Cllr Tristan Osborne - Musings from Medway

School Data Re-visited

2012-01-27T21:03:00.007Z

Have spent the last hour or so churning into the numbers and some concerning trends have been revealed which show just how stark the system of education we have in the Medway Towns has become.

Find below the breakdown of some key indicators which you may find interesting. I have picked three indicators which will become clear:

This is the sort of analysis a good researcher or analyst would undertake

This blog does not advocate any top-down re-organisation of our education system without the consent of parents; so I want to say at the outset that this is not a campaign pitch for the Comperehensive cause. I actually believe in good schools and do not want to tinker with any that work. I do however have a seething dislike for failure and as you would expect from someone of the centre-left; how it impacts those from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Evidence

Grammar Schools were the only schools to get above average GCSE results. All other publicly funded schools; whether comprehensive, secondary modern, community, academy or sponsered were below average performance
The average cohort at grammar schools was 148 pupils. At other schools cohort was 195 (and that is including Rochester Independent College (ony 24 cohort so a statistical outlier). We know that those with smaller cohorts did better overall
72.5% of all pupils in Medway taking GCSEs attended schools that are below average performance.
Grammar School pupils are on average wealthier then those at all other schools in the area if you take into account free school meal %. On average grammar school pupils (3.98%) v non grammar pupils (15.48%). From a social mobility perspective this is important.

Adding in the statistics from the Centre for Cities analysis which shows that Medway has noticeably poor education with only 22.8% with a higher qualification (ranking Medway 51/64 for same sized cities in UK) and 13.6% with no formal qualifications at all (43/64). How much of these same statistics are influenced by school performance? It is of note that on all the other indicators on the CfC analysis we performed above average.

This blog is not seeking a political outcome from the above points merely to point out some statistical realities. The decision for education in the area must be for its residents to decide.

Incidentally the above also highlights why anyone managing the education department in Medway Council has a very very tough job. Unlike in other areas our team have to work within a very difficult environment and context; one which you could argue is inherently skewed.

GCSE results below average

2012-01-26T21:07:00.010Z

Medway is amongst the worst performing in the South East region under Medway Tory LEA

The failure in political leadership in the education department is once again in the spotlight as the GCSE result league tables show that Medway schools continue to suffer under the management of this lacklustre Conservative controlled Local Education Authority

One school, Bishop of Rochester Academy, which sits in a neighbouring ward to Luton & Wayfield, and whose catchment is in my ward now sits in the top three worst performing schools in the UK, with only 16% achieving five good GCSEs

Medway is also below average with only 55.7% achieving five good GCSEs when compared to an average of 58.2%.

There are many good schools in Medway and they should be allowed full autonomy from the hand of Cllr Wicks. They do not want, nor desire, the attention of the Conservative cabinet.

It is however an abject and utter disgrace that despite all the complaints by residents in Luton & Wayfield and Chatham Central that their children are suffering a substandard education and have done so for such a long period of time.

We also continue to see poor results at other schools and the public expect better.

The Tory in charge, Cllr Les Wicks, has now overseen GCSE league-table results below the national average, with several schools amongst the worst in the UK and yet there is no apology on any Conservative website.

He has lost the confidence of the public over the botched 11+ test and the Primary school re-organisation fiasco's. He should do the honourable thing and stand aside for someone with an intellectual grasp for education and that can inject new leadership.

Not my words; but from his own Conservative colleagues.

It is time the administration relentlessly focus its attention on the failing schools from Hundred of Hoo, Robert Napier and Bishop of Rochester. Focused resource and political attention on the schools which need to do better.

In addition, would have at least expected a detailed statement today on the School results with an acceptance that they were not good enough. Yet there was nothing accept one casual remark to the press saying the results were good; below average performance is not good!

It is almost as if the league table results are not of any importance.

This school, and the others which have worsened under the Tories, have the responsibility to educate hundreds of young people to a good standard and yet the administration have put out no public statement as to how they will improve. It is a lack of direction which worries parents.

It is simply unacceptable to have a number of our schools amongst the worst in the UK. Medway is not a poor area and has significant areas of affluence; it is the lack of political leadership which has led us to worsening SATS and now below average GCSE results in many of our schools.

Cllr Les Wicks should go and new dynamism injected immediately

Why Tories are wrong on airport referendum

2012-01-25T19:50:00.006Z

The Medway Tory Council opposition poster to an Estuary Airport... and you wonder why it has reached consultation stage!

It seems a number of the Medway Conservative cabinet are still in denial about the referendum which is receiving significant support, not only from the Campaign for Rural England, but Conservative voters across Kent & Medway.

Support from phone-ins and even the Chair of a Conservative Club in Chatham.

The idea of a referendum is not pie-in-the-sky. It is a considered and sensible position which took into account the move by government to fully consult upon the idea of an Estuary Airport - subsequently seen to be entirely correct after last weeks leak.

Referendums are common on matters of civic interest, be they for elected mayors, a change in local government or even on major infrastructure projects like we observed in Dover. Incidentally; many of local MPs are on record in calling for referendums and at no point over the last 18 months has any Conservative Councillor stood up to mention cost on the local tax payer. It would seem some referendums are ok, others are not.

It is sad that whilst Tories are calling for more direct mayoral elections today, and Scotland is setting out the agenda for its referendum, that our Conservative administration is on poor ground on direct democracy.

I do not support referendums for every issue; we had one on Europe in the 1970s and back Cameron on this. On matters of signficant civic interest however; they do have an important place.

Remember the reasons why a referendum is necessary. The problem is that the 'pie-in-the-sky' campaign (which Cllr O'Brien uses in his background) has failed. No one knows who Cllr Chambers and Jarrett are beyond our Authority borders which is why six MPs today have written to Cameron requiring an audience which got little attention on ConservativeHome and nothing in the major broadsheets. Our local Council leader is a non-entity which is why we still have not had a reply from Justine Greening MP to our enquiry for a meeting last week.

It always was a low octane campaign, which has allowed local Tories to laugh this airport off as a Boris gimmick; only sadly for them it never was a gimmick and the government are now about to spend thousands of pounds of tax payers money on a consultation exercise. Not such a pie-in-the-sky that lobbyists have been over George Osborne and that funding sources have been warmed up from China to the Middle East.

MPs refusing to listen to the public last year is the reason why we are in this position in the first place and that is the simple fact. They should have sought meetings in November as this blog and many others made very clear.

The issue of an airport on the Peninsula will keep coming back, and will continue to do so, until the government (and in this case Conservative Government) get it that we do not want it. A referendum will allow people to finally have an opportunity to say No (overwhelmingly I suspect) to the idea once and for all. An idea which if allowed to grow will pose an existential threat to our towns and civic fabric.

On an issue which has significant and tangible impacts on our towns it is wrong-headed to say that people are not responsible enough to have a say on a project which will have fundamental impact on our civic nature.

I am particularly interested to note the arguments positioned against the airport from Cllr O'Brien which I have to say are very weak indeed.

Firstly; He has picked out a cost of £250,000 - which is unsubstantiated - but then contradicts himself by saying it could be cheaper, but without a figure, if we were to use a November window. I would suggest he has picked the total cost for an election and has not mentioned, probably deliberately, the smaller cost for an additional ballot box on an existing election. A November election would be sensible for staffing and cost; the next election after this would be the Euro-elections in May 2013.

However, taking account of the £250,000 cost for a single election; Given this scheme would take ten years, cost £50-70 billion and result in the destruction of villages, and fundamentally alter our civic environment, I would perhaps suggest that it is a price worth paying.

The £250,000; could have come from the overspend on the Chatham Bus Station or countless other programmes this Tory Council has mismanaged. His party have zero fiscal credibility, as is about to be exposed on the supposed balanced budget which is anything but. This Tory Council has well documented overun spends on Aveling & Porter, Stoke Crossing, Brook Regeneration and in the Education department on botched school building projects.

Or we could accept that a Council with a multi-million pound turnover could afford and may feel obliged to consult people on an issue of this significance.

Secondly; the suggestion that our staff would have a ‘logistical’ difficulty in two ballot boxes, despite the fact we had two at the last local election.

The actual time taken to count the Yes and No votes is miniscule when counting multiple split votes as we see with candidate ballots. To suggest it could be overshadowed by the Police Commissioner election is like saying the local elections were overshadowed by the AV vote; and implies voters are stupid and do not have a clear understanding of what they are voting on. People would grasp the difference and it would add an hour, maybe two, to an existing election night.

Thirdly; He suggests that a referendum in November would sit at the ‘end’ of a consultation exercise, after he admits he does not actually know the start and end dates. He also incorrectly implies that none of the parties wont have pre-existing campaign positions as if the AV vote never happened and the Conservative Party sat quietly on it. The Council has a responsibility to frame a sensible question asked in an appropriate fashion; it does not mean the administration and parties cant have a stated position and pursue them as I am sure everyone would. It is true that Council resources may not be used for overt campaigning until the result is clear, but then the parties should accept responsibility for this. In addition, once a mandate is received, the Council can act with full knowledge of a mandated result.

The timeline he has suggest is also unfeasible; I suggest that the aviation review is likely to be longer then six months, and that any primary legislative process would take at least 12-18 months; this ignoring the likely judicial review that Medway Council would call if it were to be accepted by government. To imply, as Cllr O'Brien has, that this could all be rubber-stamped by the government before November is irresponsible, unsubstantiated and just finger in wind speculation.

Lastly; the people were not given a substantive decision on the airport in the local election. The local election is a chance to elect a local Councillor to represent you across Council services more generally. It is a vote on a collection of policies which at the time did not involve any major discourse on the airport, because the government had no plans to consult! Not only have the proposals become more detailed but I would suggest, as did many callers on BBC Radio Kent last week that Local elections and referendums are not the same.

All in all Tories are clutching at thin straws in rejecting the referendum. Straws which will get strained more over the weeks and months to come.

Centre for Cities Analysis

2012-01-23T21:30:00.002Z

Click to enlarge

Some very interesting analysis from the Centre for Cities think-tank on how Medway compares with the rest of the United Kingdom

It makes a bleak read in some ways and a positive in others.

Medway comes out very poorly on education with our area amongst the worst in the region for the level of people with high level qualifications in comparison with areas with a fully comprehensive system. We also have very few knowledge-based jobs in our area which means Medway is disproportionately impacted by cuts to manufacturing and the public sector (ratio is 2:1 private to public).

Medway also has concerningly high business churn but with a low start-up in comparison to other areas. This means not enough is being done by the Council to encourage and start-up new business in comparison to other sized conurbations

The loss of income is also pronounced with average weekly earnings falling to £488 which is a real terms reduction of £6 but with inflation is likely to be significantly higher.

Overall Medway is in a fair position in comparison to cities in the North East and Midlands; but does not fair well in the region and on indicators where the Conservative administration could have had influence; business growth and support, they are failing in comparison to other nearby authorities.

Danger of Care Home Privitisation

2012-01-23T21:01:00.004Z

Letter sent to press below by Cllr Teresa Murray

Dear Sir,

The concerns raised in the Messenger article about Friston House and Winchester house care homes provide us with a timely reminder about the dangers posed by the Medway Council Cabinet's proposals, currently out for public consultation, to privatise Robert Bean Lodge, Nelson Court and Platters Farm. These popular and high quality homes are owned by the council and while this is the case it's much easier for the standards of care they provide to be monitored.

As your article shows even though private homes are subject to inspection by the Care Standards Commision, many more of them fall below acceptable practice when compared to those in the public sector. This is because the only other monitoring private homes have is that by relatives of users and annual visits from the Council who fund places in the private sector too. As accountability in the private sector is less regulated many private homes refuse potential clients and their families the right to drop in unplanned when trying to choose a home.

In the course of the consultaion I have heard relatives say that that they were even refused visits to see their loved ones already in private homes, if they didn't call first to say they were coming. Those who work at private homes are just as kind and caring as those who work in our council homes but they are paid less and there are fewer of them, reducing the time they can spend with those they look after. This results in higher hospital admissions where the neglect resulting from lack of time causes more presssure sores and infections. The consultation meetings have been well attended and I have now lost count of the numbers of people at the meetings or who have contacted me separately ,who tell frightening and moving stories about the way their loved ones ,now comfortable in our council homes, have been treated in the private sector.

Their stories include poor hygeine,the eviction of patients whose condition worsens, bad food and lack of feeding, regimes with few meaningful activities for residents and constant staff turnover. Privatising these much loved homes in Medway will leave the council prey to the private sector, vulnerable to uncontrolled pricing of care and weakened in terms of being able to uphold a gold standard or secure a safe place when things in the private sector go wrong.

Even the Parliamentary Public Accounts committee has recently issued a report saying that it's hard for councils to control standards of care in the private sector and intend to issue guidelines for tightening things up. I hope that the Conservative Cabinet of Medway council will listen carefully on February 14th to what the consultation has told us all and keep the homes in public ownership. Why let a good thing go when we could build on our success?

Privatising the homes is short sighted and the savings resulting from doing so are anyway very unclear, our older people have worked for all of us, they deserve the very best we can provide.

Cllr Teresa Murray

Labour spokesperson on Medway council, Health and Social care.

Tory Chairman endorses referendum

2012-01-19T12:22:00.003Z

A very interesting post which shows the wheels are falling off the Medway Conservatives over the airport with a former Chairman of a Conservative Club endorsing the referendum.

There is enough evidence to suggest this is a genuine comment which highlights the Medway Conservatives are engaged in a dithering display over the principled position by the Labour Group of a referendum.

The Tory faction fighting is now open with Tory Councillor's on the Peninsula using Labour as a proxy for their own internal fights against colleagues.

The below from Cobweb on Medway Messenger

"I will say right now as the former Chairman of a Conservative club and a die hard Tory Rodney Chambers does not represent my views on this matter. Rodney's views have come across as very insular and give the impression of intransigence based on a very narrow view of his vision of what the island of Medway should be achieving which I assume includes independence from the rest of the United Kingdom

Nowhere does he seem to possess any vision of the practicality of politics which embraces the future of jobs, progress, and future prosperity for Kent and Medway citizens. Medway has currently one of the largest unemployment problems around with 8 people announced competing for one job

Rodney Chambers cannot continue to bury his head in the sand. Sustainable jobs are badly needed in Medway now and for the future and we have to think of the interests of all of Medway's population not just a few who will likely undergo the horror and tragedy of relocation for the greater good of all. Using arguments that may have been valid 10 years ago does not augment your case in my view but diminishes it. The Cliff aiport protest fielded something like 100 and 2000 protesters marching. That's not a lot out of 250,000!

As regards getting the support of Medway's MPs I haven't forgotten that 2 of them the Hon(s) Reham Chishty and Mark Reckless were former Councillors and that shortly after the election in 2010 chose to remain in their old posts (I think one still does). So of course they are going to back their former boss as their future seats may depend upon it!

As regards Tracey Crouch who is my MP she is the only one who has come up with a sensible alternative to just no and that is Birmingham. I would agree wholeheartedly with her except that I think that the London area has been stipulated as the preferred site. Birmingham is easy to get to now only being an hour away by fast train from Euston(I used to get the 7:45 shuttle in 95) It'll be quicker when the high speed link gets in.

Neither Rodney nor the MPs can safely state that they represent a quarter of a million Medway citizens on this particular issue as they have not asked them.

A referendum might produce some interesting results on this matter. By that I mean a fair and impartial referendum which poses an objective question not a highly emotive one. Listening to Rodney on the radio the other day, It didn't appear that Rodney wanted the electorate asked in any other way but a subjective one. "

This Conservative is now endorsing the Labour referendum and we believe many others do so as well.

Only dithering Tory Councillors on the Peninsula; who voted against the referendum on a recorded vote; stand against the overwhelming majority who believe that a authority-wide or parish-led referendum campaign would give people a final say on the proposal and would be a shot in the arm to the anti-airport campaign.

Such is the desperation that they have now changed tack; suggesting that people may even vote for an airport; in a display of disloyalty against local campaigners there is no polling evidence to suggest this is remotely feasible.

Meanwhile today Tories continue to play local residents like a football; Cllr Chambers yesterday admitting that the people of the Peninsula are being pawned like a 'boiling pot' in a disgusting attempt to curry support for West London voters.

