Another myth busted

One of myths that is trotted out by local Conservatives is that we are only subsidising 'Labour voting' areas of the UK.

It seems the myth spread by some misguided right wingers is factually spurious. Would not be the first time...

Whilst some form of redistribution from poor areas from wealthy regions does indeed occur from the wealthier South to poorer areas in the North, it is particularly interesting to see which part of the UK takes the most subsidy.

It is the Northern Irish which seem to get the highest level of subsidy, with Belfast one of the lead cities in terms of capital receipt direct from the government.

According to the Belfast government website the public sector plays a huge role in Belfast's economy. Almost two out of every five jobs are in public administration, education and the health sector.

The table shows that London, South East and Eastern regions are subsidising the more industrial areas of the United Kingdom and in particular Northern Ireland (29.4%), Wales (26.0%) and the North east (22.2%).

I suspect the Tories, who rely on the DUP for votes in the House of Commons may not feel comfortable but it appears true, it isnt just Labour voting areas that need help.

£6m Outstanding Council Tax Bill

Do you honestly think that Medway Conservatives are fiscally competent?

The news that Medway was the worst local authority in the entire South East for uncollected Council Tax with almost £6m outstanding is an outrage which serves to highlight the total incomptence of the current Conservative administration.

This figure has worsened on my piece in late 2010 when the Conservatives had failed to collect £4m in Council tax. This is now the twelfth year running that our bill has continued to rise.

Over the same period we have seen other Authorities reduce the outstanding Council tax debts so there is simply no excuse. Unless you consider incompetence as an excuse?

This blog would suggest that the local Tories have just continued to blindly ignore the problem; this has those that pay Council Tax continue suffering the cuts to Sure Start, Libraries and other services which impact the front line, whilst a number of people are getting away with out paying.

Despite all the hot air about managing your money sensibly this current Council stands in shame as the worst performer when compared with all the other 67 Authorities in the South East. A position which serves to highlight why the Conservatives locally can not be trusted with the finances on the Council.

The Council spin machine incorrectly stated that this was only in comparison with smaller district Councils. However Slough, Southampton and Brighton & Hove are all Unitary Authorities so this is a flawed response.

We have yet to have any apology from the Medway Conservatives and not one member of the administration has deemed it appropriate to comment on their shameful legacy.

As the budget day approaches the public can smell the stench of Tory mismanagement as predicted by this blog in December. The simple fact this is but the latest in a sorry saga of financial mismanagement.

Councillor Jarretts budgetary incompetence is well documented and this latest piece of news just serves to reinforce his record; no grip, no clue, no future:

Bus Station overspend

Stoke Crossing overspend

Chatham regeneration overspend

Walderslade School overspend

Fraudulant Activity

Non-Council Tax collection (again)

The above is merely the tip of the iceberg but adds up to multiple millions of pounds of your money squandered.

The incompetence permeates every level of the local Conservative Party; they have simply lost grip of good financial governance.

Tory colluding as Airport looms

The news that the #TwofacedTories have been colluding in government over the Estuary Airport may shock readers on the Peninsula, but does not come as a surprise to this blogger.

This blog has consistently stated for months that there was active lobbying in Whitehall by pro-airport groups, which is the reason why it suggested that the actions of Tracey, Mark and Reh were next to useless. From the news today I was entirely justified in my angry musings to this effect; it was pity that some of our MPs were and remain in dithering denial.

Up until December we were getting the same old trite spin from them that the government had 'no plans.' The news today shows how utterly two-faced they really are on the airport.

It is ludicrous for them to represent, in all good faith, a party that is secretly colluding with engineering groups whilst on the other hand asking residents to 'trust them' on the airport. Only a true fool would put any stock in anything the Conservative say on this issue; they are simply unbelievable.

The proximity of little-known MEPs and smiling blue-rinsers on the Peninsula also does not mask the fact that we have had no response to any of our cross-party letters calling for an immediate meeting with senior policy makers.

How much longer will we have to wait?

I suggested at Full Council the lack of response is because sunset Cllr Chambers was little-known and ineffective; I was shouted down for suggesting as such but almost one month later and he has been Ignored, Ignored, Ignored.

If I were a resident on Grain I would have next to zero trust on any Tory representative. Not only are Tory Councillors not planning to resign, instead pledging their fawning loyalty to the party machine managed by the pro-airport brigade, but they seem very happy to ignore the wishes of residents when it suits them. Just take a look at the numerous tweets of Grain LNG campaigners who appear to have been blacklisted by local Tories and ignored.

