31 December 2010

Looking forward.....

On the last day of 2010 I'm thinking about what 2011 might hold for us and Radio4 this morning gave me plenty of food for thought. The Today programme had a guest editor, Dame Clara Furse, who was, from 2001 to 2009, Chief Exec of the London Stock Exchange. Dame Clara engaged in an interesting discussion on the state of the economy (remember that?) and, whilst I don't deny that I'm cherry-picking the discusion, her guests made some interesting comments:

Sir Howard Davies (Director of the LSE) proposed that the financial crisis was a function of global imbalances, loose liquidity and weak monetary policies meeting a wave of financial inovation surrouded by weak risk management. This produced an unpleasant mixture of banks taking risks that they didn't understand, able to do so because money was easily avaulable and credit was cheap.

Avinash Persaud (Chair of the UN task force  on Financial Reform) suggested that bankers are an easy target because of a decade of egregious overpayment perhaps over influence on regulation and bankers turning out to be not half as clever as they thought they were. The reason for regulation is that if bankers are allowed to pursue their narrow interest there are wider problems. Persaud would give a more frontline role to regulation. Everything that happened in the banking crisis was incentivised to happen. Financial regulation incentivised bankers to shift loans 'off balance sheet' (creating an unrealistic picture of their financial situation).

Gillian Tett (US Managing Editor, the FT) observed that the agencies that failed were not just the banks but the politicians, the consumers, the rating agencies. The only problem is that only one of that group (the Bankers) has walked away with massive payouts and the big political question is that the population is being asked to take a lot of pain (cuts in public services, increased taxation) at a time when the financial industry is seen to be doing rather nicely.

This piece was followed by an equaly interesting interview with Boris Johnson discussing London, its position in the UK and internationally and its future challenges.

These two pieces, taken together, reinforced my own belief that without London and its financial centre, Britain is a dead duck. In stark contrast to those stupid Germans and French, and largely thanks to Mrs Thatcher, the UK has very little manufacturing which is controlled within its own borders. For the UK to attract finance from abroad, we must support a state within a state and so, whilst the City of London flourishes, the rest of the country will steadily and gently decline.

We, the taxpayers, have bailed out the mess that the unregulated financial institutions got us into and now we, the taxpayer, are facing swingeing cuts in public services as the government cuts debt and reflates its reserves not from the profits of the banks, but from us, the taxpayers. Kutter Ken Maddock and his chums at County Hall are just a reflection of that government policy and they will get away with it if we, the taxpayers, sit back and allow ourselves to be reamed. They care not one jot for Somerset or its population. Their only care is for the orders that they receive from Osborne. And he only cares about the interests of his fellow millionaires in the cabinet and their friends in the City.

I do agree with David Cameron on one thing - there are hard times ahead.

Till next year, I'm Niall Connolly

28 December 2010

To Northfields Obs Group (whoever they may be).........

M&B received this in response to the anonymous and negative commentary from the 'Northfield Obs Group'. As it deserves prominence, I decided to make it today's blog entry as well as reproducing it under 'Invitation only'. The text, in bold, is reproduced as received by M&B.

A Town Councillor replies..........
I read with interest the comments from the Northfield Obs. Group written in response to your blog dated Tuesday 14th December 2010 – Somerton Town Council Meeting.

My overriding feeling is one of sadness that the respondent believes it's necessary to use comments like, “the war carries on – apparently with no Generals”. Do I take it that this implies the group he/she represents is at “war” with the new town council? So what's the underlying psychology behind this verbal behaviour? It's a pretty negative and destructive comment. Is this a group which enjoys conflict? Does it feel threatened or insecure? Do they feel something that they value is being destroyed? Have they forgotten or lost the ability to put trust in others?

Then we have remarks referring to the leadership of the council. Here there appears to be a complete misunderstanding of what leadership at local government level is all about, by the apparent link to “Generals”. As the town council isn't at war with anyone

it doesn't need Generals, leaders yes, which it has. Leaders in public life aim for principle centred leadership wanting to develop and encourage amongst other things the following:

· Co-operation
· Community engagement
· Community empowerment
· Community participation
· Honesty and openness
· Clear communication
· Trust

I certainly believe that as a town council we've made a start in each of these areas, it's a long term project and doesn't happen overnight.

Finally I agree with Niall Connolly's invitation to join in the dialogue, let's have some open communication, after all discussion surely has to be more constructive and positive than “war”.To this end I would welcome an opportunity to meet with you to discuss the concerns mentioned in your response, including your point about “zero achievements”.

