Why throw money at the Town Halls to resolve the financial crisis?
In my last blog I suggested that the Government should use local authorities to kick start the economy. There are many advantages to using local authorities rather than very large infrastructure schemes like HS2, Hinckley Point nuclear power station, Trident replacement or even the Olympic Games.
Many of these very large capital projects are politically contentious and sometimes very slow to have an impact. Most get bogged down in expensive public enquiries and a proportion probably won’t come off. What is more much of the early expenditure is spent on highly paid staff, such as lawyers, architects and designers and not construction and support staff. An equivalent £1billion spread amongst Britain’s 500 plus local authorities would, on the other hand, have an almost immediate impact.
£10 or £20 million given to my local authority, Wandsworth, could be used to buy every school pupil a laptop or to implement 10 or 20 small, local environmental improvements. I think we would have little problem in spending most of it within a couple of years, with an immediate small but significant local economic impact. Such a nation-wide scheme might, of course, include some silly, vanity projects and some failures but nothing as disastrous and costly as failed and useless mega-projects. What is more such a scheme could easily be targeted to, say, the local authorities in the poorest parts of the country, with the highest unemployment rates or the worst health statistics.
I see William Keegan in the Observer (7th August 2016) agrees with me about using local authorities to kick start the economy, though I must confess I am more one of his disciples than the other way round!
A similar suggestion comes from one of today’s great iconoclasts, Simon Jenkins. He suggests that the simplest solution would be to throw money directly at people. His suggestion reminds me of Alistair Darling’s scrappage scheme, which gave people £2,000 to car owners to scrap their old car and buy a new one. But Jenkins’ idea is more open-ended, in that people could spend on clothing, food or, and here’s the rub, foreign holidays – I have nothing against foreign countries, of course, but, if one is trying to kick start the UK economy then giving it all to Benidorm seems rather pointless.
The problem with Jenkins’ idea is, it seems to me, that it is not targeted to those most in need and there would, I think, be considerable difficulty in targeting, say, the lower paid or the unemployed. It is an interesting idea and gets round Jenkins’ perennial scepticism about bureaucracy. But the time of local democracy has come (again). Think of Joseph Chamberlain in Birmingham in the 1880s or John Burns in Battersea in the 1900s, think of Attlee and McMillan boosting council house building in the 1940s and 1950s.
Boosting the local economy means boosting local democracy and society. Forget quantitative easing, which goes to the banks; forget big vanity projects, over-budget, over-time; think local – NOW.
Austerity in the Town Halls; Recession out there for working people
Today the Bank of England took crisis action by lowering interest rates to 0.25% and throwing money at the business heights of the economy. Will it work? Cutting rates to 0.5% seven years ago didn’t. Nothing, Osborne did, really changed the equation.
What would work immediately, however, would be to take the heat off public expenditure. What do I mean?
Well right now Wandsworth and Richmond-upon-Thames are cutting service levels and reducing the number of jobs right here in south west London under pressure from this Government’s cuts in local government grants; 400 jobs to be precise. And all because the Tory party has an ideological commitment to reducing the size of the state – whatever that means.
The same thing, and worse, is happening in every local authority across the country. Similar cuts are happening in many more public sector organisations.
Meanwhile what do the councillors do? Well, all of us were under great pressure to vote for the jobs cuts. The majority (Tory) party councillors voted for the cuts because they cannot face opposing “their” government and the minority (Labour) councillors are not in a position to defy the government and are “scared” of being accused of voting for an increased Council Tax.
I’ve been around long enough to remember when the Ted Heath Government (1970-74), the Thatcher Government (about 1982-86) and the first Tony Blair Government (1997-2002) faced similar economic crises. What did they do? They threw money at local government with orders to spend, spend, spend in an attempt to kick-start the economy.
The public sector turned out to be far more effective than throwing money at the banks; that was tried in 2009 and it didn’t work.
Just when will Teresa May take the same kind of actions and just how silly will the cuts of 2010-16 look when that happens?