If you were living in Hoo, Cliffe or Grain; you must see that this is overt Conservative Party posturing at the expense of your house prices and businesses. It is simply outrageous and its spilling out into the open.

The message of splits highlighted yesterday with lack of core message from MPs.

Rehman Chisthi claiming that there were 'no plans' was straight from the DfT statement but was totally out of sync with context; Tracey Crouch MP stating that a consultation would be tedious and unncessary (clearly not in agreement with the above) in a rushed tweet which could, and will, be taken out of context. Mark Reckless MP now stating that if a consultation were to be conducted (but no apology at the volume of spin he put saying it wasn't going to be) that it would be good to reject the proposal - despite ignoring the fact that most of the options have been discounted in advance.

The Conservatives are an absolute and total mess. The ferrets are quite literally scratching each other to death.

Estuary Airport Consultation

2012-01-18T21:43:00.007Z

Well the gloves are off and the proper campaign begins across Medway, Gravesham, Sheppey, Thurrock and Essex to oppose the London Conservative plan for a mega-airport in North Kent.

An idea, which three years ago started as joke island off the Isle of Sheppey, has morphed, slowly but predictably, to onsite options at Grain and Cliffe on the Peninsula area of North Kent. A mega-airport which will impact hundreds of thousands of residents and change the community fabric of towns and cities across the Estuary.

The community in Medway has seen this fight before, but this time the plans are more detailed and being led by the Cameron Conservatives. Plans which if not opposed would uproot communities, destroy sites of significant ecological interest and land North Kent with ten years of transport chaos as the most beautiful part of North Kent and the Peninsula becomes a concrete slab. Surrounding areas would be blighted with noise and pollution.

So says the NIMBYist who would be opposed?

And you would be right, but this is not because I dont support public consultation on aviation; it is because the consultation itself has ruled out too many options before it even starts. No cross-party aviation group, a rule out of Heathrow (November 2011), Gatwick expansion (May 2010) and Stansted (May 2010) and you end up with very few options left.Birmingham has support but would require a link with HS2, which is itself under review and opposition. Kent has access to Europe, HS1 already built and nearby, two major motorways (M2 and M20), employment prospects and a working proposal for a further crossing East of Dartford. No surprises to anyone where this government is angling which makes it important that a proper campaign is run now.

Residents here have spent three years of being played as pawns by the Tories as proposal after proposal is released and trailed in the press, and this consultation I believe will be just the same if it is led by the Tories alone.

It is a test of local resolve across the Estuary to send a very clear message to the government.

And this clear message should not just come from a band of unknown grey-beards in the Council chamber, irrespective of composition, but by the collective voices of residents.

In Medway, we have been here before - less then a decade ago many Tories worked with Labour MPs on the anti-Cliffe airport campaign. The idea of Cliffe was even less developed then, but the Council resources were used to send posters, fix lamp-post placards and support local groups. This was right because it worked; the airport was dropped. The subsequent election saw Labour defeated locally and a Conservative administration formed.

The point is that this time, despite the plans being even more developed, the ruling Tories have not endorsed any formal strategy. They have waited too long and have been exposed by their own admittance to a woeful ‘pie-in-the-sky’ campaign, which was simply a low-cost way of not campaigning.The simple truth is that residents in North Kent owe no loyalty to a ruling Tory elite, and especially not now when there are questions about why more is not being done.

It is important for strong Labour groups to organise at the County, Unitary, District and Parish level. This means it is ever important to have a strong, capable and nimble opposition ensuring that pressure is applied to ensure that the Tories represent residents and that MPs are held to account in representing resident interest. An opposition which can work with partners in government and the region and which can effectively articulate itself to residents.

This does mean being robust and being engaged. Being in close contact on any campaign requires tenacity and perseverance.

Last week, before today’s news, Labour proposed a referendum on an airport in the Thames Estuary, at a full Council meeting, because we believed (correctly) it would be in the government proposals. We believed that a Unitary Authority wide referendum would allow residents across Medway to finally give a say to the idea once and for all, which on all polling currently would be a resounding No. An outcome to a consultation based on votes rather than the opinions of a distant elite who thus far have seemed incapable of doing anything against their own. A referendum which would send a message to Westminster that you cant just impose a solution because of three years of attrition, and/or because you want to play a game of chess between East and West London for votes. A referendum which would send a message that if you want to proposed mega-solutions you need to work in government with the opposition and groups on solutions and engage in a proper consultation of all the options.

The referendum was opposed by the Conservatives in the Council chamber and dropped, but the message was sent to residents and that is unlike ten years ago the Tories are closing off solutions and not suggesting any. A mistake that showed they do not trust the electorate to give a say on something that will fundamentally alter our civic environment.

Labour meanwhile are seen as leading on ideas, and that is where we need to be if we are to regain the trust of people for the future.

We will continue to campaign locally as part of a cross-party group but the public expect results and they expect action.We can not have the next six months be the same dithering and delay of the last, because withour a clear resolve and local leadership a poor campaign will send a green light for the bulldozers and that is not in our interest or yours.

Not one of ours

2012-01-16T22:33:00.000Z

Interesting to see the Council looking after it.

Salt Bins

2012-01-15T14:48:00.005Z

One of the most contentious issues in the winter of 2009/10 and 10/11 was the number of salt bins in the ward and whether they were stock filled.

Luckily this year we have not had the same level of snow and ice as in previous years but as ward Councillor's we are expected to be responsible for ensuring all our bins are replenished and where requested new bins be placed.

In late October, the ward team surveyed every bin, after we were sent maps, to ensure that stocks were high and most importantly where identified new bins were placed.

Some examples below from Wayfield.

Alamein / Cherbourg Corner

BEFORE

AFTER

Ironside / Roosevelt Road corner

BEFORE

AFTER

We have also moved a salt bin after request in Lawn Close in Luton and have replaced grit in several other roads including Mill Lane.

Vox-Pop on Care Homes

2012-01-14T19:00:00.001Z

Thames Estuary Airport Referendum

2012-01-13T10:50:00.004Z

Another day, and another article, in the editorial leader in the Times making clear the government is looking very favourably at an Estuary Airport proposal in the Thames Estuary.

It seems the ceaseless drip drip of national press coverage coming from leaks in government and the London Conservative spin machine is nothing short of managed. Pravda would be proud at the manner in which the public expectation is being managed by the Tory government; slowly but surely changing the goal posts and the psyche of the public.

This blog has been clear; it has never, and shall never, support an airport on the Thames Estuary.

The idea would destroy and uproot communities, undermine years of planned regeneration, cause ten to fifteen years of transport and roadwork chaos (as if we dont have enough), and lead to the re-definition of Medway as a place. Our civic fabric would be for ever be altered.

Whilst this above point is agreed across all political groups, the manner in which we have ended at this point has not.

The simple fact is that the Medway Conservatives are exposed as never before. Exposed by government policy changing and the goal posts moving. Exposed by the mutterings that Kent County Council can be bought off and that Cllr Chambers was none too pleased about being foisted onto a regional LEP forum. Exposed by our MPs running for the hills after the u-turn in November. It is clear that whilst they dithered others moved on... the moving slide from island to on-site.

This blog has been vitriolic in its opinion that Conservatives are being two-faced on this issue.

This is reality not fiction; the London Conservative Party and many in government, including Stephen Hilton and George Osborne, are continuing and actively pursuing this policy; meanwhile local Tories are running lack-lustre campaigns, in their own words 'verbal grenades' to try and 'contain' the threat.

The local Tories have finally accepted that verbal 'grenades' from Chambers and Jarrett have, not unsurprisingly given no one knows who they are beyond our Authority borders (believe me), had any impact in Whitehall. It is, and always was, simply naive to think that non-entities from a Local Authority in Kent can compete with the weight of the elected offices in London, and thus in November it reached a crunch point - on the movement of Philip Hammond MP.

Now a cynic would not suggest that putting an anti-Heathrow expansion campaigner as Transport Secretary was planned; the Kremlinology of this could twist the logic in most people. However, what we all know is George Osborne, after sustained lobbying from the London anti-heathrow campaign, the public near Heathrow airport (who were mobilised) and Justine herself the idea of expansion was ruled out of the aviation paper.

The point of note; the Thames Estuary was categorically not ruled out, despite that being the line-in-the-sand for local MPs set by the opposition and public

And yes, our MPs cant absolve themselves; they were happy to take the credit for challenging Cameron, and spinning letters to the press, but when the proverbial 'brown' hit the fan in November they ran for the hills. They have consistently failed to grasp the nettle and have accepted on face-value bland utterances from the Tory leadership; I believe they are also ignored in Whitehall as being either extreme or naive. I am angry at their failure... too right given the warnings and the known history of government undermining local MPs on this issue...

I was attacked last night by Tory Councillors not because I was wrong but because I challenged them with fact and set out their failures which are documented on this blog over time; and the simple fact is they have misjudged the politics. I was accused of being a 'silly child' and of being young (coincidentally both Tracey and Rehman are of the same generation), accused of grinning at the plight of residents and callously playing a partisan hand. I was staggered and bemused by the utter level of contempt from politicians who have braved local politics for decades; who are happy to have elections on Police Commissioners and on the EU during the Eurozone crisis, but not on something which poses an existential threat to our towns.

Simple truth; it sometimes takes someone who has not been blinkered by years of Council bureaucracy and compromise to see the wood from the trees. A fresh set of eyes not inwardly facing but outwardly looking; I am not an 'insider' run tired by years of officer-driven compromise, and I am proud of that. It seems a few too many of those exist; apologizing for a lack of ambition not pushing for the possible.

So it came to our amendment for a referendum last night which was rejected by the Conservatives.

Labour proposed the referendum with the full knowledge that on the latest Council poll that the majority nationally oppose the idea. Given the fact the local population will be most impacted and against, we felt a public vote would give a massive mandate and democratic punch to the no campaign and challenge the government and the Mayor of London head on. Not taking into account the potential impacts on the Peninsula in the future and the current ongoing impacts of dithering (house prices, business investment) we thought it necessary to give people a voice and stop this once and for all.

The referendum was to happen, but the question itself, and this is important, was to be referred to a cross-party forum for consideration. That is important because Tories still objected to giving the people a forum to oppose, despite the fact they could help write the question. Interventions from my colleagues making rational cases for its inclusion with their input were rejected as mischief.

Ruling out a future referendum was a mistake. The Conservatives rejected allowing the people a say; rejected the idea of Parish referendums and whilst accepting that 'pie-in-the-sky' had not worked refused to acknowledge the public any stake in deciding on the future for our towns.

Despite the amendment being rejected I did vote to support the establishment of the anti-airport cabinet group; my parting message was that this can not just be a forum for endless dithering and delay; and that a full blown lamp post poster campaign be set up as soon as possible to galvanize opposition.

In reality the public wont grasp, or care, who is sitting on what sub-cabinet group, but it will be important to see whether the Tories water-down proposals for campaign activity on this body. Watch this space.

I hope that in the future that the Parishes can take our idea and run with it; I will be suggesting to them they pursue localised versions of it. Despite the groans from two in the audience there is a worrying lack of understanding about the proposal; let me clear, this is to give a democratic mandate and add weight, and recognition to the anti-airport campaign. A vote would confer weight in London and the corridors of Westminster.

My closing statements were clear; the Tories rejected the idea of giving the public a say, they have mismanaged and underplayed the threat and have been caught exposed, our MPs have been woeful in Westminster and it is clear that ongoing dithering, will only lead to the public perception that one lot of Tories are saying one thing and other lot in Medway another. This is the history; the future is for them to finally grasp this issue and fight for our residents tooth and nail; I suspect and fear the weak leadership they have already shown will continue.

I hope this cross-party cabinet works but the proof is not a pie-in-the-sky but on a lamp post near you.

Will they step up; I really hope so for all those living in Medway

Back Birmingham Hub Airport

2012-01-11T21:44:00.002Z

We should back this immediately as stated on Monday.

Link to the full article

They want an aiport; we dont.

Rail Fares at PMQs

2012-01-11T19:57:00.005Z

Splitting Image warning of Tory privitisation...has to be watched...

Ed Miliband was on the right track today when he stood up and attacked Cameron over the increases in rail fares.

Rail fares are a contentious issue and this blog has been at the vanguard of exposing the absolute and eye-watering, vomit-inducing, hair-wrenching Tory hypocrisy over fares and most importantly why the Conservatives have fibbed and duped the commuter by cutting the rail grant and increasing direct cost, making the choice (and it was a choice) to scrap flex-caps.

I fully admit that Labour did not get it totally right and there is an argument for saying that fares for many were too high in 2008 and 2009.

But the argument at the time was clear; the investment to introduce HS1 and speed up rail times (which Tory Ministers now conceed is necessary in terms of HS2) and to improve rolling-stock, stations and security after years of chronic under-investment under the Conservative-awarded franchise Connex.

And dont let the Tories fool you on rail fares; because they are the culprits.

Rewind back to 2006 (only 6 years ago) and we saw the Tories finally apologise over the monstrous act of privitisation unleashed upon the public by the Major government.

Remember within seven years of the Conservative privitisation the railway was costing the taxpayer three times what it had cost before de-nationalisation (up from £1.3bn to £3.7bn). In the 1980s, fares covered 76% of rail costs, in 2006 42%.

The reason why fares in the UK are so eye-watering when compared with Europe is directly because of the Tory privitisation in the 1990s mentioned above. Other countries have state-owned rail and were able to manage cost; the Tory design of a myriad of complex Whitehall sub-contracts and punitive get-out clauses made it too expensive to re-nationalise (deliberately designed by the way). The establishment of a separate track company destroyed management discipline, unleashed a nightmare in infrastructure costs and proliferate litigation and regulation and your fares have gone up ever since.

The privatisation was the biggest Conservative failure on a national infrastructure programme ever.

Add into this mix the conveniently forgotton Tory-driven Connex franchise; many of the Tory Councillors in Medway moan about service now, but forget (mainly as many arent actually from Medway) that it was truly god-awful under the previous franchise.

The full scale of the Tory-franchised incompetence can be read here in a special Parliamentary report no less. This report is utterly utterly damning on the franchise, made all the more real by the fact it has been the only franchise in history to require re-nationalisation. These people were fiscally inept and duped the public; and they were quite literally playing with commuters lives.

Essientially the Tory franchise deliberately and maliciously hid the state of its finance which led to the SRA compulsory termination of the contract. It was operating at a loss with massive irregularities caused by an unsustainable model over 10 years. If you read reports at the time was putting passengers lives at risk; one only need to take a look at the Health & Safety record,

The Tories are so very happy to ignore history; to conveniently forget that SouthEastern inherited a network woefully starved of investment which had been fragmented and weakened because of there own botched incompetence.

Fares did go up; but the utterly shameless Tories then had the nerve only one year later to jump on the fact that Connex was allowed a concession for RPI+3% to invest in the same railways the franchise they awarded had just destroyed.

It is so utterly shamlesss that you have to admire the audacity

Fast forward to this week and you can see a genuine attempt by Labour to re-evaluate fares; we called for SouthEastern to return to 1% RPI and it happened after lobbying. The pledge to re-introduce fare-capping on all services in addition to the Labour transport five point plan on ticket pricing is a genuine and plausible alternative in the current climate. I suspect the Conservatives will steal all our policies but the fact remains that it is Labour that are raising this up the agenda with the support of commuters and the Trade Unions.

The fact that Ed raised the issue today on fares is symbolic. To Labour the improvement and best management on the railways has always mattered. We opposed the privitisation in the 1990s and we inherited a mess which had to be fixed. The reason why fares are and remain high is because of the Connex franchise and the mess left.

Lastly, the spin that Labour had planned to lift fare capping is utterly trite. The Conservatives had a choice in the Comprehensive Spending Review on rail to suggest another agenda (remember at the time the rumours of RPI+5% or RPI+7%).

The Tories chose to remove the cap and that was a government decision; just as the Conservative government has been pushed by opposition to reduce fares to RPI+1%.

No matter what the Tories spin on rail the independent facts stand for themselves.

Only a fool would not learn from history. This mess is the legacy left by them from the 1990s and for that they can be never forgiven

MPs back Care Home cuts

2012-01-10T22:54:00.000Z

Well it is not as if this blog has not given enough time for our local MPs to make it clear where they stand on the privitisation of Nelson Court, Platters Farm or Robert Bean and the closure of the Balfour Centre.