I look forward to hearing from you soon.

Phil Thomas

==========================


Cerberus writes:


Comment -
Whilst I am not involved with the Somerton Town Council I share Phil Thomas’s sadness, but perhaps from a different perspective to his own, in relation to where I live.  Whilst the use of ‘war’ may not be appropriate, there is no escaping the fact that addressing local issues has become a series of ‘battles’ with the Council.  Some may comment that a war is merely a series of battles.

Councillor Thomas’s list is the usual mantra trotted out by Council and Central Government but the reality of implementing them is another matter.  One has only to visit the many Blogs and Websites and talk to people in the community to see the level of disenchantment that exists and the frustrations experienced by the ‘common’ folk.  

I respond to each of Councillor Thomas’s proposals for ‘development’ based upon my own community’s experiences of SEVERAL years and that appear to be all too common elsewhere across the country.
1.      Co-operation – It would be refreshing to see some of this.  Council only want co-operation if it fits their own agenda, and has to be strictly on their terms.
2.      Community Engagement – Is selective, focussing on ‘flagship’ projects whilst those deemed less ‘worthy’ are ignored.  Council kudos appears to be (is) the main consideration.
3.      Community Empowerment – Council don’t want it.  Public consultation and opinion, even by large, well organised, groups is invariably ignored.  So, whilst appearing to encourage the ‘engagement and empowerment’ of the community, it is nothing more than fulfilling the illusion that public opinion really matters.
4.      Community Participation – Pretty much covered above and below.
5.      Honesty and Openness – Point blank refusal to consider the latter which only increases doubts about the former.  ALL meetings should be open to the public and subject to appropriate scrutiny.  A Council meeting, in an adjacent village, to discuss the purchase of a building for a proposed Community Centre is to be held behind closed doors.  Why?  This meeting is to discuss the possibility of a COMMUNITY Centre, surely the community should have their say in the decision making?  It is actions like this that make a mockery of the much publicised ‘greater community involvement’.
6.      Clear Communication – In an ideal world this SHOULD happen, but the reality is another matter.  Ask a fairly innocuous question and, yes, you will probably get a response.  If one has the audacity to ask something a little more ‘probing’ then expect NO response.  For example – A recent request for clarification on why a local project was £9+M over budget, directed to the head of the local council, has been ignored, as have most communications relating to other matters.  The response to the ‘other matters’ resulted in a response from one of his staff stating that I, “Cannot expect the head of the local council to read everything that is sent to him”.  Is this acceptable?  Does this in any way begin to address the concerns that are expressed by the taxpaying public, OR contribute to the ‘list of objectives’ outlined by Councillor Thomas?  No, it doesn’t.
7.      Trust – It would appear that there isn’t any.  Many of the residents of Exeter simply do not trust the council.  Why would they?  We are constantly bombarded with the message of ‘get involved’ and ‘have your say’ and, when we DO, the barricades go up.

There is no doubt that there IS a desire by the community for greater involvement.  Unfortunately, this enthusiasm is NOT shared by the council and many other organisations and there is no evidence to suggest that this is likely to change any time soon.  To quote Councillor Thomas, “Does it feel threatened or insecure?  This comment should perhaps be directed at the Council.  The current ‘them and us’ situation is of THEIR making.  We, as residents, have expressed OUR enthusiasm for changes, the onus is now on the council and other organisations to prove to US that this is what THEY really want. 

22 December 2010

Merry Christmas

Muck&Brass would like to wish everyone a happy Christmas and hopes that everyone gets the Christmas that they want and need.

20 December 2010

A time for reflection.........

In the light of the recent arrests in Somerton, I took a little time to assemble various press cuttings covering the Somerton Saga since October of last year (see 'Press Coverage'). As part of that effort I have included a random selection of letters which were published in the Western Gazette and they probably make more interesting reading than the main articles. These letters don't particularly add anything other than illustrate the prejudiced and limited views that many members of the local community hold with regard to 'how things should be done'.

One of the regular criticisms levelled at M&B, and repeated by some of the letter-writers, was that using a blog or using the internet as a platform for comment somehow 'wasn't the done thing'. I have also read comments made by ex-councillors that the 'way to do things' was to come to the Council (bending the knee, tugging the forelock etc etc) and speak directly to the council. Now I had one early experience of that process in 2005 when seeking to comment on a planning application (an application from a then councillor) and the Chair's response was to accuse me of counterfeiting or forging documents. Not quite the open and inclusive response that I expected or that the WestGaz letter-writers promote.