Councillor Tony Belton’s Latchmere August, 2016, Newsletter (# 87)
|
Councillor Tony Belton’s Latchmere July, 2016, Newsletter (# 86)
Councillor Tony Belton’s Latchmere June, 2016, Newsletter (# 85)
|
Councillor Tony Belton’s Latchmere May, 2016, Newsletter (# 84)
|
Councillor Tony Belton’s Latchmere April, 2016, Newsletter (# 83)
- I am going to start with the last day of the month, 31st March, 2016 – a disaster! I have been well and truly hacked. I was rung by a Microsoft support technician, except that it turned out that he wasn’t. Indeed he was a modern highwayman, a crook. After he had conned me and stripped my computer of all locally held data, including photographs and software, and got into my bank and transferred $5,000 (I can’t at present find the GBP sign on my keyboard!), to a Mr. Cardusi, I was able to get free from him. Fortunately the Bank refused to transfer the money and I have access to the internet
- So I am able to type this newsletter using Mailchimp, with its limited word processing capabilities. I also have all the email addresses that I used in Mailchimp, namely Latchmere constituents, but I have lost many of the rest. How much of the rest of this newsletter I will be able to finish, you will know when I get there. But I think I have lost photographs I intended to put in and maybe have been so hit by this emergency that I miss stories and forget events. But one thing I do say to you is be more rigorous about backing up all your data and filing copies of your software than I have been.
- I will spend much of the next week trying to recover the accounts of two voluntary bodies, of which I am Treasurer; constituent casework, maybe 4,000 photographs, etc., etc. I look forward to a miserable week and I do hate criminal hackers! And now onto the rest of the newsletter – though if any of you are experts on pc recovery then I look forward to hearing from you!
- There was a Council Meeting on 9th The March Council Meeting was traditionally an important debate about the Budget and next year’s Council Tax. But it has rather lost its point since successive governments, of both persuasions, have so limited Council’s capacity to raise, or in effect cut, Council Tax that although we go through the debate and we try and find grounds to vote against each other, in practice there is very little to debate.
- So the main debate was about the Ofsted Report condemning Wandsworth’s performance relating to “children looked after”. The Labour councillors, me included, called AGAIN for the resignations of those local politicians responsible for the “inadequate” services provided for these vulnerable children. Of course the Tory members took no notice.
- The March Planning Applications Committee PAC meeting was on 23rd and had one application of real interest to Latchmere residents and that was for the redevelopment of the Shell Garage in York Road – the one on York Road, right opposite Doris Emmerton House. It involved the demolition of all the existing buildings and the erection of essentially a nine storey building and basement to provide 78 private rented apartments, and a replacement filling station, with a shop.
York Road, admittedly not the most glamorous of roads, looks like being transformed beyond recognition. - By the way, here is just a reminder of what used to stand on the site – the Savoy cinema – I mentioned it in my February, 2014, newsletter. The massive auditorium, built in 1938, sat over 2,000 people and was damaged by a V2 in January, 1945, and was finally demolished in 1960.

- Talking of planning applications, the latest news on that front is that a developer has acquired the site of the old schoolkeeper’s house at Harris Academy, formerly Battersea Park School, and is in talks with the planners about putting a 13/14 storey block on the
site at the corner of Culvert Road and Battersea Park Road. This might look something like this, with Castlemaine House on the right. - A few days earlier, 19thMarch, Wandsworth Labour Parties had a fish ‘n chips fund raising supper at York Gardens Library. There is not really much reason to mention it except that it was to mark International Earth Day, which I dare say you have never heard of. I hadn’t and when you look it up on Google there are conflicting accounts of when it actually is with some saying 22 April and others 21 March. In any event it has been “invented” to salute the earth and all of those environmentalists making efforts to save it! So we ate by candlelight and MP, Hilary Benn, gave his first ever candlelit speech. A bit odd really but very pleasant.
- Where were you during Hurricane Katie? I went down to the Duchess
in Nine Elms Lane not long after Easter Monday and saw the “blown-out” gable end for myself. This is the best picture I got of it! You can see by the amount of masonry on the road what a mess it would have made of any person or thing (car) below on the road! - Of course, we all know just how perverse the British
weather can be so it was fun to take this picture from my house at sunset, two days later! - On Saturday, 26th March, a number of people staged a “Welcome to Refugees” event at Battersea Arts Centre. Here is
Aaron Barbour, in the sweater and jeans, of the Katherine Low Settlement welcoming some of the recent arrivals, largely from war-torn Afghanistan and Somalia.
My Programme for April
- First of all, I have to sort out my computing mess. Do I go for Apple? How much of my data can I recreate or recover? Be more thorough about back-ups. Put as much into the sky as possible. Don’t make my mistake!