Our MPs have failed to make any public statement that I can find online about whether they back the cuts to Care Homes or not.

Now it has been revealed of sorts. Mark Reckless, Tracey Crouch and Rehman Chisthi back the closure and privitisation of these homes not because they are right, but because they are being led by Conservatives.

It is clear that the Conservative Council has pre-budgeted the closures and privatisation and it is also clear they have not, or at least publicly, considered the not-for-profit limited company or partnership model which is followed elsewhere in the country. Lastly, it is disengenuous to claim closures on the back of statistics which they themselves have manipulated on thresholds which have been changed to reduce numbers.

I can therefore cut and paste the comment from the Nelson Court Facebook page from Maureen Ruparel who has been organising the anti-closure campaign after I put in a request to find out the MPs position on the closure.

Tracey Crouch MP definately backs the closures

Some people cant understand why I have been quite so tenacious (or rude) in pushing for a response. A recent debate with local blogger Chris Sams, explained the logic of why I made a request, a quite assertive one, that they make a public statement on their position.

Members' of Parliament are in the end there to represent the people they serve and are beholden to them to make representations to government agencies, including the Council.

I requested that they make clear in public, to stop any confusion and allow their constituents to see a clear position, how they would react and respond to the consultation by the Conservatives on the Council to cut care services for the most vulnerable.

It is totally reasonable request to make; most MPs would have said that they were backing or not backing it and a link to a reason why. Given the media and press coverage, and ongoing debate and consultation, you would think that not only would a public position be sensible, but actually there would be an expectation of MPs to respond

I got a swift slap down for my enquiries.

The public really do deserve a better.

It is particularly eye-brow raising because meanwhile some of our MPs have rightly supported a cross-party Parliamentary Group to discuss care in the future; and yet in the same breath Tory Councillors ignore local Labour Party suggestions for a limited partnership under local authority control. Listening but only when told. Saying one thing and doing another.

Public and the residents deserve to know where our representatives stand so make it clear when requested.

Civil Aviation Authority backs airport

2012-01-10T20:50:00.005Z

Tory Boris endorsing the destruction of the Peninsula

Another week and another public body comes out to endorse the proposal for an airport in the Thames Estuary

It seems the endless march to the inevitable paper in April is all but certain to include plans for airports on the Peninsula, an island close to the Peninsula and at Southend.

Full Council on Thursday will consider a badly written and rushed paper on the airport which shows that Cllr Rodney Chambers has been forced into a LEP (Local Enterprize Partnership) Group which does not actually discount an Estuary airport. Indeed, he is sitting alongside Paul Carter who actually wants an airport in the Estuary.

The UK Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) - that government sponsered quango with responsibility for airways - today advised Government that without a credible, long-term Aviation Policy Framework that focuses and allows capacity to develop sustainably, it is likely that prices will rise, route choice will drop and the UK economy will suffer.

Andrew Haines, CAA Chief Executive

“Additional capacity would offer significant benefits for consumers, and for the UK as a whole, so long as it is delivered in an environmentally sustainable way. However, as we haven’t built a single runway in the south east of England capable of handling Boeing 747s and Airbus A380s for over 70 years, the difficulty of increasing capacity is obvious. This underlines the importance of an integrated policy framework that addresses environmental and planning dimensions as well as consumer need.

“However, in the South East, although a number of measures will help improve use of existing facilities and increase flexibility and resilience; these are essentially short-term fixes and are not enough to maintain the UK’s direct access to global markets alone without additional runway capacity. As such, developing appropriate additional capacity would deliver significant benefits to consumers and wider benefits to the UK economy."

Nothing was mentioned about the flight path issue which a number of Conservative Councillors for some reason think is important. All flight paths could br managed; oh well one argument demolished almost instantly.

Of course play back 12 months ago and all three Conservative MPs were stating it would never come to a government paper; the failure for them to grasp the nettle is now obvious for most to see. The low-key and shocking Medway Conservative campaign 'pie-in-the-sky' was a joke and deliberately kept as such to get Tories elected.

The biggest people to be let down are those on the Peninsula who were cuddled by Ashcroft and the Conservatives over the plans for Grain, [which were nowhere near as developed], but which opportunistic Tories spun into a position for electoral gain. We all remember the posters designed to look like independent ones and the sheer volume of fibs about Bob Marshall-Andrews to curry a few votes...

Well its payback - from all those voters whose house prices are falling, who are insecure about the future and who have totally lost trust in their Conservative representatives. The more Tories ignore this issue the tighter the screws will turn...

This blogger has spoken to independent parish councillors, chairman and residents and the simple fact is they have lost faith in Mark Reckless to have any influence over the airport process - many think his head is with the European issue and not focused on domestic problems.

Any MP with any thought would be running to endorse the airport in Birmingham now that HS2 has been accepted. Birmingham wants a new mega-airport and the rail network gives them an opportunity.

Tracey has run away from it and Rehman barely mentions it. CCHQ look like they have given them media advice, but unfortunately the about turn is visible for everyone to see; waxing lyrical about the airport in August and September to be silent in December. Come off it; get a grip

The House of Commons meets on Thursday to discuss Transport Questions; will any of our MPs seek assurances that the airport will not be in the paper in April?

I will put a bottom dollar that they wont, and even if they do, will get a flagrantly unsubstantive response which they wont challenge.

Over the next couple of days and weeks Medway Conservative MPs will be challenged. They can stop this charade of ignoring local issue after local issue and back Labour on a consistent position on the airport.

We will see whether they back the people or whether they shirk their responsibilities

Labour stand up for vulnerable

2012-01-08T22:03:00.004Z

Guest article by Cllr Teresa Murray; Spokesperson for Health.

Teresa is responding the article in the Guardian yesterday about the leadership of Ed Miliband:

Saturday's interview with Ed Miliband portrayed him as the personable, determined leader we in the Labour Pary know him to be who won't be distracted by less confident Party technocrats who are losing their nerve.

We have to play a long game and as Polly Toynbee rightly says, there's no shortage of battles to fight while this old style Tory government do what they know best,attack the vulnerable.

Here in Medway we are fighting to save the only day centres left for elderly and disabled people.

The local Tory council are doing what Eric Pickles wants them to do, shutting down as many public services as possible before the next election in the hope that by then, voters will have forgotten what they did and be grateful for the inevitable tax cut in the pre election budget.

We have seen this before but it doesn't stop it hurting. Our centres, now under threat of closure or privatisation give therapy,hope and respite to those who have no other means of socialisation and no possibility of finding such facilities or friendship groups elsewhere.

These groups also face losing up to £70 per week in Benefits making it even harder for them to fund their limited activities if the centres close.

This is the real fight and the Labour Party is up for it.

Cllr Teresa Murray

Rochester East Ward

Transport Price Hikes hit

2012-01-08T00:27:00.001Z

Article from YourMedway on Tory transport failure on bus and rail. More to come from other publications am sure.

Euroland could be worse

2012-01-06T12:22:00.005Z

Another Tory flipflop on Europe as they reneged within 2 years. Not as if we have seen opportunism from them over Europe before have we...

Particularly interested to read the latest blog piece 'Euroland is not working' from John Redwood; the arch Euroloon and as many will remember from the 1990s the 'bastard' behind the Tory leadership election in 1995.

It is particularly interesting and worrying to note now that John Redwood's position in the Conservative Party is now accepted as mainstream; such is the drift towards the right in the current crop of Conservative MPs.

Of course the argument positioned by John is utterly one-sided and I would suggest dangerous for UK jobs and our future economic interests. They must be ignored by the government; I hope they will, but these days you can never be sure...

Firstly he uses the argument that because unemployment is high the Eurozone it must be failing; whilst on the face of it this is compelling argument it totally ignores the fact that the crisis in unemployment is global. John knows as well as everyone else that unemployment is also very high in non-Euro countries in the EU - Latvia (16.2%), Lithuania (with flat tax - 15%). Bulgaria (12.1%), Poland (9.9%), Hungary (9.785) and UK (8.3%). These unemployment rates are broadly comparable, whether in the Euro or not, and are more related to the relative designs and strengths of domestic tax and spend policies then currency.

Secondly he argues that the weakness of the management of the Euro has caused the problem but then argues against further controls by rejecting the treaty. He is correct; the lack of central control over those in the currency from the centre allowed nation states to engage in debt-binges over the last 10 years. The Euro creators saw this early on which is why they tried to limit the budget deficits of the nation states involved, but it was (and this is crucial) watered down by the individual governments of the Eurozone at the time. The cause of the problem is not the Euro itself but the fact that individual nations tried to get out of the rules. Germany is therefore absolutely right to require sovereign capital monitoring and tighter fiscal control not because they want to 'take over' other countries but because it will keep stability across all the states using the Euro. Stability incidentally which will help all those in Europe whether in the currency or not, including the United Kingdom, in growing our economy because stability means growth, and growth means exports.

Cameron I believe was wrong to veto the treaty and that is why; the guff over the City of London was never on the table... and that is also why he will go back to the table to help push through a fiscal compact.

Thirdly, John targets the loss in equity value on banking stocks. There is always a risk of jumping on such fluctuations in stock valuations and some would say just a tad opportunistic. The decline in bank stock is related to cross-border loan exposures to in-debted economies and the capital implications on the bank balance sheets. Currency valuation is important but French banks investing in Greece would be just as exposed to loan implications were it in the Euro or not; however and I would juxtapose that the fact these countries remain in the Euro does give some form of underlying guarantee that payment will be received; albeit one that currently has little confidence.

It would be far worse believe me if these countries were kicked out of the Euro not only on its short term impacts but the markets would have zero confidence in these countries in extracting themselves from the problem (remember they have distorted the truth on economic performance / tax / spend for years). There would be a flight on capital like we have not seen and this would impact UK banks as well; we have huge exposure to Italian debt. Returning to the dracma or lira would have undermined Bank capital balance sheets across Europe even more...

John then talks about bond yields which he fails to mention are decreasing. Gilts are high and that happens when any national government is overly exposed; irrespective of its currency. The fact is gilt yields are not solely related to currency and is actually related to government balancing its books; exactly the treaty solution which John opposes and Cameron veteod. Incidentally if a country were to de-value its currency the gilt repayments would skyrocket... creating an even larger risk to surrounding states and those banks John is talking about.

The last mistake John makes is on currency valuation. Now there is a truth to the fact that had Greece been allowed to leave the Euro that it could have revalued its currency so making exports more attractive - and therefore magically improving jobs. This assumes though that other countries are fiscally stable and that there is a demand elsewhere in the global economy; neither is true currently. I would suggest it would be worse for the countries kicked out because unemployment would still go up, gilts would go up and this would spread instability. it is also likely the Eurozone would have introduce tariffs on imports to prevent wholesale destruction of nationalised industries in Euro-land economies; leading to fiscal nationalism and the undermining of the common market itself.

And that is what these Tories want.

The break up the Euro would lead to major instability in the European Union. The end result in my mind a round of fiscal nationalism and tariff impositions across Europe as nation states compete to be the best value; not only would this have been self-destructive but also immensely damaging to employment prospects in the UK, which has a relatively high wage bill and which could never compete on a 'race to the bottom.' Fiscal nationalism of course leads to jingoism and the election of extremist governments and so the political implications mentioned by Merkel are entirely accurate.

Incidentally the fact that Greece, Spain, Ireland and Italy can remain in the Euro does confer stability. The markets know that the Eurozone nations are acting, albeit and I agree, not quickly enough. They also know that politics in these countries is subservient to the wider economic interest; the imposition of Mario Monti in Italy may be anti-democratic but no one is suggesting it has not been a necessary solution.

The Euroloon Tories state that imposing policy on government is anti-democratic but ignore the fact that IMF has been doing this for years by the backdoor. In an interconnected world to be utterly niave to this fact is playing games for populist appeal. Of course the ideal solution would be the election of a government that has a mandate (e.g. Spain) but this is not always the case in countries with a very pluralistic system of political engagement; sometimes difficult choices need to be imposed and I believe the President of Italy acted correctly in selecting Mario Monti.

And for those who dont think there is precedent in the UK; you'd be wrong. The formation of a national government of all parties happened in the 1930s where the King led the creation of a joint Labour and Conservative government. I refer primarily to the government of Ramsay MacDonald.

It is all very easy for the Euroloons to moan from the sidelines but the basic premise of fiscal union and currency union is sensible. Free trade, no tariffs and open movement of Labour increases wealth in all countries and reduces conflict; it is the basic premise of capitalism. For it to work properly we all need to balance the books and for the hypocrites to claim this at home whilst opposing measures for it abroad are playing a dangerous game with our jobs for a principle.

The Euroloons are posturing to the national-flag to gain grubby votes out of people's natural response in a crisis which is to protect one's own. Pandering to prejeudice whilst ignoring the end result of their political argument which is essentially nihilistic and regressive.

The destruction of the Euro would be immensely damaging to our economy and for anyone to claim otherwise is living in laa-laa land.

Compare and Contrast CVs

2012-01-05T22:58:00.009Z

The Iron Lady

Background before becoming MP

Margaret Thatcher was born Margaret Roberts in Grantham, Lincolnshire, on 13 October 1925.

She spent her childhood in Grantham, where her father owned two grocery shops.[4] She and her older sister Muriel were raised in the flat above the larger of the two, located near the railway line. Margaret was middle class and came from humble roots

Her father was active in local politics and the Christian church, serving as an alderman and a Methodist local preacher, and brought up his daughter as a strict Methodist. Unlike Cameron who is not particularly religious. Margaret had religious convictions.

He came from a Liberal family but stood—as was then customary in local government—as an Independent. He was Mayor of Grantham in 1945–46 and lost his position as alderman in 1952 after the Labour Party won its first majority on Grantham Council in 1950. Family was not traditionally Conservative.

Roberts attended Huntingtower Road Primary School and won a scholarship to Kesteven and Grantham Girls' School. State school educated.

She arrived at Oxford in 1943 and graduated in 1947 with Second Class Honours in the four-year Chemistry Bachelor of Science degree; in her final year she specialised in X-ray crystallography under the supervision of Dorothy Hodgkin. Degree was not PPE; she was not a careerist by choice from the age of 16.

After graduating, Roberts moved to Colchester in Essex to work as a research chemist for BX Plastics. Had a professional career before politics.

Stood in a non-winnable seat of Dartford; Officials of the association were so impressed by her that they asked her to apply, even though she was not on the Conservative party's approved list: she was selected in January 1951 and added to the approved list post ante. Not given a safe seat because of connections in CCHQ

Her selection was not assured and she had to work hard against the establishment to win a seat in Finchley. She was not part of the 'old-boys' network and instituted major change.

Etonian Cameron

Background before becoming MP

David Cameron is the younger son of stockbroker Ian Donald Cameron and his wife Mary Fleur daughter of Sir William Mount, 2nd Baronet. His father was born at Blairmore House, a country house near Huntly, Aberdeenshire. His paternal grandmother, Enid Agnes Maud Levita, Cameron is a direct descendant of King William IV by his mistress Dorothea Jordan. This illegitimate line consists of five generations of women starting with Elizabeth Hay, Countess of Erroll née FitzClarence, William and Jordan's sixth child, through to Cameron's grandmother (thereby making Cameron a 5th cousin of Queen Elizabeth II). Aristocratic 'high society Tory upbringing' and related to Queen

Cameron's paternal forebears also have a long history in finance. His father Ian was senior partner of the stockbrokers Panmure Gordon, in which firm partnerships had long been held by Cameron's ancestors, including David's grandfather and great-grandfather. Family wealth made through banking dynastic 'connection' with historic banks

Cameron was educated at two independent schools: at Heatherdown Preparatory School at Winkfield, in Berkshire, which counts Prince Andrew and Prince Edward among its alumni. At the age of thirteen, he went to Eton College in Berkshire, following his father and elder brother. Eton is often described as the most famous independent school in the world and "the chief nurse of England's statesmen". Educated at top Private Primary and Secondary Schools

He obtained three 'A' grades and a '1' grade in the Scholarship Level exam in Economics and Politics. Went to study politics from early age

After leaving Eton in 1984, he worked as a researcher for Tim Rathbone, Conservative MP for Lewes and his godfather. In his three months he attended debates in the House of Commons. Benefited from Nepotism and family connection to get experience

Cameron was a member of the elite student dining society the Bullingdon Club, which has a reputation for an outlandish drinking culture associated with boisterous behaviour and damaging property. Member of elitist drinking society (and anyone who has been to University will know this sort)

He bagan his career with a call from the Palace which got him a job at CCHQ. He progressed to work on campaigns and was part of the 'brat-pack' which successfully worked to elect John Major in 1992. He then became SPAD to Home Office and Treasury Ministers. Gained first job through nepotism and call from Palace and progressed up greasy pole internally. Considered a 'careerist' root into politics

He used his political connections to get a top PR job at Carlton.

