Another Liberal Democrat summary of the budget

Stephen Lloyd, MP for Eastbourne in the last parliament, is generally reckoned to be a business-friendly Liberal. Indeed, in his latest newsletter, he welcomes the cut in corporation tax - something I am against, coupled as it is with the tightening of rules on professionals' small companies.

However, his summing-up is:

My conclusion of the Budget overall is that if you are of the working poor, disabled, young or work in the public sector, then the next few years are going to be bleak. If however you are rich or in the upper 50% of income, then life's just going to keep getting better. 
 

Yup, the Tories - unfettered - are back in power.

Butterfly Hunt

Running from 17th July to 9th August, Big Butterfly Count is the biggest butterfly count in the world.

To take part in the event and do your bit, simply count the butterflies you see and submit your sightings at bigbutterflycount.org.

(Thanks to WWT's Waterlife magazine for giving me the link)

BBC and impartiality

The following exchange took place during Culture, Media and Sport questions in the Commons last Thursday:

Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) (Con): My right hon. Friend talks about strengthening the BBC, and he is right to say that it has many good values, but one of the problems that has existed over a number of years—the BBC itself has admitted this—is that it has tended to be very much an EU-biased organisation. It is almost institutionally biased. Is that something that the review will take into account?

Mr Whittingdale: The question of how the BBC meets its impartiality requirements is certainly part of the charter review process, as that forms an essential component of its governance. My hon. Friend will be aware that the BBC Trust adjudicates complaints against the BBC about impartiality at the moment. Some people have questioned that, and it is certainly something that we will be considering.

I wonder which BBC these two gentlemen have listening to or watching. Have they ever heard anyone (commentator, politician or ordinary citizen) speak up for the euro on air? Have they ever seen or heard prime-time coverage of  the European Parliament or in-depth analysis of other EU institutions? I must admit that I did hear a journalist once suggest that populist governments rather than the euro were to blame for failures in Ireland and Greece, but she hasn't been on air since to my knowledge.

Then there is the North British Question. Since the general election, which saw the Scottish Nationalists become the third party in the UK parliament, there have been three SNP figures on the panel of Radio 4's Any Questions? In that time there have been four Liberal Democrats. Now, I welcome regular representation of a distinct strand of political thought in this country on AQ? Indeed, I was arguing for it constantly when Liberal Democrats were not only the third party but also in government and were under-represented. In the same period, UKIP (two MPs and one peer at their peak) seemed to be on every other week. It seems that the less significant the threat to the Establishment, the greater the representation on AQ? and vice versa. It is unfair, and I would like to hear more of what Scottish MPs have to contribute to UK (remember that the nation of Scotland voted to remain part of the UK) debates. Not all of them have accents impenetrable to listeners in the Home Counties.

Sorry, Tim

It's the kiss of death. I voted for Alan Beith (Paddy Ashdown won), Malcolm Bruce was my no. 1 choice when Charles Kennedy became LibDem leader and I voted twice for Chris Huhne (and I did not regret those decisions right up until the moment when his deception over speeding points was revealed). Now I am going to vote for you.

In many ways, this election is similar to the last one in that both candidates occupied similar political ground. Nick and Chris were both former MEPs and both had contributed to Paul Marshall's Orange Book. Both spoke well from the platform.  In the end, I chose the more forceful of the two candidates and the one who had practical City experience, at a time when it was clear that the next government had to sort out the economy. It was a pity that we were not given the choice of someone who would now be described as a "social liberal", but I would probably have voted for Chris anyway.

Both you and Norman occupy roughly the same space on the social-economic spectrum as each other. I am voting for you because from the first time I heard you speak at a fringe meeting at Brighton conference in 2006 it was obvious that you were passionate about the things you believed in and you had no trouble communicating that passion. It's that instant connection with people from all walks of life that we need now as we constantly remind them what a mistake they made in removing us from government in May. (The working poor will feel the pain imminently as a result of the budget; I predict that the economy will begin to suffer from Tory mismanagement in a year or so as the coalition policy flywheel runs down.)

Your religious convictions do not bother me. His Catholicism did not affect my regard for Charles Kennedy nor hers affect my admiration for Sarah Teather. His Catholicism is not my main bone of contention with IDS, though I suspect the current Pope would disagree violently with the way he applies it. Steve Webb and Sir Alan were both leading members of the parliamentary Christian group until May but it did not prevent them fulfilling leading roles at Westminster. It was noticeable that the subject of religion did not come up during tonight's Any Questions?, of which you were a panel member. It was your contributions tonight, and the response from the audience, which finally sealed it for me.