- On Wednesday, 6th, I will be attending my first Corporate Parenting Panel. I must say I am very dubious about this. I just do not see how the Government can really believe that councillors can take on the almost entirely theoretical role of corporate parents. Just try suggesting that they should legislate for MPs having such a role. MPs would run a mile – in my view – especially the opposition MPS who would be said to have the responsibility but no power to set the agenda or policies.
- I am going to a friend’s new house in Hastings over the 9th/10th week-end for my birthday – just which one I will keep to myself for now!
- The Battersea Society has tasked itself to make a record of all the buildings, terraces, views, memorials, etc. that it believes are of note in Battersea in an attempt to get them all, or as many as possible, listed and protected by the Council. And I and another Battersea Society member are going to spend all day Sunday 24th driving round Battersea listing and photographing them! That should be fun – I am looking forward to that.
- I have the Education and Children’s Services Committee on 12th April, when we will yet again be discussing introduced after the Ofsted Report! But that won’t be all as there will be another committee on 19th and a full Council Meeting on 27th, just devoted to this one matter.
- On the 21st there is the Planning Applications Committee, which will be deciding amongst other things – ring and check the list!
- And all the time the Mayoral Election, Khan vs. Goldsmith, and the Referendum campaigns are going on in a background full of Tories fighting like ferrets in a bag and Labour unable, or is it unwilling, to get its act together. What a turbulent political world.
Did you know? Last month I asked for the connection
between the famous playwright, George Bernard Shaw, and Latchmere. Quite a few of you got this right but unfortunately one of my PC losses was my inbox so I don’t know who – It would be really nice if you could resend your answer. The answer was that when John Archer unveiled the statue to the “Little Brown Dog” in Latchmere recreation ground, Shaw was there and was one of the speakers.
And for this month: There was a horse trough, there were actually quite a few, in York Road, but one in particular had the charming legend engraved in it – Be Merciful to your Animals. It has a new home 30 or so miles away – any idea where?
Two prescient Blogs from 2014
I was just trawling through some old blogs and I came across two, of which I am pretty proud. Just scroll down the right side of this screen to July 14, 2014 and October 7, 2014 and take a look.
The first is titled School Governance and Governors, and it bemoans the demise of local councillor representation on school governing bodies and the rise of the technocrat. I didn’t know it but it presaged last week’s announcement of the “end” of parent governors. After all parents don’t know anything about running schools, their expertise being merely to have kids and local councillors equally don’t know much about running schools – all they know about it is the local community and the need to plan for school provision and school places. Obviously just the kind of people that Cameron/Osborne would want to kick out of school administration: parents and local representatives! The Tory version is, of course, to have technocrats and the private sector under the pseudo-guise of educational charitable institutions.
The second was titled The Tory Party faces a disaster called Europe. The one thing I got wrong in that blog was the date of the crisis, which I had down for 2017. I didn’t know that Cameron was going to plump for June 23, 2016 as the Referendum Day. I predicted Tory division and disaster and potentially its demise for a generation. I hope that I am right. It is beginning to look that way!
And my punt for 2016? Against all the punditry and all the apparent trends, the economic problems and climate change issues demand a collective solution. So my prediction is that 2016 sees the start of the rejuvenation of social democracy.
Come on Jeremy raise the stakes: get tough, get leading
The Tory Party is seriously on the back foot. The Brexit wing needs no help from us, though it might get plenty from traditional Labour voters, but the Cameron “mainstream” desperately needs Labour help for this crazy referendum campaign.
Here we are the largest party in the country, by a country mile, and we are being shafted by a Government, which assumes that Labour will do the right thing. We are always doing the “right thing”; we are always taking the “one nation”, “all in this together” approach whilst the Tories stuff the pockets of the rich and the rentier class.
I can’t be the only Labour activist who seriously wonders whether the future of this country isn’t more dependent upon defeating the Tories, possibly for a generation, than it is on staying in the, let’s face it, struggling EU. Its pretty much an “on balance” decision for me and many other party sympathisers.
Now what would swing it for me would be a few concessions from Cameron. Take your pick from attacking “welfare”, abolishing Bedroom Tax, scrapping the Trade Union Bill, opening real discussions about boundary redistribution, stopping “right to buy” housing association properties, ending so-called schools reforms and NHS restructuring, ending the continual and vicious attack on immigration and immigrants.