Having been approved for the Candidates' list, Cameron began looking for a seat. He was reported to have missed out on selection for Ashford in December 1994 after failing to get to the selection meeting as a result of train delays. Early in 1996, he was selected for Stafford, a new constituency created by boundary changes, which was projected to have a Conservative majority. Was given a winnable Tory seat which he only lost because of the huge swing against the Tories in 1997.

Labour Memo

2012-01-05T21:36:00.006Z

MEMO [TO ALL]

To: The Public

From: The party of the centre / moderates

Re: 2012: Setting the Scene

The leak of the Labour Party strategy memo today was perhaps not as bad as first appeared and certainly has a number of interesting and important messages for Labour members which are similar to my own conclusions.

The memo, ironically written by the former Conservative Election Strategy supremo Shaun Woodward (who worked alongside Cameron in the 1992 Conservative Campaign team and who is despised by him) states that Labour is in a strong position when compared with other opposition parties after government, and that we are well positioned to improve our position and build on most accepted poll leads that we held on average last year.

He is absolutely right, as this blog has suggested, the Labour Party is united and occupies the moderate and centrist positions on a number of key policy issues and on this turf we must remain.

I absolutely agree that the Tories are now shifting to the right which represents a major strategic and electoral mistake for them.

The Euroloon fraternity locally, represented by Mark Reckless and Tracey Crouch are of course very pleased to see the party move back into the right wing comfort zone. The public however have the impression that the Tory detoxification exercise has all but collapsed - the nasty party is back.

The memo states

"Analysis of Tory party policy, carried out over the summer, convincingly demonstrates the Conservatives are shifting to a distinctly rightwing strategy, in both their chosen focus on issues and their solutions,"
"Cameron clearly recognises some of the danger he faces in his repositioning. He is still seeking to separate himself out from a toxic Tory brand and has assumed a presidential role and style. But the Tories have become far less worried about inhabiting the centre ground they once cultivated and more worried about any perception of appearing weak."

"They do not appear to be seeking long-term solutions to Britain's real challenges and problems"

There is now an opportunity for Labour to move back onto the centre ground but we need to do some heavy lifting on economic credibility and we need the public to notice we are doing it.

A number of heavy hitters making noises could be presented as a party split and at war with itself, or it could be used as a means to articulate a new narrative on the economy. An argument takes press attention and allows differentiation and markers to be set. The public tell focus groups Ed needs to up his game; a few surrogates take to the air to state the same (as the public); and within weeks a shift in leadership. I suspect we will see more.

The public perception is that the Tories are inhoc to big business (primarily investment banks, private equity and spivs) - they are the elite - the establishment and represent the vestige interests. They dont like Labour still but they also know that all is not working with Cameron.

The polls being so close reflects the fact that the electorate moved to the left between 1997-2010 and that the Tories are now trying to push them to the right a little bit too quickly, and in so doing damaging the Tory brand:

"But here is the paradox: whilst the Tories made changes before the election – intended to convince the public they were compassionate – since the election (and especially in the last few months) the Tories have taken major strides back towards their ideological roots. Buffeted by events, there is a growing incoherence between 'liberal conservatism' and the increasingly shrill language the Tories are using as they vacate the centre ground."

Cameron is and should be the only target for Labour and he does have an achilles heel.

Cameron is a light-weight who failed to win the general election with all the fair winds behind him, he is a fop, an elitest and he gets things wrong time and time again. He is not a 'grocers daughter' and did not achieve his position by meritocracy; he won it from a call from the Palace! He is a born Tory not a grafter and that image will never shift enough for a big majority; ever.

The media have been totally on side since his election yet the Tories barely bobble around the 38% mark. The trick for Labour is to bank the Liberal Democrat vote and outflank him in the centre which the Tory party is allowing with grins. Target Cameron as an out-of-touch elitest which even Tory voters think is true; focus on his CV, his financial backers, his education and background and keep on reminding people.

Labour do need a new narrative on the economy and accepting some deficit reduction and we need the public to be watching whilst we do it; mirroring Tory cuts in some areas will nullify any attack and allowing Labour to be presented as sensible on others we oppose

A move to a more fiscally neutral position on deficit reduction where we accept that cuts have to be made but that Labour would be fairer, nicer, better at delivering them would be a good position to be in 6 months time. Post-Olymics the economy may see recovery say we need to be positioned to take this forward.

Labour can also present the Tories as fiscally irresponsible on the Euro and Europe. Not now, but in six to twelve months time this blog predicts the Eurozone crisis will stabilise; rest assured we will point back at those that called for its implosion and ask the electorate whether that was sensible in the middle of a downturn.

Irresponsible partisan posturing which would have ruined our economic recovery at a key moment of recovery.

Miliband does need to improve his personal profile and leadership position; I suspect you will see much more of that over the next six months helped by 'managed debate'. Cameron was in a very similar position this far into his term as opposition leader and did exactly the same.

The Tories know that Ed is not damaged goods and that the public still have an open judgement on him. This is better than Hague and Howard and he is immeasurably stronger than IDS; if he can stiffen the sinews and stand up on issues in the centre they will respond positively to the Labour brand; contrast it with the elitest Tories who are trying to move the public too far too fast to the right and the vote share wont slip beneath 40%.

The Tory attacks on Ed show wobbles in the Tory Party and the recent poll fillip does not reflect a sustained gain. They are making an ideological mistake but Labour needs to be positioned to gain by understanding our weaknesses and targeting there's.

Back on track

2012-01-04T23:04:00.008Z

Connex - The failed Tory profit-making franchise

Over the last couple of months have been working with colleagues on a number of potential solutions to reduce rail fares.

One of those that could be actively considered by Labour is the co-operative or social partnership model.

Some of my ideas below (policy suggestions)

Retain Network Rail in government hands

The model inherited by Labour in 1997 was fragmented and allowed the Tory-driven agenda of profit making into public services. The slavish devotion to profit leading to unsafe tracks and millions to be spent later as Labour had to fix the broken system. Never again.

Retain Network Rail in its current format as a not-for-profit enterprise and extend the principle.

Introduce not-for-profit Social Partnership / Co-operative train franchises

The not-for-profit model was adopted by Labour for Network Rail (see above) in the early-2000s.

The Labour principle could be extended and widened to franchises. Private or indeed state-owned franchises managed in tandem with local authorities or a collection of authorities which could manage it as an arms-length limited company.

This is not a socialist fantasy. Transport for London currently manages buses in a similar manner and the principle could easily be extended.

Transport Commissioners could be elected to manage bus and trains.

Either way retaining the efficiencies and management of the private sector whilst keeping prices down through removing the profit motive. A democratic mandate driven via the elected commissioner.

The Tories have always thought marketisation is the way to solve the probem; and they are ideologically wedded to this argument. Suggesting the creation of regional transport boards as limited companies with an elected leadership could be the solution.

Tickets

Scrap the glut of different types of railcards and introduce one single discount rail card (which would get discount; [over 60s (link with buses), students (NUS), forces (Military), AND income tax bracket)]. Income related ticket would require registration with certificate from HMRC on tax code / income as proof. Income tapering would remove the inherent bias on fares against poorest. It could be introduced into current system easily. Currently students and forces have to provide evidence.

Remove the different type of tickets and match online and ticket office prices

Technology

Passengers should be allowed to purchase season ticket online via ebank accounts or via direct debit monthy installments with discounts for collection at station kiosks. Already in part introduced but system is cumbersome.

Rail franchises should move towards touch-in touch-out system, linked to credit/debit card as ticket. Initial outlay paid for by bank loans on future income accrued from accounts using system. Offer reduction in price for online renewal so reducing station queues.

Your debit/credit card would then become the season train ticket.

Refunds

A suggestion that could be immediately implemented is days-in-lieu added on renewal equivalent to delays, calculated for previous month or year. This would not require a complex repayment system for season-ticket holders just a % calculation of journeys delayed on average and equalise that to days. Therefore a month with 10% delays would get free 3 days added to next months season ticket.

An annual ticket where the year previous has 10% delays would a month free.

Could be introduced with current technology with basic calculations. Customers would then feel they would be getting money back

Individual ticket holders entitled to online vouchers or 20% immediate refund at end station without having to complete complex form

If you loose annual / monthy season ticket should not require lengthy process of form filling. Immediate over-counter renewal possible

Company rail card

Encourage companies to mass purchase rail cards for staff and deducted via salary. Companies offered incentives to do so.

e.g. Those that register could be entitled to NICs deduction on employer contributions to encourage registration. Companies could retain profit on delays so recouping organisational loss for delays in lieu of payment. Bulk discount purchase would reduce cost-impacts

Income Generation from alternate sources

Stations should be centres for energy micro-generation / recycling. Solar panals, wind. Land owned by rail at sides is unused currently. Stations could be fitted to be energy self-sufficient and supply grid.

Government subsidy of solar specifically targeted on transport nodes invested through Green investment bank.

Paper recycling could be sold on the market

Nationalised Network Rail should own all stations and manage stock centrally so pooling efficiencies of scale and bargin-power negotiaton on contracts. These could then be tendered en-masse in auction process to coffee-chains, newsagents and services within. Asset must remain in public hands. Proceeds kept for station improvements.

Democratic Accountability

Local Authorities should establish transport user groups which should be able to scrutinise regional franchises. Transport company bosses compelled to report to Council Scrutiny Panels. These could report into regional LEPs

The next level up would be to have an elected transport commissioner and a regional transport quango with powers to commission and manage transport costs. This in reality be a small team but be democratically accountable. Transport for London with powers over rail is an example.

Rail fare increases

Legislation introduced to state average fares should not be an more than the average wage gain in the economy. This would mean investment in good times and not in recession. Follows cyclicity in economy and fairer.

Any increases above annual wage must be met 2:1 by equal government subsidy if the investment argued pursued by transport commissioner. This ensures affordability, will track economic indicators and when fares go up by more than average that government has to pay 2:1 more as a result. Of course whoever puts up the fares is at political risk.

Additional Perks: Value for Money

Rail Season ticket holders should be allowed option to top-up to include regional bus season / cinema / theatre tickets at a reduced rate so conferring other benefits.

In reality this could be linked to a credit/debit card deal. Could also be linked with other transport services / points system like BA.

This would disassociate the cost. A nectar card deal for instance could see reduced cost on season ticket or spending £50 on fuel in Sainsbury gets you £30 off. Let the companies do the slack; let the government or transport boards auction.

The above are positive solutions for the individual commuter above but we also need to make the tough calls on cost reduction. The immature amongst the right wing will attack this, I can imagine the comments now, but we do need to have a rationed debate.

Immediate cost savings and tax ideas

All train services on Sundays scrapped from non-core stations with hourly bus services from hub stations. (e.g. Chatham in Medway). Inter-city services between major cities retained but only to hub stations if desired. The hubbing of trains could see services run from the HS1 spine in central Kent from perhaps 3 or 4 core stations. Suggestions would be regular bus services from Medway station (Chatham) into Ebbsfleet International every 40 minutes - bus journey would take 20 minutes or so. From Ebbsfleet a 20 minute journey into London.

This would be unpopular but also allow allocated time for fixed track and works so steam-lining engineering contracts; cost reduction of not having unprofitable services on Sunday. Train usage on Sunday is minimal but yes it would hurt some.

Introduce VAT on air travel for all domestic flights and use subsidy to invest in rail. This will have impact of reducing unnecessary flights and allow investment in rail.

Fare Fail: Send your message today?!

2012-01-03T22:48:00.003Z

This blog is supporting the FareFail campaign against the Conservative-led government which has let down the commuter and rail user.

Despite all the hot air prior to May 2010 we have seen eye-watering increases in fares on both Medway trains and buses. The Tories have simply let the commuter down because they have cut the direct transport grants; they are therefore not only charging the fare user more, but commuters get less investment. It is unfair.

Medway Labour has been consistently leading on opposing fare increases with a campaign event only in mid-December at Chatham bus and train stations. Labour have been speaking with residents who are sick and tired of the lame excuses on transport; sick of botched £10m Tory bus station and the eye-watering bus fares, sick of the train fares swindle which they were promised would not happen by Tory Councillors and PPCs prior to May 2010.

Medway Labour have also been working closely with Maria Eagle MP and the Labour transport team on developing new policies for train users so that we can once again champion the cause of commuters. The party that stood up against the reckless privatisation in the 1990s which destroyed the railways and left a fragmented and dangerous legacy - You can never trust the Tories on rail.

This blog has also exposed the utter hypocrisy of Conservative MPs who are happy to spend taxpayers money subsidising their own rail and car travel at your expense. These same Tory MPs are now trying to change the IPSA rules so that you cant hold them to account on transport

You can send a message to the multi-millionaire and out-of-touch cabinet of Conservatives who may indeed have chaffeur driven and subsidised cars in government, but can not and should not ignore the rest of the public who are expected to get to out and work.

In 2012 our overpriced rail fares have been hiked again.

Our trains are already the most expensive in Europe.In three years time ticket prices will be 24% more expensive than now, yet passengers continue to be stuck with overcrowded, unreliable trains, with less staff on trains and less staff at stations.This Tory-led Government is taking us further and further away from the value for money train service we all need.

Are you sick of paying hundreds of pounds extra each year to get to work?

If so back the FareFail campaign and send a message to the out-of-touch Tory elite in government.

Round-up of 2011

2012-01-01T18:21:00.011Z

The twelve month local review of the political year. For those interested you can also read last years blog piece on 2010.

It is interesting reading the narrative in bullet point form as it reveals themes and trends on multiple issues.

It has been a long year!

January 2011

The local election notched up a gear as the squabbles in the press between Liberal Democrats reached pitch levels. The argument boiled over into a full scale spat between former Liberal Democrat PPC Cllr Andy Stamp and former Councillor and King-maker Alan Jefferies. The spat revolved around allegations of harassment that occured subsequent to the leadership election to the Liberal Democrat Group which saw Cllr Geoff Juby elected.

Council insiders revealed that the Council will seek to cut 750 staff

Mark Reckless MP was caught taking to the piste in Switzerland; whilst claiming at the same time by twitter that South Eastern rail fares were excessive and not 'fit for purpose.' Later revealed he only was en-route.

Strood Councillor Jane Chitty was in trouble over allegations over a dodgy address; a reputation that threatened the Tories in a marginal seat. Not upheld.

The economy shrank by 0.5% in the fourth quarter of 2010 showing the first signs that the Conservative economic gamble was failing to secure recovery for Britain. Alan Johnson was replaced by Ed Balls as Shadow Chancellor and Labour predicted a further decline in the UK's performance unless the UK engaged with European partners.

Cllr Vince Maple raised the issue of the Chatham Bus station at Full Council. Conservatives refused to give an answer on the future budget for the station but stated would not overun significantly.

February 2011

Medway Council budget cut by 11.9% as Tories promise to residents that front line services [including adult social care and care homes] will not be hit. The budget is open about cuts to front line services to libraries

Medway Tories re-affirmed the Labour pre-manifesto committment to re-introduce on Free Swimming after Tories scrapped it in 2010, and pledged to work to introduce a Freedom Pass after previously ruling it out but were deliberately unclear as to future funding pledging only a miserely sum. Labour responded figure budgeted for Pass was way below expected cost and was a face-saving exercise which would still leave young people in Medway worse off.

The Medway Labour Group published its first major manifesto committment to freeze Council Tax for two years at the Annual Budget Meeting. The Conservatives were caught off-guard and scrambled a response indicating they would, and had always planned to copy the pledge. In reality both parties nationally had a similar position on the Council Tax Grant but Tory core attack line on Council tax nullified.