After that, in 2008 when I had enquiries to make, I wrote to the Council and their response in that situation was to take legal advice on how not to respond. Then, in 2009, when I went to the Council offices and looked at documents (and photographed them) the Council's response was to obstruct further access. So, today, at the end of 2010, I look back and wonder what was the most effective communication tool and the blog still seems to be the #1 method. Importantly, it was the one channel which the Council could not silence or ignore and, probably equally significantly, it was a channel which was open to others.

So, looking forward to 2011, I hope that those letter-writers find time to celebrate the 'cleaning up of local politics' and, at the same time, they might consider just how much their complacency and smug self-righteousness contributed to Somerton's woes, woes that they did nothing to address or resolve.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly

PS If you wish to comment, follow the advice at the top of the page titled 'Commenting on M+B'

18 December 2010

Without comment.......

16 December 2010

Time for a change.........

Right from the start of Muck&Brass, I've taken responsibility for the blog by publishing it under my real name. I always felt that it was a responsible position to take as it made me accountable for what I wrote. It acted a brake in some circumstances when it caused me to consider what I was writing before I published it. But it remains the responsible position to take and I've decided to extend that responsibility to contributors.

It may seem contradictory to some but this blog isn't the place to criticise Somerton's Town Council. That might have been the case 15 months ago but it isn't the case today. The Council today has something of an 'open door' policy and you can take comments to the Council without running the risk of being abused for your trouble. Today's Council acts as Somerton's Town Council and there is a reciprocal responsibility where the community of Somerton needs to work with its Town Council just in the same way that the Town Council needs to work with the community.

Its easy to make glib and vacuous comments about wanting 'action' from the Town Council but what does 'action' mean? It could mean anything. Or nothing. It sounds like it means something significant but in reality its entirely without substance. So what do people want from their Town Council? Quantify it and communicate it. Start a dialogue, that's what adults do.

So, as part of that adult dialogue, comments can now only be made when you have followed the instructions laid out in the 'Commenting on M&B' page. Hopefully this will mean that I have far fewer comments to moderate and those that I do moderate will be written by real people with real identities. Anonymous comments will no longer be published.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly

14 December 2010

Somerton Town Council meeting - 7:30pm, Tuesday 14th December 2010

At the start of the meeting the Chair read out a prepared statement:
"As the result of an objection to the accounts of Somerton Town Council for the year 2008/9 by an elector, an investigation was launched by the Audit Commission who appointed an external auditor which is Moore Stephens to prepare a detailed analysis and report. The information was sent to the Council in a lengthy document titled 'statement of facts' which was shown to and discussed by all members in a series of briefings in July.

The external auditor had already held preliminary meetings with representatives from Avon & Somerset Police, and that is what is known as the Economic Crime Unit, and as a result of further information revealed in the 'statement of facts', a formal meeting with the same unit was requested by Somerton Town Council which took place at the end of August.

The Police Authorities examined the material supplied by the auditor and in mid-October informed us that they would be launching a formal investigation. This investigation started on the 2nd December and it is our understanding that three people were arrested, taken into custody for questioning and released on Police Bail without charge. A 4th person was arrested on Monday 13th and again was released on Police Bail without charge.

The investigation is ongoing and it is inappropriate for Somerton Town Council to make any comment. This means I will not answer any questions directly relating to the investigation and would remind the press and media that the sole spokesperson for the Council on this matter is Cllr Austin, chairman of the Communications Committee.

Finally, to clear any misunderstanding on external auditor's costs, the final bill totals £24,000. This is not an insignificant amount but not the £35,000 plus quoted in the local press and even more, anecdotally, in the town. As it stands at present, we will then have no further liability.

Lastly, if I could, on behalf of members, thank Paul Austin who has been fielding and acting as spokesman on our behalf whilst this matter has been going on and if I could please re-iterate, I will not answer any questions regarding the Police investigation."


Following the Chair's statement an early highlight was a statement by County Cllr Jimmy Zouche regarding the cuts being imposed at County. In summary, Jimmy doesn't know what's happening but, when he does, he'll let us know. Declaration of Interests was followed by Previous Minutes, Matters Arising, Finance (cheque signing etc) and Correspondence where Cllr Neale raised a question about a letter written to .......... Niall Connolly. He seemed inordinately interested in this letter, causing the Chair to read it out. Essentially it informed Niall Connolly that he was saying naughty things about the Town Clerk and the Assistant to the Town Clerk and that Niall Connolly should stop it at once. Now, as this letter was written to me, and being someone who believes in a 'Right to Reply', I did ask the Chair if he could read out my reply. Fortunately, a copy of my letter was unavailable and I think that's a good thing because I don't want to cause the Town Clerk or the Assistant to the Town Clerk any further embarrassment by having my rather robust and pointed response read out in public. But there again..............

