A do it yourself world

Yesterday two things convinced me that, due to the cuts in government funding for local services, we really are in a ‘do it yourself’ world.

During the afternoon I was out and about delivering leaflets in Haverhill with my friend and fellow councillor, Mary Evans, who is the Assistant Cabinet Member for Travel and Transport.  We were surprised to learn that she was unable to give more than one of us a lift because she ‘had a road sign’ in the back of her car.

I understand that later on she was going to take the aforesaid sign to a parish council meeting.  The community has been waiting for the sign for rather a long time and it had finally been delivered to the depot.  Whether or not their county councillor really had to deliver it personally I am not sure, but Mary’s action in doing so seemed to me to be a sign of the times.

Later on I went to Lavenham Annual Parish Meeting, and once again came across the ‘do it yourself’ approach.   Sick and tired of the amount of litter in what must be one of the most beautiful villages in England, the parish council has invested in litter picking equipment, including litter grabs and high viz jackets.  Of course this equipment is available on loan from Babergh, but only on a one off basis.  Laudably the community wants to clear up the village, and then, importantly make sure it stays cleared up.

Does this ‘do it yourself’ approach matter?  Those who think that the payment of council tax means that we should always rely on the public sector to provide will disagree with me, but I personally think it is a good thing. Mary showed real commitment while getting something tangible done for her community.  Lavenham residents will enjoy the camaraderie and new friendships that often result from getting together as a village.  Additionally, children engaged on the litter picks will learn not to drop litter.  And the truth is, given the shortage of funds from on high, self-help and community action may be the only way to get things done in the years to come.

Metropolitan lovies' view of Ipswich

Our quiet rural county town

I received my future productions booklet from the National Theatre at the beginning of the week.

Some time ago the theatre put on a musical called 'London Road' which was based on the murders that sadly occurred in Ipswich in 2006.  I did not go to the show, and thought at the time that it was rather tasteless to stage something about a series of events that had only happened relatively recently and which had a very damaging and traumatic effect on the community.

A film has now been made based on the musical, and the live premiere is to be beamed to cinemas nationwide on 9th June.  It will then be on general release in some cinemas from 12th June.

What has irritated me this time however is the blurb accompanying the advertisement for the film.  This has clearly written by some metropolitan luvvie who has never set foot in Suffolk, let alone Ipswich.  He or she writes:-

'London Road documents the events that shook Suffolk in 2006, when the QUIET RURAL TOWN of Ipswich was shattered etc. etc.....'

Quiet rural town?  I wonder what the writer would make of Stowmarket, or Sudbury, or a really quiet rural town.  The ignorance of people living and working in the artistic bubble that is London about life in the rest of the UK never ceases to amaze me. Sadly this also applies to many of our politicians.

Councillors under pressure

I understand that one of our Babergh councillors may well resign from the council a year early.  I am not altogether surprised.  Being a councillor is very enjoyable and rewarding, but it is becoming increasingly hard to perform the role and also hold down a regular job.   This is a change from the past when people generally did council work alongside their work with little problem.  The truth is however that the demands on councillors’ time are steadily increasing year on year.

The temptation to throw in the towel may also in part be prompted by the feeling that councillors seem to be under attack from many sides at present.  This is a dispiriting feeling when one is doing one’s best. 

For a start the EADT is becoming increasingly interested in our attendance records.  Not content with sending Freedom of Information requests about appearance at Council Meetings, which I suppose is fair enough since attending these meetings is a key part of the role, they are now approaching Parish Councils to find out how often our faces are seen there.  For those of us with rather a lot of parishes getting round them all regularly can be a problem but most of us do our best.

The press is also very interested in the level of our financial allowances.   You might argue that being a councillor should be a voluntary role as it was in the past.  However, as it becomes increasingly time consuming, often absorbing around 30 hours or so a week,  it seems unreasonable to ask people to do it for nothing.  Some payment also means that those with modest means and younger people are more likely to apply.   An independent commission has recently suggested that allowances rise by 1%, the first increase for around 4 years, and this has already attracted press comment and speculation, plus an atmosphere of embarrassed soul searching among elected members.

Then there is the Inland Revenue, who have clearly decided that being a councillor is a ‘job’ by any other name.  In their wisdom they plan to tax all fuel allowances that relate to journeys to and from the council’s offices from home from 5^th April.  They argue that the council office is our ‘place of work’ even though most of the time that councillors are working is spent either at home or around and about in the Ward or District.

Ironically the opposite view was reached by another branch of government this week.  It was decided that councillors can no longer participate in the Local Government Pension scheme because they are not ‘workers’. 

Thus is seems that we can have a 'place of work' when it comes to paying tax, but not be ‘workers’ when it comes to having pension rights.   It is hard to see how the powers that be can have it both ways!

In any event, it does not make us feel particularly valued, either by central Government, or by society as a whole.  It is not surprising that it is becoming increasingly difficult to find new councillors.

Hair raising tales

There has been some excitement in the Press about the fact that David Cameron’s hairdresser received an MBE in the New Years Honours List.  I have to say that I am not sure why a hairdresser should receive such an honour for just doing their job, however illustrious the head of hair in question.