The Medway Liberal Democrat spat continued in full public with statement and counter-statement being released to the media. Labour attacked the Lib Dems for being riven with factional splits and failing to fight for Gillingham residents. A full transcript on the Lib Dem spat here. Labour MP, Caroline Flint visits Gillingham to canvass for local candidates in Gillingham South and North wards which are key Lib Dem/Labour marginals

The Medway Labour Group leader Paul Godwin, publishes position to cut local Councillor grants and stipends after it was revealed local Councillor's cost taxpayers £750,000.

Labour published a manifesto commitment to protect heritage and work with resident groups after the £850,000 summary destruction of the Strood Aveling & Porter buildings for a 'temporary' car park, and the issues on tree removal on the Brook for the 'dynamic' bus facility were rushed.

Medway Conservatives claimed Labour were planning a Medway Tunnel Toll; despite fact the purchase was mired in allegations of inappropriate relationships and backroom deals by Conservative Councillors and the Rochester Bridge Trust. Labour accused the Tories of purchasing an asset which would leave a tax bombshell on the Council budget in future years.

The Allhallows Brimp fiasco hits the Tales from Gun Wharf as Parish Councillors are called to account after dodgy dealings on a local youth club on the Peninsula. Medway Councillor's are initially distant from the issue, having appeared to be caught off guard, later become involved in what becomes a tale of ego's in the village.

March 2011

Councillor Alan Jarrett is in trouble over Medway City Status as he tries to rebrand core Council services in advance of any potential announcement. The Advertising Standard's Agency rules against the Conservative administration but there is no apology from Councillor Jarrett who compares the Medway City bid with that of a rock festival

Campaign by Cllr Teresa Murray and Nick Bowler to save blood services in Rochester well received in Rochester East ward. Tories caught off guard by public petition and accused Labour of scaremongering

Medway Labour publishes manifesto pledges for a full review of the CCTV Cars and a focus on stamping out anti-social behaviour which blights communities

Conservative Chancellor George Osborne spells out his second budget and admits that all is not going to plan A. He blames the snow in December. Labour suggest growth figures are way too optimistic and predict a slow-down in economy with the private sector not picking up the slack. George Osborne pledged to meet his deficit target by end of Parliament. (NB: This pledge was dropped in November Autumn statement).

Rumours spread that Cllr Rodney Chamber was due to stand down after the local election and to expect a leadership change. Tory bloggers suggest Labour mischief making.

Medway Tories publish full local election manifesto but forget to place the imprint on the bottom of the publication making it illegal under electoral law. Efforts are swiftly made to take the PDF version of the manifesto down from Conservative websites but whiff and accusation of incompetence ensue

Strood candidate re-shuffle on the cards as Cllr Chitty mired in further allegations of inappropriate behaviour in China from a respected local businessman and former Special Constable. Allegations emerge that there were major selection issues in the Rochester & Strood Conservative Association which led to bad blood; and suggested possible departure of John Ward from his official membership position.

April 2011

Local election short campaign begins in earnest. Labour publish progressive local election manifesto (with imprint) with a six point plan to 'Get Medway Moving'. Focus on transport, Council Tax, Weekly bin collection retention, safeguarding Sure Start, improving Primary Education, Anti-Social Behaviour mitigation and more funding for Greenspaces and opposition to Boris Airport. Tory surrogates accuse Labour of copying their manifesto.

Medway Lib Dems only mainstream party not to have a manifesto.

Independent candidates in Gillingham South accuse Labour of approaching them to defect. Challenged by Medway Labour who suggest approaches were mutual.

Candidate nominations close with 315 people nominated for 55 seats in May. Labour and Conservatives put a full slate of candidates each despite last-minute rumours and accusations of candidate changes on both sides

Sure Start cuts of £281,000 revealed in question to full Council.

Councillor Vince Maple asked the same question on the bus station met by static from Conservatives. Labour highlight the cost could run into the multiple millions over the original £5m budget estimate.

GMB publishes figures which highlight Medway Conservatives take home £515,000 in take-home allowances. Labour accuse Tories of lapping up the cream.

May 2011

Conservatives retain control of the Council with 35 seats. Labour take 15. Lib Dems are confined to three seats with the independents taking two. Medway votes No to AV.

Cllr Paul Godwin re-elected leader and Cllr Vince Maple elected to Deputy Leader of Labour Group. Cllr Geoff Juby returned as leader of the Liberal Democrat Group and Rodney Chambers / Alan Jarrett re-elected into leadership positions of the Conservatives.

Medway Conservatives refuse establishment of youth organisation despite protests. Medway Conservative Future later established but only represents one and a half constituencies after complaints by Gillingham & Rainham constituency.

First financial fiasco hits administration as £1.2m hits Woodland's Primary School. Total lack of transparency over awarding contracts for new building work at school ongoing for months.

This blog predicts the future rise of Rory Weal, rising star of Labour youth, in an unusual blog plug.

Road re-surfacing plans revealed showing Conservative wards received disproportionate funding for road improvements. Twydall road safety improvement scheme scrapped in favour of Lordswood leisure centre improvements

Labour propose a new Mayor and Deputy Mayor as designated by the previous points-based selection system. Tories politicise the position by imposing candidate on Medway residents under dictat.

Medway Labour support the Love Music Hate Racism campaign

June 2011

John Woodcock MP accuses Medway Tories of gerrymandering and underfunding road maintenance by £35m in total leading to spat with administration on appalling state of Medway roads

Medway Tory Council puts £86,000 on Credit card bills

Medway Messenger hires several new journalists with investigatory experience. YourMedway ceases to print Medway-covering editions leaving only two mainstream publications; Medway News & Medway Messenger

This blog publishes transport subsidy under IPSA for every Conservative MP in Kent. Blog highlighting hypocrisy of Tory position on rail fares. Shadow Transport Secretary Maria Eagle MP uses Chatham station to highlight Labour opposition to train fare rises which could rise above £5,000 for HS1 users in 2012/13.

Liberal Democrat Councillors cleared of allegations of harassment from now re-elected Councillor Andy Stamp

Shadow Business Secretary John Denham MP, visits Rochester to highlight that Labour is back in business and policy to cut VAT for small business

Boris Johnson plans for an airport in North Kent receive backing of 100 top British Business CEO's and News International Group (Sun & Times)

Teaching strikes loom as Medway Labour highlight data on cuts to teachers and support assistants in Medway schools despite assurances there would be no front line cuts to services by Conservatives in May 2011

Tory-led Government publishes consultation on Dartford Toll increases

July 2011

Medway Labour step up campaign on Woodland's fiasco demanding to know how incompetence was allowed to happen under the watch of Cllr Les Wicks. Tories move to blame governor's and staff and absolve Cllr Les Wicks of all responsibility. Labour say its time for Les Wicks to step up and step out.

GDP figures for the last quarter reveal stagnant growth of 0.2%. Tory austerity plans unravel as growth part of the deficit reduction strategy is undermined. Labour warn Chancellor need to work with European allies on crisis encompassing Eurozone nations

Newly elected Gillingham Labour Councillor's get down to work in the ward. Warmly received by local residents fed up with Liberal Democrat division

Campaign to safeguard St Mary's Amateur Boxing Club steps up in Luton & Wayfield ward

Blog raises concerns of monopoly with announced merger of KM with KRNM. Predicts this coud be a major stumbling block to a merger.

Kent Conservatives and Liberal Democrats publish an unprecedented joint-letter opposing the Police Commissioner propsals by the government. Medway Conservatives are isolated in the county.

Cabinet papers reveal cost of Chatham bus station rockets to £6.8m, a full £1.8m over original budget estimate and a direct cost of £435,000 to local taxpayers. Costs were ongoing. Cabinet papers also reveal Brook Regeneration was almost £800,000 over budget and confirmed that the manifesto committments of the Conservatives was to come from reserves and not revenue accounts; [therefore not sustainable].

Lord Foster publishes detailed proposals for an airport on Grain. It is backed by Boris Johnson and rumours are that George Osborne and Cameron aides are being lobbied actively. Medway Conservative MPs deny any change in government policy.

August 2011

Boundary Review conversation starts in Medway with multiple theories published suggesting Labour could gain from any outcome.

Immigration rockets under the Conservatives despite pledges during election in 2010. Tories says changing government policy is like moving a tanker and say things will improve.

Blog highlights that graffiti in Medway is getting worse

London riots catch Cameron off-guard on vacation. He ignores the problem in Tottenham before returning to lawless streets across London three days later. Major cities up and down the UK caught up in anarchy as Tory right wing calls for military on the streets. Cameron blames lack of social cohesion whilst Labour calls for a full review of austerity policies which are pricing people out of education and jobs

Serial arsonist strikes Medway streets with fires in Strood and Rochester

This blog suggests that residents have not been appropriately consulted on Lodge Hill suggesting that awareness was at an all time low.

Improvement plans and investment for Luton School is cut. The school is a poorly performing Primary and was in need of investment

September 2011

Tories reveal Planning changes to NPPR which shows that the developers will be king in any new national planning guidance. Residents fear for development of Capstone Valley as a result of Tory-changes

Medway Tunnel Toll rears its ugly head as Councillor Jarrett reveals that the Medway Conservatives could not rule out a future Conservative toll on the tunnel. This directly contradicting Conservative promises in the local election.

Medway Labour launch 'Save our NHS' campaign across highstreets opposing the Tory privatisation agenda.

Police and PCSO row erupts as Councillor O'Brien reveals that PCSO numbers in Kent are due to be slashed, despite fact this had not yet been confirmed and was subject to sensitive conversations related to future Police budgets. Tory is accused of playing politics with cuts to PCSOs for future gain and publicity. Medway Conservatives refuse to back the numbers given by O'Brien and Member of Parliament Mark Reckless distances himself on radio.

Electoral Boundary Commission report is published with Labour supporting the independent position of the commission. The Conservatives launch a full-scale and partisan opposition campaign claiming residents identity is undermined but in reality oppose the move because it could make Gillingham & Rainham susceptible to a Labour swing

The Chatham Bus Station costs continue to balloon now £2.3m over original budget estimate of £5m. A date is published for opening in Autumn 2011 with promises of completion. Labour call emergency meeting of the Council after it was revealed Conservative administration failed to negotiate with Arriva (main bus contractor) prior to the contract tender for the bus station leading to further cost on the taxpayer

Luton & Wayfield Councillors support local campaign to oppose dodgy land deal to create a new NHS facility in Luton. Citing poor resident consultation and inappropriate consultation. Joining forces with local environmental groups and residents.

The 11+ failure rocks the Council as it becomes apparent a major cock-up by the Tory-led Council at several Exam locations leads to hundreds of resident posts on the Medway Messenger website calling for heads to role. Cllr Les Wicks refuses to immediately respond and Cllr Vaughan Hewett blames the schools for the fiasco; citing that it could risk Academy status. Labour call for an immediate apology and review. Rehman Chisthi acts after dithering - full report outstanding.

Rory Weal steals the limelight at Labour conference and becomes a hit with the public. Right wing press go for the 'kill' supported by local Conservative Councillor's.

Ed Milband speech calls for ethical capitalism whilst Ed Balls launches plan for jobs following by-election victories across the UK in the Summer 2011.

Residents of Grain village launch a safety campaign to highlight failures of the local authority on risk and impacts of an accident at the Grain LNG facility. Cllr O'Brien dispatched but confirms Council have wrong statistics on numbers of residents and refuses to let visiting expert speak. Meeting ends badly causing acrimony; leading campaigner for the group pledges to stand as an MP against Mark Reckless.

October 2011

English Democrat PPC defects to the Medway Conservatives. Rochester & Strood Conservatives fail to manage defection apprioriately calling for blog to remove picture in a case of sour grapes. Blog reveals the hypocrisy of the Conservative Councillor on his new colleagues

Press leads a campaign dubbed 'Where's Wicks' after the Councillor is absent without leave as the 11+ fiasco continues. Parents attack the Conservative Cabinet member for an abject failure of duty. Labour call for his immediate resignation after continued incompetence over his brief. The report is later published late and only in part with recommendations kicked into the long grass leading to anger from independent grammar school advocates. Cllr Les Wicks was supported by Conservative colleagues after Labour tabled a motion of no confidence in his performance.

Cllr Les Wicks apologises a full 13 days late after it was revealed he was at Conservative Party conference. Promises a full review.

Chatham 'Dynamic' Bus Station opens in an utter fiasco. Unfinished and without toilets and zebra crossings it is dubbed 'unsafe' by Cllr Les Wicks. The public are outraged that the facility is without appropriate shelter. Teething problems continue for weeks as pelican crossings remain unfinished. Labour reveal it cost £30 for every man, woman and child living in Medway.

Councillor Jarrett attacks Luton & Wayfield campaigners and the Friends of Hosted Valley for being against change and opposing NHS facility on grounds of ecology.

Rising star Rachel Reeves MP speaks at Rochester Coffee as we host Purple Book launch proposing a centrist and progressive agenda for Labour in Medway.

Medway Labour reveal that bus fares will rise as a direct decision to move the bus station

Boris Johnson reveals that he fears without new airport in North Kent the country faces a risk to its premier city status.

Medway News publishes information that suggest all fines given out by the CCTV car could be void. Labour continue to call for full and public review.

Liam Fox resigns as Defence Secretary after giving lobbyists and friends access to sensitive British defence information. Justine Greening replaces Philip Hammond as Transport Secretary and this blog is first to warn of the impending Airport u-turn given the history with Justine on Heathrow and Gatwick.

Lodge Hill consultation extended after only 30 responses received as warned by blog.

November 2011

Rochester & Strood Labour oppose Conservative moves to close Halling Fire Station

Council budget forecast for 2011/12 looks bleak as revenue overspend stands at £5.1m and capital overspend stands at £2.8m. Looking increasingly likely Tories will fail to balance budget despite pledges in local election 2011

Union blasts £2.4m 'Better for Less' model claiming it will not see realised savings. Labour suggests the scheme is likely to go way over budget and delays are inevitable

Medway Tory Council revealed as amongst the most fraudulant as £646,000 identified. Medway is placed in the worst quartile highlighting Tory fiscal failure locally

Ed Balls MP visits Chatham to highlight Youth unemployment as it hits 1m under the Conservatives. Tracey Crouch MP blames the way statistics are collected.

Medway Conservative MPs co-ordinate campaign on Estuary Airport re-inforcing to press and local media that there would be 'no plans' for an airport in North Kent and that it was Labour spin. This blog highlights contradiction in letters sent to both Tracey and Mark on the airport.

Reports in press that George Osborne and Steve Hilton now back the Estuary Airport begin to leak in expectation of November statement on infrastructure announcement.

Labour highlight house prices fall in Medway by 6-8% making it the worst performing Local Authority in Southern England.

Mark Reckless and Tracey Crouch vote for an immediate referendum on the European Union in the middle of Eurozone crisis. Tracey Crouch then tries to back-track suggesting she didnt really mean to be a rebel as she tries to suggest her position has been misrepresented by colleagues forming a faction against the leadership.

English Democrat Sean Varnham second right-winger to defect to Medway Conservatives citing his political affinity with local MP. Blog exposes some of his views under charge of hypocrisy.

George Osborne delivers bleak November statement admitting he called the recovery wrong and highlighting the Tories would have to borrow an additional £158 billion because of the failure in his judgement. The Tories also broke their golden rule to rid the deficit by the next election.

George Osborne rules out Heathrow expansion but refuses to rule out North Airport proposal. Kent Country Council Leader supports airport in the Estuary in an apparent U-turn.

December 2011

Medway News closes after KM and KNRM merger rejected by Competition Commission.

Medway Conservative move to close and privatise care homes across Medway. Medway Labour highlight the consultation is a sham and pre-budgeted. Medway Labour call-in decision on care home closures and privatisation and challenge administration to justify the budget position and options to keep the centres in public ownership.

Medway MPs refuse to comment publicly on closures despite Tracey Crouch MP having a clear position on highlighting care of the elderly in the UK, citing it was inappropriate for her to respond. Blog challenges the logic of not having a public position

Primary School results for KS2 reveal true extent of Cllr Les Wicks department to improve results. Medway schools in worst quartile nationally.

Medway Council formula grant revealed and Tory smoke-and-mirrors from central government highlighted. Floor damping and gerrymandering of money to Tory shire Councils continues to hit local residents

Medway Labour highlights cost of rising train and bus fares at 6-10% with campaigns at bus and train stations

Medway Labour campaign on highstreets to oppose NHS privatisation and raising concerns of Medway and Darenth Valley mergers

Medway Labour reveal true and final cost of bus station at £10m. Twice the original budget estimate of £5m.