The meeting moved swiftly along to Committee Reports then Casual Worker, Youth Club Grants then to Precept where Cllr Barrie Davies read out a schedule indicating those items that were changing in the coming year's Precept. The long and the short of it is that the Town Council is estimating that the Precept will rise by some £15,000 in the next financial year and the rise will be a direct consequence of the cuts in funding at County. Given the fact that County have not, as yet, fully quantified the cuts or their impact (or, as Cllr Thomas pointed out, done the impact assessments which are a legal obligation) it is possible that the Town Council may have to increase the Precept further just to stand still. And remember dear readers, that the Precept is added to your Council Tax bill so now you are going to pay twice for services because of the cuts imposed at County level. So don't complain to the Town Council, go and see Jimmy Z or, better still, Twitter a flash-demo at David Heath's next surgery. I should also add that Cllr Davies has done a pretty good job on laying out the Precept and explaining it, a refreshing change from the way the last bunch conducted themselves.

I should give Cllr Neale another name check for his contribution within the Precept item where he seemed to be pointing out that something should have been done about the changing rooms on the sports field. He explained that £150k had been put aside for the provision of changing rooms but it had all been absorbed by, in his words, "this building". Clearly he has forgotten that, of the current council, only two members voted for the expenditure on the Tin Dunny and that was Cllr Harrison and, of course, Cllr Neale. So the point of his interjection was rather lost on me.

The Chair then wound up the meeting with thanks to Somerton's 'Light Brigade' who installed the Christmas lights and also thanks to Cllr Shane for his work on the LSMI alterations.

13 December 2010

The Localism Act - A Crooks Charter

The curious activities of the current administration at County Hall continue to amaze but now we have to deal with the erstwhile Mr Pickles' latest ouvre - the Localism Bill. Its all part of Dave's 'Big Yurt' idea where we all gather in Dave's tent and he hands us a humungous bill for all the services that we thought that we had already paid for through the taxes we pay, including our Council Taxl.

And now we have the Localism Bill. At first I thought it was a bale-out for our ailing public houses until someotold me that it was the next big idea to push responsibility for providing services down onto the community at local level. The idea is that this gives us ('we the people' I presume) to spend money on services that we want or need. This is another way of saying, "You decide what you want, you pay for it and you take the blame when it goes down the dumper".

So, last week I met with David Huxtable, Cabinet Member for Resources at Somerset County Council. David seems to me to be a pretty laid back guy, pleasant and very conversational. (I described him  to a friend as being rather like a lightly sedated Jeremy Clarkson.) Anyway, David gave me a quick run through of the problems facing County and, whilst I came away none-the-wiser about County's 'business plan' (yet to be announced), he did explain the wacky 'Crank the Precept' idea being pushed onto the 350 Town and Parish Councils in Somerset. Here's how it works:

10 December 2010

Credit where credit is due

Just recently I've been looking at some aspects of the cuts proposed by Somerset County Council and the issue of the closure of Household Waste Recycling Centres features high in County's considerations. 4 HWRCs are currently proposed for closure and the logic of the choices (Dulverton, Coleford, Middlezoy and Crewkerne) is driven, in part, by the catchment area of the HWRCs ie the number of households that they serve.

Although I don't have definitive information on Somerton, Somerton's existing HWRC isn't at the top of County's list when it comes to number of visits or tonnage processed and this makes me wonder about the very dubious logic of the aborted Badger's Cross HWRC project.

If I could see that the Badger's Cross project had addressed some pressing need then I could understand why that project went so far. But the fact is that even in SWP's calculations, there were other sites more deserving of investment before Somerton.

And now we see the hard-nosed view being taken by County and Somerton's existing HWRC isn't so far up the league table that it might not be considered for closure at some future time. (I stress that I don't have definitive information and I am unaware of Somerton being considered for closure.)

So its worthwhile taking a moment to consider what might have happened if the old Somerton Town Council had waved the Badger's Cross scheme through. The project would probably have been signed and sealed some time ago and we might now be facing a situation where a glossy new HWRC was being constructed at Badger's Cross at the same time that County was deciding to close it because it enjoyed no pressing justification.

