsible Capitalism, a new approach to our economy and our society.

Anyone else hearing Nick Clegg April 2010? Still it is true that Capitalism needs to change, greed has badly affected the nation polarising it to Victorian levels.

Ed Miliband also has warned in his New Year message that the Government's measures are reminiscent of the 30's Conservative Government's measures and;
When politicians shrug their shoulders in the face of other people's despair, they are not just abdicating responsibility, they are making clear choices. That is as true now as it was in the Great Depression during the 1930's.

Just a quick History lesson;
1. Stanley Baldwin may have been a Conservative Prime Minister but he was PM of a NATIONAL GOVERNMENT with Ramsey MacDonald the Labour leader and previous PM as his deputy so it wasn't all the Conservatives crushing the people - Bear in mind that Labour were a lot more left wing in the 30's.

2. Britain's economy never sank to the levels of Germany in the early 30's where Deutschemarks were near enough worthless and had fully recovered in time for the Second World War.

Also another observation. A true leader, a real leader in military and political terms has to be hard. Tough decisions have to be made to help the people and the nation. It is sad but sacrifices have to be made for the greater good and you do have to shrug your shoulders at the plight sometimes and keep on going, however tough it may be.

It is suggested that Labour should come up with better plans to encourage the private sector growth than the Conservatives as encouraging growth rather than spending cuts will attract votes in the same way that Clement Attlee did in 1945.

Also if they were to concentrate on the Coalition's regressive charging mechanisms and focus on Labour's plans to cut tuition to £6000 pa.

As the authors of In the Black Labour have said, Labour need to stop this vague economic plans and actually pull a white rabbit out of their hats and show that they can be a credible party on the economy with actual policy that will actually work rather than "Not the Coalition's way".

As for Ed as a leader, only time will tell and I don't think one poll now necessarily means that he will not win in 2015, after all that is still a long way away and anything could happen.

Afraid I can't find my link to the Guardian's story but here is a link to the Sun's article on the poll.
http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/politics/4022470/New-poll-blow-for-Ed-Miliband-Voters-favour-Lib-Dem-leader.html

High Streets lose £200 Million this year

Chatham High Street

As people charge to do battle in our town centres this time of year and manners and courtesy are forgotten in a frenzy of last minute shopping, £200 Million business will be lost nationwide from town centres.

This isn't directly due to the deficit and crunch times and people not spending money - it's people like me who have taken their money to the Internet.

As I have mentioned in previous blog posts I cannot abide shopping - except for book shopping which up until I got a kindle for my birthday, was a major vice. I can't resist the pull of a book shop, the feel or smell of a new book that - any way moving away from that...
I don't like fighting through crowds and being jostled. I've made two trips to Chatham and that was more than enough for me.

Clearly others feel the same way and been estimated, according to the Metro, £200 Million has been sent on line with companies such as Amazon offering up to 70% off!
Not only is the Internet quick, quiet it's incredibly cheap and gets delivered to my door!
There's also the added bonus of not having to use public transport and car parking, in themselves painfully expensive and awkward. I hear nothing but bad things from drivers trying to navigate or park in Chatham. I must report that I used the Dynamic Waterfront Bus Facility yesterday for the first time and was fairly non-plussed but can see what people mean by walls ending short of the ceiling and it being exposed to the elements.

Internet companies can afford massive deals because they don't have the overheads that shop keepers have. A warehouse with a massive stock can be run with limited power, few staff and postage is paid by you. A shop holder has to buy stock, pay utilities, rents and taxes and live on the profits.

So what does this loss for the High Streets mean?

Well the bad thing is for small businesses who aren't part of a chain and cannot set up an Internet company. They tend to make money from overflow and people drifting in looking for bargains but if people aren't in the streets spending money they won't get any business.


Some of the models that I've painted



No where makes this more apparent than the Trafalgar Centre at the far end of the High Street. My favourite shop Maynes has closed down so now I have to go to Maidstone or Bluewater to get my Games Workshop fix. The rest of the centre is devoid of other shops, short of a newsagent, Tattoo parlour, Medway financing, a couple of random units and an Airfix model shop. The rest is a lifeless shell, even the toilets are out of order. It holds so much potential but there is nothing going on and no money coming in. The climate is not right for start up businesses and no one wants to risk their money, understandably.

The other people who make money from the Shopping season, food outlets, coffee shops, fast food eateries will also lose out on trade.

Is this a natural shift though? As I postulated before people don't have time, nor the desire to battle through towns to spend money when the with Amazon et. al. you can place your orders on your lunch hour at your desk rather than doing what I had to do on my Lunch hour- power walk from Lambeth to Westminster to get a Mug from the Parliamentary bookshop and then power back.