Medway Conservative Cabinet forced by LEP to sit on regional airport aviation task group. Tories set up an cross-party Estuary Airport cabinet group but deny the chance it will be in a government paper.

Cameron veto's the EU fiscal treaty changes to stabilise the economies of Europe citing safeguards not in place. Not only were safeguards never discussed, Cameron failed to fight Britain's corner. He has since undertaken a u-turn and will sit on the table. Polls responded accordingly to the veto.

Medway Tory CCTV Car statistics reveal car has lost 30 staff and whose profitability and management leads to record appeals. Medway Labour call for an immediate review of CCTV car.

New Year Review

2012-01-01T14:30:00.008Z

As is usual for this blog the annual round up of news from 2011. This piece will be on the overall commentary on the year with my 12 for 2012; a later post will discuss the major issues, scandals and controversies that arose month by month last year.

Locally, the year can effectively be broken into two halves. The January-May period which focused heavily on the local election and AV campaign and the May-December which should have focused on some of the failures of the local Conservatives but which were conveniently hidden pre-May. This includes significant number of budget overspends on major programmes and incompetence in the education department managed by Cllr Les Wicks.

Nationally, the year has also seen the rise in threat of an airport for the Hoo Peninsula, with all three MPs being caught looking like political pygmies over the shifting position of the government. The administration's belated and forced move in late December on the airport shows it is concerned about its survival.

In addition, you will note themes around the economy - it getting progressively worse over the course of the year, and the shifting position of the government which has clearly called the recovery utterly wrong.

Lastly on Europe - the right wing now have the ability to push Cameron. The move to appease is a major sign of weakness which could come back to haunt on future policy positions. The centrist leadership of Cameron is immesurably weakened despite and indeed highlighted by the fawning in the Express and Mail.

Party positions

Labour has maintained a consistent poll lead up until the populist EU veto and has taken hundreds of council seats in what is a slow march to gain back public confidence. A lot more to do but this year but the leadership took principled stances on the economy and on the press hacking scandal. Ed Miliband still has a lot more to do on burnishing his leadership credentials on a politically apathetic and angry public. It is clear that whilst the Labour Party brand is improving the leadership need to work this year to close the gap with Cameron. This is entirely possible but requires stability and focus; ignoring the Tory trap which is to move Labour to the left or wobble for a Labour leadership contest which will come from right wing surrogates everytime the Labour-lead in the polls close. I believe the membership are now very much aligned to the centre and wont be destablised; more efforts to present a centrist position; pro-business, pro-enterprise and pro-work need to be encapusulated.

The Liberal Democrats with Nick Clegg have had a terrible year with major losses on the AV referendum and implosion at the local elections to Labour. The shift in voting behaviour all but now confirms they are a spent force for at least the next five years in the urban centres. Nick is on the face of it being out-foxed by the Tories in government but may be playing a more astute political positioning trick. It has however been a truly terrible year; Clegg has now reinforced those who previously supported the Lib Dems in 2010 but briefly moved to Labour on rhe election of Ed Miliband. Labour have now banked the social democratic Lib Dem voter.

The good news for Labour and Lib Dems though is that by-elections show Liberals maintaining Council seats in the South and South West - which shows the 'Clegg' brand of Liberalism may be universally despised in urban centres but also appealing enough to brace against the Conservative onslaught in 2015. The hope for Labour is that the Liberals continue to loose urban Council seats en-masse in May whilst holding and taking shire Council wards. Tory strategists will be paying particular attention to by-election results in South / South West show if there is any slippage in Lib Dem support. Thus far they have done remarkably well where it matters so this blogger is willing to suspect the Liberal leadership is playing the only card it can; defence of its seats in the South.

David Cameron has maintained the love of the media classes but has got nearly everything wrong this year. Woefully mismanaging expectations on the economy, not having a clue about his policy on the Big Society, flip-flopping over NHS re-organisation, failing to get a grip on immigration, overseeing a drastic reduction in police numbers whilst the UK falls into mass strife and civil disorder - whilst he is on vacation, a cut in the defence budget and aircraft carrier capability just before Libya and a populist but unsustainable position on the European Union caused by his faustian bargin and weakness against the right wing in his own party, and a total lack of political respect and capability to impact internationally. He has fallen into the trap of gesture politics which sadly masks populism with political maturity.

Despite the back-slapping, the poll story in 2011 is a real, and only self-continuing decline, in the brand position of the Conservative Party which is now being held up by the personal ratings of Cameron. A dangerous position for any party when the judgement of the Prime Minister rarely, if ever, stand the test of time. Cameron has recently burnished his credentials by taking right wing and populist positions; the risk and upside for Labour is that he will seek solace by moving to a more Thatcherite position which is unsustainable for victory in the marginals currently held by Labour MPs in the midlands and urban centres (like Feltham & Heston) and also unappealing enough to centrist voters who supported popular and hard working Liberal Democrat MPs in the South / South West.

12 of 2012

This year will be interesting for Medway; my predictions below:

1) Boris Johnson will win the Mayoralty election and Labour will win the London Assemby elections. Labour will make gains against Liberal Democrats in urban centres in Council elections across the UK.

2) The government will announce a cross-party review on aviation and will formerly look into the possibility of an airport in North Kent - consulting with local authorities in the region. Medway Conservative MPs will not apologise for mis-representing the airport position to the public for 3 years

3) The Olympics will be a success and will mark the change in economic fortune for the UK. There will be recession - albeit a small one - in many industry sectors from January-July 2012

4) Rehman Chisthi will become a PPS

5) Medway will continue to have appalling KS2 and Primary school results. The 11+ fiasco will be hushed up with a move to primary-school based testing absolving the politicians of all responsibilty; there will be a further move to re-organise Primary Schools in Medway.

6) Councillor O'Brien will make an unsuccessful bid for the Police Commissioner role but will be outfoxed by a KCC-sponsored candidate with populist appeal.

7) Councillor Chambers will continue as leader of the Medway Conservative Group, ostensibly as a result of weak and incapable positioning of Conservative back-benchers in Rochester & Strood who will of course remain loyal to him to the press

8) The next Medway Conservative Council budget will be as balanced on paper but as usual unbalanced in outcome. This years budget, which is currently in deficit to the tune of £7.9m, will not be equalised. Money will be taken out of reserves to cover up shortfall.

9) The Better for Less programme will see massive, but covered-up, delays in rolling-out across the Council. It will not save £2.4m, but this will be deftly accounted for in overspends in other budgets to hide the delays that always happen with PwC projects.

10) Councillor Les Wicks will be re-shuffled in April/May 2012

11) Further Medway Liberal Democrat wobbles will continue to cause damage as the party squabbles about its future. The party will further retrench itself into defending urban seats rather than focusing on sub-urban areas it could win in 2019.

12) Train fares will go up by 5-7% and bus fares 6-10% at the end of 2012 despite Conservative pledges. IPSA rules will be changed so Tory MPs do not need to disclose transport as an item on Parliamentary expenses.

CCTV Car Review Required

2011-12-29T20:15:00.008Z

CCTV Car Timeline (KM Group)

Many people reading this blog will be aware of the authors views on the Medway Conservative CCTV cars which are a law onto themselves. Symbolic of the administration, many consider it a 'white vulture', a flight of fancy, whilst others are apparently 'almost' demanding these cars on their street corners

Medway Conservatives claim there is a groundswell of support for the vehicles - yet never substantiate this - nor do they choose to mention it once on the Medway Conservative website or the Rainham Central website. So many passionate advocates that, from my recollection, it did not feature on any electoral leaflet in the local election.

I along with most people somehow find it hard to believe that there is a massive hidden majority out there who are salivating for one of these vehicles down their road, but if you believe the (Rainham) Tory spin in the press; these cars are the salvation of the Medway roads and a paragon of virtue.

Or course I am willing to be proved wrong and I am sympathetic to the argument that people want appropriate enforcement of parking and scrutiny. But sub-contracting out two vehicles to a potentially poor contractor who inflicts much reputational damage onto the Council, should and needs to be scrutinised very closely. I believe some Tories are in denial about this.

Let me explain why.

Universally despised wherever they operate these cars are seen as the physical embodiment of an overly centralist and controlling local authority. Many Conservative Councils will never introduce such schemes, and the leading campaign group Big Brother Watch, who oppose the cars, is being managed by a former Conservative PPC. Let us be clear; many authorities do have the opportunity to introduce the cars but choose not to...

And why? There is something fundamentally wrong about being caught breaking the same rules it imposes on everyone else which it does on a regular basis (see here, here, here, here, here and here) and the inequity of the fine; it has created more front page scoops than any other story added up over the last 2 years and it will continue to do immense damage to the trust of politics in Medway.

Indeed, the only positive news on the cars can be found on the Medway Council website, who have ironically awarded the vehicles several Customer Service awards. The cruel irony is that the car was awarded an award in April 2010 not because of customer support, but one month after it issued an eye-watering 2,762 tickets against residents in March 2010.

This type of public back-slapping angers the public immensely. It should.

The leading supporter of the cars is none other than Councillor O'Brien. Indeed, such a supporter that he has stated that "at every single community meeting I go to I have residents almost demanding the CCTV car."

Well if residents of Rainham are 'almost' demanding a Council spy car on every road that settles it. In fact the only (not almost) cases I get are people moaning about the inequity of the vehicles choosing to fine people in narrow terraced streets, where parking can be difficult at the best of times.

And are the cars raising important sums? The vehicle (s) has made a revenue of £770,000 over four years or £192,000 per annum. In the grand scheme of Council budgets this is pathetic sum and could be more than corrected by increasing number of actual wardens, or constant use of fixed site camera's.

The argument of course used to oppose any review is that the cars are fulfilling a service and slapping down those who are inconsiderate.

This I believe is woefully ignoring the fact that 1 in 4 of the fines is overturned on appeal and as to why only two-thirds have been paid. It would ignore the challenge tabled by many that these vehicles has been anything but professional with 30 CCTV car staff having left since 2008, of which six were sacked, five were laid off and 19 have left of their own accord. No review and we may continue with a management failure caused by inappropriate recruitment or staff training.

The Tory line that the number of tickets is reducing proves CCTV enforcement is having a positive effect is also totally unsubstantiated with fact, and actually ignores the reality for why a review is necessary

Lets just look at the Tory CCTV Car in more detail

Tory CCTV car has issued over 55,000 tickets, but only two-thirds have been paid due to disputes. A quarter have been cancelled after residents fought and won
Tory CCTV car has made revenues of £1.6m since 2008, with £771,000 remaining after costs
Staff have cost £421,000, the cars have cost £319,000 and fuel, maintenance and the 'uniforms' have cost £31,000
30 staff have left since 2008. Six were sacked, five were laid off and 19 left of their own accord
Number of tickets issued has declined since November 2010 with only 754 tickets issued in October 2011
All tickets issued could be void due to 'blunders' in the paperwork

So why the review?

The above facts make a review sensible. Backbench Councillors would then be able to ask the decent and substantive questions about the operational effectiveness of the cars.

Labour have been consistently aware of the public concerns of the vehicles which is why we called for full review of them in the local election 2011. Despite protests from leading Conservative Councillors that the cars were well managed and popular the facts now stand for themselves.

At present, the Tories have refused the opposition demands for a full operational review

We know there is some sympathy in the ranks; even some Conservatives dont like them. Both Alan W Collins and leading Medway Youth Chairman (who represents only one and a half constituencies) Joe Armitage have both savaged the vehicles. With friends like those there is a small glint of light that they may reflect more widespread opinion...

It is time the CCTV car had a full review so that backbench and opposition Councillors can undertake a proper and thorough assessment, so that if appropriate we can scrap the cars when the contract expires in April 2013.

Cameron's Trap

2011-12-29T16:27:00.010Z

Christmas is such a good time of year; not only do you get to catch up with family and friends but the blackberry stays silent. It happens once every twelve months and by goodness it is welcome.

I have spent lots of days catching up with friends, family and former political campaigners and have been careful to drop the politics for a week or so.

I note today two interesting pieces of news that are on the face of it bad news for the Labour Party but are actually nothing of the sort given the position in the electoral cycle. Firstly the relative failure of the 'registered supporter' project established in September 2010, and secondly the paper by Gregg McClymont and Ben Jackson published today on the 'Cameron Trap' which has some very strong warnings on Labour economic re-positioning which does need to take place.

Firstly, I shall deal with the obvious Tory spin on the membership question.

Whilst it is true that the number of registered supporters are small it is worth remembering this was established only last year and as a result of the relative success of the French scheme and those in North America. It is worth noting that the French scheme has seen success as a result of over a decade of right-wing dominance in France and at a time when the French left are selecting a potential presidential candidate. In North America, the established political networks and partisan support base is particularly pronounced; unlike in the UK people actually register their political alliegiance and fund parties through 'Action Committee's.' It is therefore utterly inappropriate for journalists (who are currently fawning over Cameron) to compare the scheme in the UK with other countries when we have had 18 months of Labour opposition. Keep the scheme in place and nurture it; it will reap rewards slowly and surely...

Incidentally what the right wing journalists wont tell you, because that would be balanced, is that whilse the Labour membership (those that pay) has increased from 156,000 (2009) to 193,000 (2011) the Conservative Party membership has actually been declining since the election of David Cameron. The Tories have been clever not to reveal membership figures but it is almost certainly going in the wrong direction - as a result of ageing / death of the blue rinsers and the unattractiveness of the Tory brand to young peoply. So for sake of clarity the Conservative Party membership number is carefully guarded, but we can guess it is below the 177,000 reported in September 2010. I would hazard a guess that it even could have gone below the 156,000 figure.

What should worry the Conservatives is that Labour now has a period in opposition to attract new members (and we see them locally just on twitter alone); the same was not said for David Cameron who lost a third of his own parties support as a result of stitching up local selections and gerrymandering A-lister selections (who failed to get elected in the most part). As a result the modern Conservative Party is totally reliant on money from the financial services sector (that is the same bankers who caused the crash) and very rich hedge fund speculators. There is a rich seam here to be reaped by Labour at a better time...

Incidentally, whilst we are talking about membership figures; the Rochester & Strood CLP last tally was higher than the local Conservative Association and more importantly we know where the funding comes from; so Boris Island believe me is worth the Tories worrying about. We know the numbers and the contributions from moles and sources. The talent attraction that has occured locally to the Medway Conservatives almost exclusively comes from the English Democrats. Hoovering up extremists on the right is a dangerous move...

Which brings me onto the second question is the conclusions of 'Cameron's Trap' paper from Policy Exchange, which are endorsed I would add by the majority of Labour members.

Whenever I am told the membership of the Medway Labour Party is very left wing (which is not often) I merely point to the the CLP votes at the leadership elections in 2010. The Blairite candidate won the majority of member support across Medway and second was the next most Blairite candidate.

That tells you that the Medway Labour membership is wedded to the centre and is distrustful of very left wing positions.

The message therefore from Gregg and Ben can not and should not be ignored by those who want a Labour Government and who also want to appeal to our membership support.

The conclusions are not to be driven into a Council of despair:

•Refuse to be driven into a simple defence of the public sector and public spending and instead mount a patriotic appeal to the nation to improve growth and living standards.

•Put forward a more convincing strategy for private sector growth than the Conservatives. A key element of a credible growth strategy would need to be a widely-supported active industrial policy. In this way “Labour can evade the trap of the ‘tax and spend’ argument of 1992, by making the key measure of governing competence the creation of new and sustainable jobs that improve living standards. Labour is more comfortable than the Conservatives with the idea of an activist state: the Conservatives have reason to fear a political contest organised around which party can best promote growth rather than which party can best reduce spending.”

•Aggressively highlight the Coalition’s preference for regressive charging mechanisms to fund public services. Labour can counter this by offering more progressive funding mechanisms, and developing new welfare policies that reduce economic insecurity by pooling risk. Crucially, these approaches need not require significant additional spending.