We have a brigade of elected Conservative parish and unitary authority Councillors all seemingly paralyzed by fear. Fear of action which could destroy them but fear of inaction as they see the impending political car crash. We have a government soon to be actively consulting for the destruction of homes and a local Conservative Party that has been in dithering denial, and which now refuses to endorse a public referendum and any form of active campaigning.

At this point in 2002/2003 we had public meetings, lamp post posters and active campaigning. This time we have a refusal and delays from Tories to having any form of action.

It is that dithering which is the reason why plans get more developed; it is the mutual back-patting which typifies the greasy and 'jobs-for-the-boys' attitude of Kent Conservatives more generally.

Labour must now step up the campaign and stand up for the Peninsula and it's residents. We will be.

Bonkers Budget adds up to cuts

He may be smiling... but you definately wont be...

Have just had a quick look at the budget figures and they are bleak and depressing. It is clear that the chancer Cllr Jarrett and his Tories have utterly mismanaged the finances for 2011/12 and have presented a bonkers budget for 2012/13 that simply doesnt add up.

In many other authorities across the UK the ruling group (whether Tory, Lib Dem , Labour or NOC) have actively consulted the public in open forums. Our administration has been desperate to keep the budget process hidden from public view; and we now know why.

There are many Councils controlled by Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats who have successfully managed the finances. This is not a partisan point; this is the incompetence of our current Conservatives in Medway.

The budget is a bloody mess

We have eye-watering shortfalls and cuts within caused ostensibly because the Council is spending too much.

In addition this is another budget which is very likely to fall apart and result in a budget, like this years, which will require a Tory raid on our capital reserves. An unsustainable position for the future.

This blog has reported on countless botched projects and overspends over the last 12 months at schools, bus stations, transport schemes and beyond. Not helped by the fact that Medway Tories oversee one of the mose fraudulant authorities in the country. They have simply lost control; all analysis points to a lack of political control.

Residents across Medway will likely feel that the Tories were elected on the basis of false promises following the publication of this bonkers budget.

Cuts to front line services are happening and will get even worse.

The draft proposals, which will be debated at the next Full Council meeting on 23rd February, show dramatic cuts to adult social care budgets, including ‘Supporting People’ funding which is targeted at the most vulnerable in society, including those with mental health issues and victims of domestic violence.

The budget also presumes that the closure of the Balfour Centre will go ahead, precluding the outcome of the consultation – but also offering another stark contrast to the Conservative election pledge of “Continuing to improve front line services such as care homes”.Likewise Sure Start centres, which give invaluable support to families across Medway, were a key source of debate during the election.

The Tories claimed Medway’s Sure Start centres were ‘safe’ with them and would not see funding reduced – yet they are now highlighted as a target for budget reductions.

The good news items are directly lifted either from our manifesto or are a result of the previous Labour administration in Medway

Good News items

Freeze in Council Tax - This was proposed by Medway Labour at the budget last year and it was copied by the Conservatives in the local election manifesto. We have led on this locally.

Lowest Council Tax in Kent - This is the lowest tax in Kent because under the last Labour Council we scrapped an entire tier of local government from the majority of Medway. Whilst Tory Kent has a district and County system we have a single layer of governance. The fact the Tories have maintained our record was due to tax rate capping by John Prescott and under Eric Pickles.

Bad News items (which stand out for me) on revenue and tax wheezes by the Conservatives

• Tory bulky waste tax to be introduced – we will see second charges for collections at£17.50 per collection
• Park and Ride – disposal of popular park and ride at Horsted
• Roads / Potholes – Road Maintenance (re-surfacing and potholes) budget reduced by £250,000
• Crematorium 'income' will increase

Of course the real bad news is in the small print which I and others will be going over with a fine tooth pick over the next couple of days.

Chicken Run

A bit windy...

Romney Marsh wind farm is largest in SE. Kent is becoming centre for wind farm education, technology and jobs

It is particularly interesting to note the move by a hundred (mostly Conservative) MPs today writing to David Cameron to oppose subsidy of onshore wind facilities.