Needless to say though that Chatham High Street was rammed yesterday with a lot of Primark bags being carried and Debenams, Card Factory, MacDonald's, KFC, the Pentagon all very busy- even a queue to see Santa!

Fears for the future

Sophie and I

 A few of you will know about my daughter Sophie who was born on 12th May 2010 at the same time as the Coalition. With the birth of both there was a feeling of hope and an exciting new future.

Now... Now a feeling of dread has set in as a wary parent I eye the future.

Education and Social Mobility

One of the Coalition (especially Lib Dem) aim is to try and level the playing field so that Children can progress to any level of society no matter what their background.
This is as it should be, we're not in the Nineteenth Century and everyone us equal and should be judged by ability not on background or ability to pay.
The Pupil Premium will help many children from poorer backgrounds into preschools and in the early stages, building a brighter chance for later on.
The early years are so important and you need to get the foundations just right. The stereotype of the Chatham Girl goes back to at least the 90's where a now defunct website catalogued the Gold Argos clown wearing "Proto-chavs". This stereotype continues and when ever I am in the High Street or walking home and see these groups of teenage girls smoking, littering, drinking etc I shudder fearing that in time that could be my little girl. This is one of the reasons that my wife and I are not doing what so many parents end up doing - leaving vasts amount of basic parenting up to the Schools.

It is not the up to Schools to teach Sophie not to litter, to be courteous, how to talk and behave. In fact we will also be teaching her to read and at least write her own name before she goes to Primary school. At eighteen months she can almost count to ten... She doesn't know what it means but if you say "One" she'll do the rest with you.

A lack of money though and the state of Medway as an area means that Sophie will be going to an "Adequate" school where really we would like an "exceptional" school to best help develop her mind and educate her. As we don't have money though, we'll also be helping her at home. Between Sam and I we have a good base of general knowledge and a huge library of books to help her and we will help her with her homework and learning.

Money and the deficit.

One of the big things, and everyone is watching it is the deficit. I'm a low grade civil servant/public sector worker who sits under the £21,000 pay freeze but in a job that will see a 1% pay rise over the next few years whilst my bills etc will raise by at least 5% which in real terms is a 4%  loss for me and my family.
Also there is the pension problem which will see me paying more into a pension (if the PCS figures are to be believed) and getting less back, on top of working until I am older.

Also, as I work in a section of the Department of Culture and Sport at a Museum, I am so far down the list of necessary staff it is unbelievable. The old adage of rather save money on hospitals than museums is absolutely true. Managers and office functionaries always seem to save their jobs but I'm in a bracket that always suffers the pitfalls of redundancies, out sourcing or running on bare bones so I'm hardly secure in my post at the moment. There is a constant worry that management may decide one day that I am superfluous or come up with a better way of running things that doesn't involve many of us any more. To be fair they themselves have to look at cuts from Government and the declining numbers of people coming through the doors, spending money in the shop or making donations.

My big fear is interest rates. Due to my beloved Grandfather passing away I inherited half of his house and so I have a small mortgage (having paid my sister off) and between Sam and I we manage to live comfortably and put a small amount away for Sophie's future and for household repairs and replacements - such as the lack of central heating and double glazing. If Interest rates were to rise by more than 3% though we will be in trouble as we won't be able to keep up the payments. At the moment all is well but only time will tell.

They say Money isn't everything... They obviously have it as it isn't important until you don't have any.

Jobs and family

The job market is looking bleak, not just because of the economic situation but in general. There was a time when university degrees were far and few between - now they are prolific and every job has graduates applying for it. I work with a guy who has a good degree from Oxford and he works security.
The degrees that are truly worth something are the Vocational degrees like Teaching, medicine, Law etc... You can then go into a job in your field. If you have a general degree like History (as I have) you are able to go into any position in any company. That's if we can afford to send Sophie to University in the first place.

I'm finding that work is eating up so much of my time that I am running out of it and not seeing my family at all, not just my wife but also my Mum and Granddad. I know that I should make more time but when I'm out of the house for 13 hours a day and do 7 day shift patterns it is difficult. I worry that in the future when Sophie is in her 20's or 30's I will see her as much as I see my Mum and that will be far and few between just because to make enough money to stay afloat she will have to work more, as will I.

May be I'm being pessimistic, may be everything is going to be different. Maybe little Sophie and any future siblings will have amazing lives and all life will be all the opportunities that they deserve. All I can do is hope and do the best I can, as any parent does.
I want her to have an amazing life and opportunities and to succeed where I have failed in life, but so much is beyond my control that I am concerned. It is one of the reasons I dabble in local and watch national politics as so much that is decided at Gun Wharf and Westminster that then affects our lives and we may not even get a say.