Good luck in the contest. If there's any chink of hope for your prospects, it is that I have a good record in Welsh leadership elections.

New states arising within the EU

This opinion was given in the context of Catalonia, but it seems to me that it could equally apply to Scotland or Wales, and contradicts the advice which the "No" campaign was promulgating in the Scottish campaign. It does mean that the Conservative government is going to be in an awkward position if the UK overall votes for Brexit in the forthcoming referendum, while other nations in the kingdom vote decisively in favour of staying in.

Railway modernisation paused

It is personally gratifying but also depressing, considering the wider community, when ones views on a failure of public policy are confirmed by an independent source. According to the Signal Failures column in Private Eye no. 1396, the government denied that it had misled voters before the general election and said that Network Rail had only recently revealed the scale of its difficulties with the investment programme announced under the coalition. However, the writer draws attention to PE issues of February and April this year which cast doubt on the government's line.

On 3rd April, Eye 1389 suggested that

NR was holding information about the rail projects it would dump until "after the general election, when we'll learn how many of the Tories' rail promises will be dropped or deferred".

In Eye 1386, NR was

"helping insulate the Tories' election campaign from bad news on rail electrification" by pretending north-west electrification was "on schedule" and keeping mum about the consequences of Great Western electrification delays.


But there is more than anonymous insider information.

NR is a government body within the Department for Transport; and not only is transport secretary Patrick McLoughlin accountable to parliament for NR's "performance and activities", but DafT' permanent secretary Philip Rutnam is NR's principal accounting officer, accountable for "stewardship" of NR's resources. So either they withheld what they knew about NR [...] or they ensured that they remained ignorant for months about NR's "performance and activities" and its use of "resources". Neither explanation seems compatible with the Civil Service's "core value" of impartiality.

The same edition (1396) of the Eye adds an even stronger motive for providing the rails and wires for the Hitachi trains referred to in a previous post. Under the deal, the contractor will get an estimated £400,000 per day from early 2018 onwards, whether the sets are running or not.

The English are in worse trouble

So there are strong incentives for the government to ensure that a major proportion of the Wales and West electrification is completed by 2018. There is no such pressure on the trans-Pennine project which has dire implications for other rail travellers in the north of England. As a recent File on 4 explained, the original programme envisaged that the relatively modern class 170 Turbostar diesels released by electrification would replace 30-year-old Pacers on other parts of the network in what is known as a "cascade". It looks as if the Northern Powerhouse is going to be served by ancient (and uncomfortable, as Swanline and Valley Lines patrons will attest) glorified railbuses. At least our Pacers will be swept away directly by electrification.

First response to budget

The "living wage" is going to reap the headlines, but it seems to me that it is not a major advance on the national minimum wage. It could, however, nudge general pay in the private sector upwards, higher than the 1% annual rise which civil servants, nurses etc. are going to be restricted to for four years.

Following on from the slow-down announced by Network Rail, the re-hypothecation of Vehicles Excise Duty marks a distinct switch from rail to road. This cannot be good for the UK's commitment to green policies. It is also not good value for money if the chancellor is looking to improve industrial. infrastructure.

Paul Lewis, having delved into the Red Books for Radio 4, also reveals a mean little twist which was not announced by George Osborne: sportsmen's testimonials may be routinely taxed. This may be justified in the case  of players at high-profile football clubs which have a huge captive audience, but is hard on people at struggling league clubs like Cardiff or below. It would be even worse for cricketers, who have traditionally not been paid as much as footballers and rely on testimonials to cushion their retirement.

Neath Port Talbot treasury advisors named in Channel 4 exposé

In "How Councils Blow your Millions" on Channel 4, Sector Treasury Services was named as a company some of whose advisors took commission from brokers. Sector's rebuttal is carefully worded and does not rule out the precise accusation made in the programme.

Sector were (and presumably still are) retained by Neath Port Talbot CBC (NPT). As far as I know, NPT has not been pushed into the bank-friendly loans exposed by Channel 4 Dispatches, and the decision to plunge millions of our money into Icelandic banks was the council's alone. However, Sector revised the quality of their advice in the light of the bank crash as they were at pains to point out to councillors in an exhaustive presentation shortly thereafter.