Jeremy: this is a wonderful opportunity to get the Tories talking some sensible politics. You have a great opportunity to earn their respect, grudging though of course it will of necessity be, and to win the support of the country. Your best bet for winning support in the PLP is by winning respect from the Tories and you will never have a better opportunity than when Cameron is down, with his face in the sand.
Tory Personal Generosity vs Public Meanness
On 10th March, I attended the opening of the CAB’s (Citizens’ Advice Bureau) smart new offices in the Battersea Library on Lavender Hill, where I was approached by a self-confessed Tory constituent of mine, who said nice things about my monthly newsletter. We got talking about how he could possibly be both a CAB volunteer and a Tory. I am afraid that I was a bit rude to him, or perhaps I should say over-dramatic for such a social environment. If I knew for certain who he was I would apologise to him (I hope he sees this) – it was OTT of me.
But this exchange made me reflect on the nature of personal and public morality. Why is it that so many Tories I know are personally pleasant and generous but would no more dream of voting for, say, a 1% income tax rise than the proverbial “turkey voting for Christmas”? After all the Tories I am talking about are not strapped for a bob or two, nor are most of them personally mean or ungenerous.
For example, I remember I once did some fairly aggressive fund raising for the British Heart Foundation (I raised about £10,000) and, as I move in political circles, I knew the politics of most of the donors, who sponsored me. I don’t think it would be much of an exaggeration to say that the Tories were considerably more generous as a group than my Labour colleagues. And yet, when it comes to politics, generosity is about the last quality one expects to find in any group of Tories.
The opposite sign of the coin is, of course, that at least in my observation, many Labour colleagues respect and value what one might call collective action, e.g. having much higher levels of direct taxation, even when this action would be clearly against their own personal and immediate interest (, although all of us would, of course, benefit from not having to step over rough sleepers on our way in, and out of, the opera). Equally Labour members can be and often are contemptuous of “charitable” giving, condemning it as merely a palliative and an inadequate replacement for organised state (or mutual) redistribution.
Take my constituent CAB volunteer as a case in point. I think it would not be unfair to say that his basic argument was (and is) that “you can’t interfere with the market”. He would not, or could not, accept that the market is a social construct, made and designed by human beings and therefore capable of being interfered with very easily. Here in Wandsworth, for example, we have completely changed the housing market by taking 20,000 council homes out of the controlled sector and putting them on to the so-called “free” market, in what I would call a massive interference with the market, both in terms of supply and demand.
My constituent argued, during our conversation, that the Council sales issue was past tense and that I was wasting my time crying over spilt milk. This sounds superficially to be a good point, but the Tories are now in the process of extending this “principle” to housing associations, so it isn’t actually past tense at all.
In reality, of course, the Tory party only claims that the market cannot be interfered with, when it suits their case. They have a very different perspective when the banks face bankruptcy, when of course the opposite applies and the market MUST be interfered with, as a matter of urgency.
But, even at the local level, I well remember senior Tory councillors, now MPs Chris Chope and Paul Beresford and Boris’s Deputy Mayor Eddie Lister, when pushing for more and more privatisations, stating that they were “creating a market”. If you doubt that then just ask yourself what the market was in home helps or meals on wheels 30 years ago before privatisation got going – of course, there wasn’t such a thing as a market then – all such services were delivered by Council manual labour on nationally negotiated rates of pay and conditions.
Whether or not the market has been a “good thing” is another issue; but my point is that my constituent’s argument is that one can’t interfere with it and hence he comes down against political action, whereas I think political action is all and his volunteering is very good-hearted of him but only, at heart, a minimal palliative. Whilst for him, my political activism is useless resistance to market forces – or in the vernacular, “pissing in the wind”.
Is this why I am so often confused by the fact that so many Tories seem so nice but vote for such ghastly, mean, pauperising policies? And no doubt, why so many Tories think that most “of you chaps are well-meaning but unrealistic idiots”?
I think that my side is right; but its surely time that we made the case publicly for the enlightened self-interest, that collective intervention represents, before the rough sleepers return again to more aggressive forms of opposition.



















![7 wendy[1]](https://tonybelton.blog/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/7-wendy1.jpg?w=276&h=300)