So I'd like to thank the residents of Badger's Cross for saving the taxpayer a bundle of money, money which, today, is available to maintain other services. The residents of Badger's Cross deserve a big 'thank you'.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly

8 December 2010

An end to the rumours.....

Reported on the BBC News website (click the headline to get to the BBC article):
Fraud officers arrest ex-vice chair of Somerton council

The details are sketchy but the BBC piece confirms that three arrests have been made by Avon & Somerset Police. Mr A H Canvin is the only individual who has been named as having been arrested. 
Arrests are a small part of any legal process and they do not suggest or infer guilt. Having given the matter further thought and out of respect for the process that is now unfolding, I have decided not to publish any comments. However, I appreciate the emails and the sentiments that they express. Please continue to use the 'comments' option or email through muckandbrass@googlemail.com 

Till next time, I'm Niall Connolly

7 December 2010

The Rumour Mill...........

Muck and Brass's first entry was back in November of 2006, a little over 4 years ago and, at that time, the focus of commentary was on the complete disregard with which the then Town Council treated the wider community of Somerton.

The story unfolded quite slowly, gaining real momentum in 2008 with the asset swap which resulted in the Town Council selling off (with little fanfare) what was supposed to be the site of the community hall and buying, instead, an unlovely concrete box on the Bancombe Trading Estate. That action, and the resultant hemorrhaging of funds, became the real focus of Muck and Brass and, as a direct consequence, drew criticism, threats and violent action from quarters of the community who clearly had or believed they had a vested interest which M&B seemed to threaten.

Today, Somerton is awash with unsubstantiated rumours of Police action, possibly last week. What is known is that a significant Police presence was observed in the Town Square on Thursday morning, 2nd December. M&B has received unsubstantiated reports that the Police action, which reportedly included arrests, was related to the External Auditor's investigation into the financial affairs of the Town Council, an investigation focussed on the Town Council pre 27th October 2009.

If these rumours prove to be true then M&B hopes that this is, at the least, the end of the beginning. There is a natural temptation to say "I told you so" but these are early days and the Police presence in Somerton may have been for another purpose. Time will tell. Whatever the truth of these rumours, it is to be hoped that the wider community will continue to support their Town Council, a Council which has behaved with remarkable propriety across what, in anyone's judgement, must have been a difficult time.

Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly


4 December 2010

Throw me a curve...........

'Kutter Ken' Maddock gave David Huxtable the unenviable task of replying to my earlier email and, possibly unsurprisingly, the answers were not terribly useful or informative. Whilst this sort of response is frustrating, its not really a surprise given the culture of local/regional/national politics. In truth, given my experience here in Somerton, its a step forward to get any response from a local politician, so I guess I should be grateful.
The only useful piece of information provided to me by Huxtable is a graphic which seems to show a) the historic level of debt carried by County and b) the estimated debt that the current administration proposes till March 2013 and its that last part that interests me. The information that Huxtable provided did not contain any hard numbers so I have had to estimate the figures to recreate the graphic below (indicating 100's of £millions), but I'm sure that I'm not too far off. (click or double click the image to see a larger version)

To offer some comparison, I have included a couple of 'control curves' which show what the debt level at March '95 (£112m) would be were it adjusted for inflation by 2.5% per annum (black line) and 5.0% (green line). Whilst the current debt of approximately £355m is a bit scary, when you place it in comparison with the inflation adjusted figures from March '95, you see that the level of increase hasn't been as dramatic as the current administration would like to have you believe. 
What is immediately apparent to me is that, given the dire warnings about the 'unsustainability' of County's current debt level, and in the face of the draconian cuts proposed by Kutter Ken and his crew, the current administration are actually going to maintain the current level of debt for another three years. I had expected to see these debt levels start to fall under the current regime but it would seem not. And this begs the question that if debt levels are not going to fall, then where is the money going? It also begs the question 'If the current level of debt is unsustainable, why is the current administration going to sustain it for another 3 years?'.
The only explanation that I can see is that national government is less concerned about levels of local expenditure than it is about reducing debt at national level. As recession reduces tax receipts (VAT etc) national government looks to tax mechanisms that are 'recession proof' and Council Tax does not vary with economic activity. It therefore becomes an obvious target with government taking a bigger slice of Council Tax revenue and Council Tax payers paying the price. My only question is why is the administration at County Hall not fighting harder for the taxpayers and voters of Somerset? After all, they are meant to represent 'us' not 'national government'.
Till next time, I'm still Niall Connolly