Medway Conservatives are pro-onshore wind and have given Planning Permission on the Grain Peninsula despite local objections by residents. Many other Conservative controlled Councils are also open to onshore options and Kent County Council has even supported mini-turbine initiatives and Kent is quickly becoming the centre for the UK for wind farm technology with many aligned engineering firms beginning to express major interest in offshore and onshore production. Many local colleges are also investing in engineering schemes for future success for Kent.

You would think therefore Kent MPs would perhaps not sign up to something which could, and will likely, hurt local jobs.

The Tory letter today states that

"In these financially straitened times, we think it is unwise to make consumers pay, through taxpayer subsidy, for inefficient and intermittent energy production that typifies onshore wind turbines"

The contradiction is that the subsidy is even larger for offshore wind then it is for onshore. Under the logic of Conservative MPs lobbying they would either be calling for a reduction in subsidy to all wind energy (which I believe is the end game and so will Wind Energy Companies) or they will be choosing to subsidise even more heavily a more expensive off-shore only exercise, which will leave the bill or rate payer forking out more to the energy companies in terms of bills.

This nullifies the argument on cost which makes the letter a contradiction in terms.

It currently costs UK wind farms from £2,000 to £4,000 to produce one kilowatt of offshore wind, whilst in comparison it ranges from £1,250 to £1,573 to produce one kilowatt of onshore wind power.

Tory MPs cant have it both ways; a ruling out on onshore wind would mean more subsidy and expense on the tax-payer for the same energy output.

I also have my concerns about the Conservative NPPR planning process; I think the Tories are about to sell out to the housing developer. If they can flog off our forests then nothing is sacred...

But opposing and ruling out onshore wind turbines, as this change would do, is non-sensical and damaging and comes from Tory ideology over climate change and not the interest of the public.

Given the threat posed by climate change there is a need to move away from high-carbon producing energy production. The UK agreed binding targets in 2008 which gave our committment to deliver 15% of its energy from renewable sources by 2020. Soberingly, while these targets already provide an immense challenge, the UK will have to go far beyond them in the following decades, to achieve 30% by 2030

In response to these targets, Danish-owned company Vestas is building a new plant in Kent to build turbines for the offshore wind industry. These 2000 jobs though supporting the production of offshore capacity may also be used to support ongoing and future onshore growth. The company has a number of existing UK onshore wind facilities for its Vestas V90 onshore turbines and a number in production. The company I believe expects further demand in onshore and offshore production hence its investment.

Worryingly one local MP did not seem to be aware that Vestas operated a site in North Kent

Many companies across North Kent have supply-chain contracts with Vestas and other aligned companies; the damage in threatening this company and its business model could be very damaging to business in Aylesford and elsewhere who supply component parts or support.

In addition, there are significant moves by Conservative controlled Swale Council to review potential onshore wind options in the locality; it may even have persuaded the company to locate to Sheerness on the basis that onshore wind may very well be a future job creator

Note that Gordon Henderson MP did not sign the letter. Perhaps he is aware of something that we are not.

There is a clear drive by the national and local government to promote both offshore and onshore wind development as a response to this challenge. This is the correct position to take in terms of cost to the taxpayer. A mixed economy which reduces the cost to taxpayer for solely off-shore production and makes us open to business.

Vestas is a very cautious company and has a history of closing factories when the market shifts and they are very much concerned about the political dimension to this argument:

Ditlev Engel, chief executive of Vestas, said the UK was

"probably one of the most difficult places in the world to get permission"

Vestas have been lobbying the government for stability in the wind market

"Before our customers can provide us with the needed order pipeline, they need stability in the market and a long-term political and regulatory certainty that ensures their business case,"

The intervention today by Conservative MPs in Kent does not create stability, or long term political and regulatory certainty in the market. If the argument against onshore subsidy is allowed to play through its a no-brainer that Tories will target offshore subsidy as well shortly afterwards.

Vestas is investing in the UK because it believes we will be a market for all its product base; to rule out part of its core business market in the UK is not sensible and will impact potential business decisions about future investment. Already; the Swale proposal may be put on a back-burner and with a company like Vestas we can not afford to make another mistake.

Local MPs should be aware of the importance of wind power and the potential job impacts of a loss of government interest on both onshore and offshore wind.

CCTV Car swoops on Overbudget Bus Station

Declining profitability; up until the controvertial bus station opened

The news broken in December that the Tory CCTV car was a liability in all but name could be about to re-suface, as the Council spin machine released a statement today indicating a new potential revenue stream had been identified at the over-budget bus station, at the same time that the cars were lambasted for declining profitability and high staff turnover.