My mother, who sadly died many years ago, was very proud to receive an MBE for her service in the WAAF during the War, and I think she would probably be rather bemused to see what seems to many to be the steady devaluation of the honours system.

When I worked in the Fund Management industry some years ago now, I had my hair done at the salon just round the corner from our office in Cork Street, where Tony and Cherie Blair’s coiffeur, Andre Suard, had a 'station'.  Apparently he went along to No 10 Downing Street every morning to primp the First Couple up.  Often he was the first person there and then made himself useful by turning on the computers and so on!

For those interested in reading more about policians, their hair and the Honours List I recommend this article by Harry Wallop.

Boycott on Suffolk Show lifted

Nick and I have been boycotting the Suffolk Show for the past three years.

This is due to the decision to ban dogs.  To our mind a show that bans dogs can not be regarded as in any sense a country show,  and as such we no longer wished to participate.

The organisers' decision today that dogs will be welcome at next year's show is indeed good news and means that we will be looking forward to buying our tickets and taking part once again.

Government urged to give rural areas a fair funding deal.

Charity relieving Distress by Thomas Gainsborough, can be viewed in Gainsborough's House, Sudbury. Community action is however only part of the solution in rural areas..

Is Westminster finally catching up with the fact that rural communities are short changed when it comes to government funding?

Last week we read  that the House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Committee had issued a report which points up the inherent unfairness of the way that central government calculates the funding of rural areas.   It costs more to deliver services in remote regions and yet per capita funding for rural local authorities is less than half that received in urban areas.  

The Chairman of the Committee, Conservative MP,  Ann McIntosh said:-

“The Government needs to recognise that the current system of calculating the local government finance settlement is deeply unfair to rural areas in comparison with their urban counterparts. This is unacceptable.
 “Rural communities pay more in council tax, receive less government grant and have access to fewer public services than people in large towns and cities.
 “Defra must work with colleagues in the Department for Communities and Local Government to ensure that future settlements recognise the premium that exists in the provision of services to rural areas.”

The report’s message will come as no surprise to policy makers.  Rural local authorities have been raising this issue with Eric Pickles for some time now, but perhaps because of the inherently urban focus of most of the cabinet, and perhaps also due to an element of complacency about the persistence of the Conservative vote in the shires, their voices, as far as I can see, have been largely ignored.   The full report can be downloaded or read here.

While they are considering the Committee’s findings I think the Government would also do well to take a look at the evidence that supports  Age UK’s recently launched campaign  ‘to raise awareness of the challenges and opportunities faced by older people living in rural communities in England’.  Transport, health and social care, fuel poverty, broadband access, poverty and social exclusion and loneliness and social isolation are all highlighted as being real issues for many.   A link to the campaign web page can be found here.

For Suffolk these issues are of particular importance due to the fact that our population has a higher age profile than the UK average and this will not change in the future.   We must find a way forward if we want to maintain some sort of balance in our communities, keep them alive, and prevent them from becoming the preserve of the comparatively wealthy, second home owners and tourists.

The Chief Executive of Age UK Suffolk, Martyn Green,  came to talk to councillors recently at Endeavour House.  Unsurprisingly his message echoed that of the Age UK campaign.   The way forward lies in a combination of community and government action.  Neither player can resolve the problem without the support of the other. 

However, if the government does not shoulder its share of the burden by treating non-urban areas more fairly the future for the rural vulnerable is bleak.  Ministers should follow the advice of the Select Committee.

Eurocrats? Coming to a lamp post near you?

Lamp post in La Paz from which President Villaroel was hung in 1946.

I wonder if I was the only person who was quite shocked to hear yesterday evening  that luminaries at the European Community intend  to dip their fingers into the bank accounts of people in Cyprus as part of a rescue package for the country.

Of course it is arguable that if the measure is not taken then there could be a run on the banks which would lose depositors ALL their savings (think Russia in 1998).

Nonetheless at a visceral level the action feels like theft and is bound to cause deep resentment.  It also sets a terrifying precedent:  Italy or Spain tomorrow perhaps?  and then who else might wake up one morning to find that the Government has decided to put its sticky fingers into what one thought was one’s own?

Matts Persson, the Director of the think tank Open Europe can put it much better than I can, so I quote from his blog in the Telegraph today

‘All bailouts are unfair – the people who screwed up almost never pay – but this is in a league of its own. Seventeen Eurozone finance ministers locked themselves in a room and decided that every Cypriot depositor – whether super-wealthy or dirt-poor – will, out of the blue, see part of their hard-earned money seized. Remember, Cypriot President Nicos Anastasiades explicitly promised in his election campaign, only a few weeks ago, that depositors were safe. The Cypriot electorate now faces losses on deposits as well as years of austerity (under the bailout loan). What’s worse, deposits under €100,000 are supposed to be protected by EU law, not raided by EU leaders. And Cypriot banks have frozen close to €5.8bn, i.e. imposed capital controls which is meant to be illegal under EU single market rules. This is political dynamite.’

Whenever I read about Government overstepping the mark in this way I am reminded of the Plaza Murillo in downtown La Paz.  Nick and I went there on our honeymoon and were interested to learn from our guide about the lampposts under which various politicians had been hung during public insurrections in the past.

Time to erect a few suitable models for future use?