Labour must: “embrace the successful electoral pitches of victories in 1945, 1964 and 1997. Each of these elections involved an attack on a Conservative party that had presided over a period of economic decay. 1964, with its focus on economic underperformance and relative decline, presided over by an out of touch Tory elite, is particularly resonant given the likely electoral battleground in 2015. A patriotic, national growth appeal is therefore essential to highlighting the inadequacy of Conservative political economy.”

Following on from my post on the economy on growth I believe the above to be absolutely correct; the Tories will of course try and de-stabilise Ed Miliband because they realise the threat.

Rule number one; ignore your opponent if they do not represent a threat. The fact Tories are moving onto rule number two, which is to undermine Ed Miliband, shows full well they can see the threat. And so they should; they see the same polling we do...

Beyond the Bubble: Ipsos MORI at the Labour Party Conference

View more presentations from Ipsos MORI

What the papers wont tell you is that most people think Labour actually the argument right on the economy since 2010 and the warning of the double dip. Most people also think Labour are articulating their views and is the party most alligned to them. They also rate Labour as united as it was under Tony Blair (a record for us given the usual period of lefty antagonisms which come about after loosing government).

The Tories can also see the economy worsening and the electorate warming to the economic argument from the left on the squeezed middle. The Tories also know (and it is constantly trumpeted by the right wing press) that they have a lead on economic trust or credibility which they must maintain at all costs.

The issue is trust on the economy but it is one best solved by reasoned change on deficit reduction and continuing to bang the drum on growth, spreading fair deficit reduction on the broadest shoulders and listening to people. Remember; the last spending review announcement in November saw George Osborne move the goal-posts to effectively following the Darling deficit reduction strategy... so no lectures required.

Ed Balls is the most effective spokesperson on finance Labour has and we have articulated the correct economic argument. Regaining the trust of the electorate will take time and is best reinforced by a stable and united party not gazing inwardly, at either safety first positions, or by having another leadership election. Irrespective of who wins in London in May 2012; we have the best team at the helm for the times we are in, and are polling well given the underlying lack of trust in the economy the electorate still has with Labour (see time based polling demographics above on government satisfaction).

There will be no leadership election just a sensible and rational opposition articulating the sensible middle ground and undermining the Tory argument from a position of sense.

Keep on focusing on the econony; set out a vision for growth and continue to highlight the Tory failures on the squeezed middle and remember Cameron didnt get a majority last time with all the fair winds at his disposal; 2015 will be even harder and a united Labour team with a consistent and strong message to the voter segment most targeted by the current, out-of-touch Tories may see us win.

School Days

2011-12-26T13:32:00.003Z

Christmas is a family time which is why I have refrained from tweeting and posting on politics; it is sad to observe those with families who at this time cant drop the subject for a few days whilst with their loved ones.

Somethings are more important and one of those is family.

Attending the Christmas Mass in Rochester Cathedral on Saturday evening took me back to my school days in the Cathedral Choir and as a full scholar at the school.

The piece is very closely attributed with the school which is why it struck a chord so to speak at the end of the service.

I also understand from the organist that it has been (rather...) played at the Grammar School founders day as well.

Happy Christmas

2011-12-23T11:50:00.001Z

Bus & Train Fare Rises

2011-12-23T09:45:00.004Z

Despite the focus today on the rise in train fares and the comments in the local press we could be forgiven for thinking that they were the only one's to suffer from fares.

You would be wrong...

Conservative MP's seemingly happy to talk about train fares in today's Messenger have totally airbrushed the thousands who use buses across the area.

It annoys me enough that I have been working with bus users and residents on sourcing the real impacts of cuts on local bus services. Working with the Tory-led Council who seem happy to ignore the cuts in government grants and the fact that local authorities should be open and transparent about why local services should be getting more expensive has been tricky. The responses have seemed evasive to accepting any responsibility on bus usage and there is a total lack of clarity on the manner in which reductions in subsidy are consulted upon, in advance, with local representatives.

Instead, it seems Councillor's are only spoken with after decisions have been made.

It is simply living in denial to claim that bus users in Medway are not suffering a worse deal. Not only have they had to spend a fortune on the over-budget bus station but they are now seeing real cuts to services and fare rises, in an area with an already poor reputation for value for money.

There is no doubt that many feel burnt by the bus station fiasco which will cost twice the original budget estimate of £5m. The news today that the Pentagon bus station car park will cost £160,000 just adds to the woe.

So why do bus users get ignored? Partly this is because the media tend to be focused on the more middle-class 'train users' who have more political influence but also because bus users tend to have lower overall fares and we assume that many will only make small journeys and so the increases will be less significant.

Of course the cumulative damage of rising bus fares on poorer communities is significant. Cuts to bus services and rises in fares mean that low-income families with no car are at risk of falling into poverty.

We know buses are vital, connecting people with town centres, jobs, colleges, shopping, family and friends, and when bus services are cut, people’s lives are badly affected

Indeed, the Tory-led government’s budget allocation for Medway transport was significantly cut by the government from £3.5m per year to £1.5m per year.

As a result Medway has seen

Single fares up by 10p or 20p. e.g. Single fare on the 181 from Street End Road to Weeds Wood will go from £2.20 to £2.40 (9% increase)
Inner Medway day ticket up from £4.00 to £4.20 (5%)
Inner Medway week ticket up from £16 to £17 (6%)
Inner Medway 4-week ticket up from £47 to £50 (6%)
Inner Medway annual ticket up from £470 to £500 (6%)
Medway day ticket up from £5.20 to £5.50 (6%)
Medway week ticket up from £21 to £22 (5%)
Medway 4-week ticket up from £68 to £72 (6%)
Medway annual ticket up from £670 to £720 (7%)

The popular ‘Happy Max’ deal and evening fares will no longer be available.

The Labour opposition in government has called time on the private-sector operations which have left services fragmented and disjointed. It is now time, according to the Shadow Transport Secretary, to look at options to bring some services in-house and for residents to be given a proper consultation on services and fares. I agree.

Labour Councillor's will continue to stand up for our residents who use buses and trains. We believe that with this government fare isn't fair.

11+ Fiasco; Tory spin cycle continues

2011-12-22T16:41:00.004Z

Despite the volume of news over recent weeks around the closures of Care Homes and the opening of the 'dynamic' open-plan bus facility in Autumn the issue of the 11+ fiasco continues at a pace behind the scenes.

Let us remember that hundreds of parents of potential grammar school pupils were mis-managed by the Education department overseen by the Tory Councillor Les Where's Wicks.

The Portfolio Holder who spent the days after the fiasco at Conservative Conference and who took 13 days to apologise.

Peter Read - the independent education expert - is currently pulling his hair out at the utter incompetence and chaff that is being dispensed by the ruling Tories to hide the mismanagement.

Remember; we never did get the full report published on the scale of the incompetence involved merely a covering paper on recommendations.

Despite his attempts to get detail on the fiasco he has been met with a cold wall from the Tory-led Council; some might claim to hide the fiasco and its impacts on MPs who should actually be holding the Council to account for its actions.

Medway Council took 43 working days to respond to his Freedom of Information request, only a month after the legal deadline of 20 days to reply, rejecting his request. See bottom of page for more.

The original article by Peter is here. Copied below

p.s. If I were a parent looking to send a child to a Grammar School in this Tory-controlled area i'd be very worried indeed.

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

I remain very concerned about the Medway Test shambles, which the Council appears to be trying to bury, hoping that everyone will forget about it, although its ludicrous claim that no children were disadvantaged by the problems stands as a PR disaster, in that it angered so many parents, who would otherwise have just written the matter off to incompetence.

I hear that the Local Government Ombudsman is preparing a draft report which, if it is subsequently published, should shed further light on the mystery of why Council officers and members made so many public statements that proved wrong.

My problem is that, in trying to understand further what went wrong, ...........

I submitted a Freedom of Information request on 22nd October, which the Council is required to respond to within 20 working days. When 32 working days had elapsed without response, apart from the standard next day acknowledgement, I was starting to suspect that this was a deliberate strategy to deny me the information I was seeking. I therefore submitted a complaint on 8th December about the matter.

To cover myself, I sent a simpler FOI request on 11th December, seeking a subset of the previous, in case the Council was going to wait until the last moment to tell me I had asked for too much information (or am I being cynical?). However, I have not even had an acknowledgement of this second request (although I wrote again to the council asking if there was an acknowledgement to come) and don't know if the council is going to treat it as the previous one.

I have therefore, on 20th December, sent a second complaint, about the failure to acknowledge. I am well aware that the many parents who complained both at Stage 1 & Stage 2 of the Council Complaints procedure regarding the Medway test received uniformly unsatisfactory responses, and some have subsequently taken their complaints off to the Local Government Ombudsman (see above). In this case, my next step is the Information Commissioner's Office, but what a waste of everyone's time, when all I need is an answer to my questions.

I am not a Medway resident, but parents who complained about the Medway Test to local Councillors or their MP have also received a brush off with superficial responses.

Can anyone advise me if there is a simpler way to secure my information without going through what is a tiresome process?

I know, because I had similar problems a few years ago with other FOI requests, and finished up complaining to the Council about the failure of the Complaints Officer to act. On that occasion I decided I had better things to do when in retrospect I should have pushed on, as I will on this occasion.

On the positive side, I find that normally I get an excellent service from the education admissions department and the Department that co-ordinates FOI, who are most helpful, so I can only conclude that there are other reasons for the current obstructiveness by Medway Council (motto - Helping You!).

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

After a delay of 23 days beyond the required deadline, and 14 days after filing a formal complaint about the lack of response, Medway Council has deigned to contact me. What a coincidence that that it happedn on this date. However, apparently, my request fails because: it contains Information that is likely to inhibit the free and frank provision of advice or the free and frank exchange of views for the purposes of deliberation; Third party personal data; and Confidentiality.

There are actually ways to provide most of the information requested without breaching the second and third aspects of these, and there is great public concern about the quality of provision of advice, which should surely be in the public domain. For example - the one document I did receive was that issued to Medway Test Review Panels, to explain the circumstances of the problems at the Medway Test Centres.

The first two sentences of this are: Some of the signs directing families to the registration area were not clearly displayed and therefore parents were uncertain of exactly where on the site they needed to be.This meant that a high volume of children and parents arrived at the sports hall later than the scheduled registration time.

This is frankly rubbish and has been thoroughly demonstrated as such by many parental testimonies. Parents knew where the sports hall was by seeing the long queues that went much of the way round the building which had been built up before the registration desks were opened. Parents certainly had the intelligence to work out that they joined the back of the queue!

If this is the quality of information being served up to the Review Panels, it is surely in the public interest to understand how this level of misinformation could be disseminated so long after the original incidents. I could go on, and shall do so in another place.

Estuary Airport looms in Cabinet

2011-12-20T18:29:00.004Z

Much expectation today as the Medway Council Cabinet met for the last time in 2011.

One man who was very much in the room, but not literally, was Boris Johnson. Conservative Party Mayor and hotly tipped to be the successor to David Cameron.

There were several important items on the agenda but two particularly stood out; firstly the conversation around the Local Council Settlement grant (the one this blog indicated was utterly disengenuous and more Tory spin) and the Estuary Airport campaign paper (released at 2.59pm) to an eager press and rather thin audience

The agenda item (linked here) on the Local Council Settlement Grant

Interestingly; the Conservative portfolio holder for finance effectively cut and paste my key points on the settlement.

The fact is, and he admitted it, Medway residents are suffering from a Conservative government and that this can not continue.

Government has included the Council Tax Grant with the formula grant which is highly disingenuous. Removing this grant the figure is actually where the Medium Term Financial Plan predicted which is good news for the Council... (though im sure better news would have been more money)

Floor damping still continues despite the election of a Conservative Government in May 2010 (see Tory hypocrisy on this issue here, here, here and here). This was a major campaign issue under the Conservatives; now under their own government are strangely silent

Councillor Jarrett has also raised the prospect of a 5.1% rise in Council tax for the 2013/14 budget year. Though not relevant to the below, the fact the Council Tax Grant has remained flat since 2011 means that after inflation Medway may be signficantly out of pocket by 2013/14. Jarrett is warning the Department no doubt of the political risk. The department has continued to 'lock' all Council tax increases at 3.5% so Councillor Jarrett may have to call a referendum, should this lock be repeated next year. Labour will no doubt keep an eye

Coupled with Medway Conservative deficits in revenue budget (£5.1m) and capital budget (£2.8m) all eyes on our benches will be on Q3 forecasts. My question at last O&S on this regard shows there may be some light here. Interesting also the budget assumptions include reductions in adult & care spend for 2011/12; the consultation exercise it seems concluded?

The Department for Local Government has also published a disingenuous table on reductions in 'spending capacity' for local authorities rather then the below. Details foundhere show Medway has seen a 3.1% cut, £6.36m or the equivalent of £57.46 for every household in Medway. The Tories have form here on spinning the truth

All of the above points were confirmed by an increasingly angry cabinet; many feel utterly duped by the Conservative Local Government Minister who claimed that Medway would not suffer inappropriately if they were to take power.

The second major item of note was on the Estuary Airport (linked here)

There was a noticeable shift today from the administration that since September (though this blog would argue since 2010) the external environment has changed on the airport proposals to bulldoze over the Peninsula.

There is, finally, as this blog has complained about time and time again, a recognition that simply sitting on hands and lobbying the occassional verbal riposte simply wont do.

It comes as Conservative Ministers are proving evasive in Westminster over the Airport proposals.

Whether it has been imposed on Medway Tories or not, and this blogger suspects it has been, the Local Enterprize Partnership (comprised of South East Council's) have established a working group on aviation expansion in the region. Medway is now obliged to sit at the table which could be seen as a positive to setting out an alternative position to an Estuary Airport, but alternatively, could be seen as a way of silencing our independence and actually squashing us in other Local Authority consensus.

Indeed, the simple fact is this LEP Aviation Group may indeed propose aviation expansion in the Estuary, as Paul Carter suggested a few weeks ago. A letter read out from him today categorically refused to support our Authorities objection to the scheme. This could squash Medway on the negotiating table and leave those in Hoo in a worse position. It is worth noting that other Council's sitting on this body would include those opposing expansion at Gatwick and Southend.

The Tories in Medway have also set up a new Council Cabinet Advisory Group, similar to that set up in 2001-2003 with the hope of leading any opposition to an airport proposal. The composition of this group must of course be equally weighted and its conclusions should be actively considered; this blog wants to wait and see the final outcome and composition of this group.

So what does this tell you. Firstly that despite the bland assurances from our MPs; especially Mark Reckless and Tracey Crouch who now have egg on face over this issue, that aviation expansion is to be seriously considered by local authorities in the region. It is not simply an electoral ploy to play to West London because the Chancellor has himself waded into the debate setting a national context and ruling out Heathrow expansion. Secondly, that Medway is now part of a wider process which could govern (and neuter) a response to any proposals. Thirdly, that the Conservatives on the Council are worried about the current impact (on Peninsula residents on house prices, business plans and communities) and now consider this a plausible existential threat.

Some proposals to be welcomed on face value today but also somethings to be very concerned about.

It's about time.

p.s. Our MPs can not be let off the hook either; they have woefully failed to represent us on this issue and for that they must be pursued and pursued vigorously.

Ward Improvements

2011-12-19T17:18:00.008Z

Labour Councillor's work very hard in the wards they represent and are proud to serve in Medway.

Whilst some call it publicity it is actually very important to communicate; to be outward facing to the electorate and to talk about the issues that impact them. Taking it out of the Council chamber and onto the street corner.

Gone are the days when public servants could sit in the gilted office; the public expect their elected representatives to be on the ground and working for them.

A few snippets of work undertaken over the last couple of months will be posted over the course of the week.

This includes; alley-gating, new play areas, road re-surfacing, pavement slab replacements, graffiti removal and salt-bin replacements.

Railing Improvements for Luton Road

Reported in November by several parents at Luton School.

BEFORE

AFTER

Constitution Hill Re-surfacing

The road was in a very poor state. Reported to Council in July; re-surfaced in December.

BEFORE

AFTER

Over the course of this week will be posting a series of improvements which have been led by the Labour team in 2011

Dementia Statistics

2011-12-18T13:36:00.005Z

Demographic changes to dementia

Very interested to note a number of press reports on Dementia over the last couple of days.

The Conservatives in Medway are claiming that demographic pressures are downward and that a reduction in numbers are causing services to be un-used.