In December the press reported in great detail (see above) about how the cars were loosing profitability and were subject to huge numbers of public appeals against there operation.

It now appears that the Tory Car had found a new wheeze with which to make money

You will remember the below facts from December

• Tory CCTV 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
• The cars made equivalent to £192,000 per annum or a total profit of £771,000 profit after cost

Readers will be particularly interested to read the Council statement rushed out today indicating the 'danger's of motorists driving through the Chatham Bus Station' which has come as a response to an FoI request disclosing 'Penalty Charge Notices issued at Medway St' the fact the CCTV car has potentially made a small fortune out of catching motorists using the bus station as a cut through.

This blog welcomes enforcement of inappropriate driving but does raise serious questions about why a permanent camera was not fixed in October, and more worrying that other resources, namely the Police have been used to give out warning notices over a key period; namely Halloween and Bonfire night.

The press release states the timeline which shows why a fixed ANPR camera should have been fixed far earlier;

"For the first four weeks (between 10 October and 7 November 2011) after the bus station opened, Medway Council worked with the police to warn people rather than fine them in order to give motorists fair time to get used to the new layout. A total of 486 warning notices were given out instead of fines during this time."

This statement indicates that Police Officers, paid by you the tax payer to combat real crime, namely anti-social behaviour in my ward in Luton & Wayfield or Gillingham North were actually spending periods of time giving warnings out to drivers undertaking minor traffic offences.

Whilst I have no issue with the Police warning people, we do have traffic wardens that could do the same job. Why have Police resources, already stretched due to budget cuts, being used to in this regard?

This type of non-endorsable wrist slapping is a waste of Police resource for absolutely no gain at all. Taking into account the number of days (equivalent to 30/31 days) that is the equivalent of a cop car giving out 16 non-endorsable notices per day.

Moving on...

"Between 7 November, 2011 and 9 January this year, 962 motorists have paid fines after being issued with Penalty Charge Notices within the bus and taxi only zone in the bus station"

Now comes the crux. All residents are aware that the CCTV cars have been a declining revenue source and after reports in December, were at serious risk of being deemed decreasinly profitable to the point where the PR reputational damage would outway revenue raised.

How convenient, how terribly convenient, that the CCTV car finds a miraculous source of income for its exploits, which it is allowed to exploit for almost two months, twice the length of the Police operation, to penalise road users. In total this car would have made on my calculations £28,860 if everyone paid the £30 charge as stipulated, on the Medway Council website, and if all these PCNs were given by the vehicles.

In the press release it states that the Council has 962 notices paid but in their own FoI submission to a member of the public a total of 1786 fixed penalty notices were given. An amnesty of four weeks was given from the Police but it is still questionable tactics employed.

Despite the warm words of Conservatives indicating that CCTV car would in fact be ensuring schools and residential roads were clear of traffic the cars also spent a disproportionate of time at the bus station. One could say why move if the cash keeps flowing into the coffers...

You may remember the justification a few years ago that:

"Our CCTV cars make it safer for children by operating outside schools and help cut down on congestion by people illegally parking on roads throughout Medway."

It seems however this car was spending a lot of time not outside schools at all.

The Council have now stopped the cash cow and have

"Now permanent ANPR cameras are being put in place to stop those that continue to flout driving regulations. "

Notice the words 'are being' not 'have been'

Absolutely correct; but why did it take months of penalising the public with the CCTV car to install ANPR cameras, and when was this decision made (e.g. not today)? ANPR camera's or fixed camera's should have installed from the very start on this stretch of road or surely after Police reports; the fact they were not, and the CCTV car allowed to operate at such revenue does raise serious questions here. The timing is very co-incidental indeed.

It looks very much like, one could argue, that a previously decreasingly profitable set of vehicles, with a declining revenue stream, were seemingly allowed to rake in revenue from an area which should have been fitted with a permanent camera at the very start.

Pointing both ways; revenue generation or simply enforcement? You decide?

Of course there are a number of ways that individuals can oppose the PCNs but one very interesting spot tonight from the above. The bus symbol used on the turn 'right' side of this image is not one I have seen before. Also; I cant say I saw a lot of indications of a bus lane on the roads themselves.

This is a very suspicious state of affairs; someone somewhere needs to ask how much profit these cars made out of this failure, and why it took so long for a decision to made to place a permanent camera.