Of course this is not accurate with an increasing requirement in future years which is why closing and privatising centres on the back of downward pressures on 'Council' statistics is baseless and actually concerning.

Incidentally we saw the same Tory-trick on statistics to close Primary Schools which led the School's Adjudicator over-turning the administrations judgement.

We all know the Medway Conservatives changed the eligibility criteria in 2008 making those previously eligible to use Nelson Court, Robert Bean, Platters Farm and Balfour inelgibile. We all know that they have already budgeted for care home closures before the consultation had even started in an arrogant act of subverting the consultation exercise itself.

Councillor Jarrett is now taking the lead after the Portfolio holder, David Brake, made quite inaccurate remarks to Cabinet on redundancies only a few weeks ago.

In his piece to the Messenger:

"The Balfour Centre provides day care, but since the introduction of personalized budgets by the last Labour government there is more choice available. Now increasing numbers of people are taking the payments to which they are entitled and using to buy a host of different services"

No one opposes the move towards 'personalised budgets' for those who are capable of managing their own budgets. However, in cases of hightened dementia individuals are unable to manage personal budgets and therefore the Council does take responsibility.

In addition, Councillor Jarrett has deliberely ignored the fact his administration fiddled the eligibility criteria in 2008. Once again paiting a woefully inaccurate position of the reasons why numbers are being reduced. Incidentally the centre being proposed for closure is at 70-80% of capacity which favours well with other private-sector providers; so that argument is also utterly without logic.

"All provide a good standard of care, but at more than twice the cost to be found in other parts of the care homes market in Medway they no longer represent good value for money"

Taking into account that Jarrett has mis-spent on countless capital programmes and on revenue budgets to the tune of £7.9m; the man has lost grip of the Council spending talking about value for money has to make you cry.

This is a false argument because the centres being closed & privatised deal with very specialist cases and can not be 'averaged' out across other care homes who may have individuals with little help or need. In addition, the option to create a social partnership with other local authorities could reduce costs by creating back office synergies - this option has been totally ignored by the Conservatives who favour a wholly private sector option - which indicently for high-need dementia care could be as expensive in some cases.

"Medway will not be closing any of the three homes"

The fact is he can not guarantee that once these homes transfer to private ownership that they will not close; as we saw with Shaw's Wood in Strood, the Tories make grand statements only to be found inaccurate twelve months later.

Time and time again the Tories paint a dishonest picture of the truth.

Financial times are tight but as a Society is simply a case of basic moral right that we care for our most vulnerable in the best way possible.

If we cut the stupid expenditures on Tory pet-programmes we would not be in such a difficult spot and that is the fault of the Cameron Conservatives; who are self-evidently not compassionate

Feltham by-election swing significant

2011-12-17T16:15:00.006Z

A victory for Labour in a marginal London constituency which should send a shiver down the spines of the elitist Cameroons who have taken over the Conservative Party.

A party of the elite and not the grammar school boy.

The election result was a major slap in the face and should send a warning signal to David Cameron and his 'chums' that the economic plan set by George Osborne simply isnt working. Cutting too far and too fast is putting people out of work.

Labour warned that a douple-dip recession was likely in May 2010 and sadly our warnings, made time and time again, are sadly being proved right.

Now is the time for the Labour Party to set a credible deficit reduction plan and focus relentlessly on getting people back into work and paying our way back into recovery.

Dithering Tories are in total denial about this seat. A seat held by the Conservatives from 1979 to 1992, and was one which Cameron should have won in May 2010 had the public trusted the Tories with the keys to Number 10 last year. They have written off a seat that Cameron had targeted only last year.

Meanwhile, former Conservative Councillor John Ward has insinuated other reasons:

"such as the futility of putting up a non-Asian candidate in such places. With the "them and us" culture that has been nurtured and encouraged by the political Left, that in itself was almost certainly a significant vote-loser. Mark Bowen simply wasn't "one of us" to a large proportion of the electorate – nowhere near all, as it's mixed there, but enough to make a big difference".

With attitudes like these you will never form a decent majority

The public dont trust the right, their 'ideology' or their aristocratic leadership or the views of the grassroots right wing on equality of opportunity irrespective of wealth, race, background, creed or colour.

That message should be ringing loud and clear in Tories ears. Why did Cameron loose last year? Where was the Blair swing after the worst recession and poor leadership of Brown? Why are Labour polling in the high 30s / low 40s? Why dont people like us? Why are we out of touch? Why is our party, our youth wing and our national party, managed totally and almost universally by an out-of-touch (and public school) elite? Why are we not the party of the grafters anymore?

Party Candidate Votes % ±%

Labour Seema Malhotra 12,639 54.4 +10.8
Conservative Mark Bowen 6,436 27.7 -6.3
Liberal Democrat Roger Crouch 1,364 5.9 -7.8
UKIP Andrew Charalambous 1,276 5.5 +3.5
BNP Dave Furness 540 2.3 -1.2
Green Daniel Goldsmith 426 1.8 +0.7
English Democrats Roger Cooper 322 1.4 N/A
London PBP George Hallam 128 0.6 N/A
Bus-Pass Elvis Party David Bishop 93 0.4 N/A

Majority 6,203 (26.7%, +17.1% from GE)
Rejected ballots 75
Turnout 23,299 (28.8%, -31.1% from GE)
Labour hold: Swing +8.6% to Labour

Turnout 23,299 (28.8%, -31.1% from GE)
Labour hold: Swing +8.6% to Labour

Update

It seems that the 'right-leaning' and non-Conservative Conservative John Ward has jumped on my assertions that this seat was a marginal seat and has made some quite dubious suggestions on postal votes

This seat; held by the Conservatives between 1979-1992 (Patrick Ground MP) and was a target seat for the Conservatives in 2010 (Number 81 on list). It was classified as marginal by the Conservatives themselves and most pundits.
Postal Votes; The spin that this is postal votes is also spurious. Firstly because none of the same people can actually tell you the postal vote turnout; and the fact they ignore the fact that postal votes can be submitted up until polling day itself. Also postal voting is an accepted form of voting so to disparage a voting method which many Conservatives use to vote as well; is stupid. People should be given more ways to vote; with appropriate checks and balances in place. This did not win or loose the election for Labour.
The contradiction; the Tories have been polling higher in all polls up until the day of the vote which makes the result even worse for them. Despite the fact they were ahead they still had an 8.6% swing against tells you everything about the leadership, or lack-of of David Cameron
Lastly race; the insinuation 'Bowen' wasnt one of us is accurate; but it is nothing to do with race. It is to do with the fact that the Conservatives have not done enough to reach out to communities in the UK; if Conservative values were right, they would have voted for them.

This is a seat the Tories should have won in 2010 and didnt. It is a seat that epitomises the arrogant, elitist and out-of-touch approach of David Cameron which can not be ignored. He simply does not connect which is why he lost here in 2010, again in 2011, and didnt win a majority and on this score, wont ever.

Primary School Results Shame

2011-12-15T22:32:00.003Z

The news today of KS2 results revealed the shameful state of Primary School education under the management of Councillor Wicks.

Tory-led Medway LEA is amongst the worst performing authorities in the entire United Kingdom, and has effectively remained static over the last five years - remaining consistently below the national average.

For the full breakdown please the Department for Education statistics website

It is not as if Medway operates amongst the poorest areas in the United Kingdom. The Medway Unitary Authority has some of the wealthiest wards in Kent.

Councillor Wicks has a lamentable record managing our kid's education. The fiasco over school mergers on dodgy statistics, mis-management over primary school building programme's and the 13 day wait for an apology of his departments error over the 11+ fiasco.

Medway Labour have consistently warned about the Tory failure over Primary School education which is why it formed part of our local election manifesto in May 2011. The fact is these results can not continue, year-on-year, to be below average; it really should not be acceptable that we fail one third of our kids, and in some areas more than half attending some schools not getting the right grades.

It simply isnt good enough. Our kids deserve better.

Focus on Jobs, Focus on Economy

2011-12-14T21:02:00.010Z

Despite the rather cras attempt by the right wing to talk about anything but jobs it is worth remembering that today marked a dark day for Medway and the United Kingdom. The Tory plan for economic recovery, the too-far too-fast plan, has failed and failed utterly.

Tories and their 'right-leaning' supporters simply dont care. It is all about partisan posturing and who performed well at PMQs. It really does show how utterly out of touch Conservatives really are.

No apology today from Mark Reckless, Rehman Chisthi or Tracey Crouch to the thousands of Medway residents who are jobless, who are being evicted from their homes, suffering from negative equity, worried for their futures.

No apology at all. Almost erased from the mind as they huzzah'ed the Etonian tonight. All mutual back-slapping am sure.

We can all see that the Euroloon extremist wing of the Conservative Party - which is now in charge - is riding on a high because they have promised the unpromisable; they have given the proverbial two nuggets of gold to their base and have seen a very temporary poll bounce. They are gleeful that UKIP voters; the 'loonies and fruitcakes' have joined them on their cause.

Some more moderate Tories are talking too; and they know that Cameron's position is now untenable on Europe. An embarrassing volte-face is now all but necessary. The City also knows it too...

According to Specator Editor who was talking with the Channel 4 Economics spokesperson Faisal Islam ""My gut feeling we'll end up back in the room, and even agree Treaty, after a facesaving 'Safeguard' >> my gut feeling too.""

The loons are high now; but they will soon feel a Euro-induced relapse.

Of course whilst the Tories talk Europe they utterly ignore unemployment which has now risen to a 17 year high. A record amount of lost talent as a direct result of Conservative economic failure.

Let the Tories talk about Ed Miliband; tomorrow's election result in Feltham & Heston, a Tory seat between 1979-1992 should have fallen to Cameron in 2010. Now, they are all but written-off in a seat, that had Cameron performed lasy year, would have been a Conservative seat. They had everything... but still could not deliver.

Cameron is not performing since he fluffed the election that was a gift-horse in the mouth... and deep down they know that his Etonian out-of-touch haughtyness is un-nerving to those voters who simply did not trust the Tories with power last year.

Unsurprisingly for a looser, he is now isolated in the world and derided by his own Deputy Prime Minister. He now oversee's a dysfunctional coalition government. This image will outlast the temporary poll fillip; and the damage done in Cabinet when Lib Dem dummies flung the toys out of the pram cannot now be undone.

Tories should be very worried that only a fortnight ago they were talking about kicking Cameron if he did the wrong thing in Europe; now you just have to laugh, they have the nerve to claim Labour is wobbling and should do the same with Ed Miliband. Too busy playing partisan games whilst the public demand better.

Our membership are not as fickle as yours; we are wedded to reasoned and sensible moderate policies. That will mean sure electoral gains once the public gain confidence; and that takes times, whoever is in charge.

Ed Miliband is actually doing well given the task. After 13 years of government, the worst recession since the 1930s, an unelectable leader (in Brown), the expenses scandal. Under his leadership polls have moved from the lower 20s to a consistent 40+. It is now interesting that many of the betting agencies put it odds-on that Labour will win in 2015.

Labour need to calm; continue to make the economic case and work at that niggling feeling that the Tories are making a poor job on the economy and actually focus on the issues that matter; namely employment.

At yesterday's Regeneration Overview & Scrutiny Committee I specifically raised the 'red-flag' markers all Councillors are reading on employment. The Conservative move to scrap the Future Jobs Fund was a massive mistake and we will not see the results of the Work Programme for another quarter. Tories scoffed in derision; Cllr Chitty was living in la-la land when she claimed in full throttle (as only Cllr Chitty can) that Medway is well positioned!

Lets just look at the Conservative failure:

More people looking for work than jobs available

Over 6% of young people unemployed for over 6 months, higher than UK average and South East

Medway higher overall rate then Kent, South East and rest of UK. [Kent is at 3.2%]

If you want to know what matters more than Europe; It's jobs.

Care Home Campaign

2011-12-12T20:16:00.010Z

Despite all the national news about Europe my focus for the last week has been closer to home; namely the campaign to safeguard our Care Home Services in Medway from an overt Tory privatisation exercise.

This issue matters to me. Firstly, It does strike personally to me as my grandma had to be looked after in the Care Home system and I can remember at the time the spectrum of quality of care. Without exception the quality of care in the public sector was better; though that of course from my second-hand experience.

Secondly, one of the homes being propsed for closure, Nelson Court sits within Luton & Wayfield. I can not express how much I respect the staff of Nelson Court and the work that they do with some of the most vulnerable adults. If the same is translated across Platters Farm, Robert Bean and Balfour then we truly have some tremendous staff.

Which is the reason I am angry that our Members of Parliament have shown no respect on this issue to the families, residents or service users.

I asked both Tracey Crouch MP and Mark Reckless MP a very simple question online; whether they support the Medway Conservative move to close and privatise these services.

Instead of giving me, and the general public a straight answer, we have been met with the proverbial cold-shoulder. Apparently, it isnt appropriate to ask MPs these type of questions on twitter!

Fine; if there is a more nuanced answer; a more complicated answer, then state it online.

Simply fobbing off a legitimate question like this is really unusual behaviour from public representatives.

Moving onto the Health and Adult Social Care meeting last week.

Medway Labour called in the decision by the Conservatives last week and has been working with partners to oppose the cuts to these care homes. Labour organized an emergency public at the Corn Exchange in Rochester with over 60 attendees and called-in the Conservative decision on Thursday 8th December for scrutiny at a meeting with over 100 residents.

Labour raised several concerns about the proposals and the justification for the cuts including why:

The Conservatives had already budgeted for the privatization and closure of these homes as indicated in the budget appendix, and Q2 quarterly budget monitoring statement. Given this appears in the budget, we believe the Conservatives have already come to a conclusion before the consultation has even begun.

The Conservatives have deliberately ignored more suitable proposals; including the establishment of a Council controlled limited company which would allow those with personalized budgets access to publicly owned services.

I specifically raised this point after Cllr Vaughan Hewett misunderstood (I dont think it was deliberate, more lack of research) that personalised care budgets could be spent in the public sector if it was within a company owned by the Council.

Some specific examples include the Norse Group which is owned by Norfolk County Council and manages several carehomes under the umbrella Norse Care.

The Conservatives have not been honest about the numbers using the care home facilities, by not citing the cumulative numbers that attend in some publications.
In addition, they cite the reduction in numbers as a justifier for reductions but have ignored a probable cause which is the change by Medway Conservatives to eligibility thresholds in 2008 which caused a reduction in accessibility to facilities

It is essential that there is a fair and transparent process for deciding who in a local area should receive social care support funded by central and local government. Until the care and support system is reformed, Councils have been using Fair Access to Care Services (FACS) guidance SCIE has produced Facts about FACS 2010: A guide to Fair Access to Care Services

Medway Conservatives changed the criteria in 2008 removing those with 'moderate' requirement from funding (there are five levels). This has led to a reduction in those eligible for services via Council funding.

It is worth noting that several other Councils; including Kent County Council accept those in care on moderate requirement.

The Conservatives have totally mismanaged the communications process with reports of gagging staff and communication via the television media unacceptable to service users. In addition they have removed the cost savings of the proposal from any external communication given to stakeholders at these centres

Several speakers from the floor last week lambasted the Conservative authority for how it managed the process. I myself have seen several documents which show that service-users were given less information then 'staff'.

Facts in my mind were deliberately ignored by the Conservatives including the budgetary rationale for the cuts. In a consultation exercise, the facts provided to the public to respond is very important; Tories should not be able to manipulate the facts to come to a pre-planned conclusion.

Despite the waffle and spin from the opposite side; this is not about Labour opposing the move towards personalised care budgets. In many cases we accept that these have been a positive move for many residents.

The issue is about whether all the options have been explored and the manner in which this has been woefully mismanaged by the Conservatives.

The Conservatives have badly managed this process and have not considered all the options. The consultation premise is therefore utterly unacceptable.

We believe the Conservatives are cutting essential care homes and front-line services not to improve services but as a direct result of Tory fiscal incompetence. The Tories are predicted to overspend by £7.9m on capital and revenue budgets this year alone.

It is not surprising that the Tories will save £1m per annum by outsouring residential care to the cheapest provider In addition to this the closure of the Balfour Centre will save a further £200,000 per annum

Perhaps our MPs are shamed by the Conservatives on the Council. I suspect they are instead trying to distance themselves from the actions of their Councillors.

It is time for them to tell us where they stand.