Sunday, 17 July 2011
Save our Schools
Please see attached Northern Public Service Alliance leaflet on Academies. http://bit.ly/qS1da6
Wooler News
Read the latest edition of the Wooler Parish Pump: http://bit.ly/nLbABa
Read the Glendale Free Music Festival: http://bit.ly/mZuKhW
Read the Glendale Community Plan - A Vision for the Future: http://bit.ly/oKl7RR
Read the Glendale Free Music Festival: http://bit.ly/mZuKhW
Read the Glendale Community Plan - A Vision for the Future: http://bit.ly/oKl7RR
Monday, 11 July 2011
UNISON Labour Link Forum 2011
I attended the UNISON Labour Link forum in Liverpool at the weekend with the the Northern Region delegation. Northern Region delegates spoke on half of the 19 motions at Forum and moving 2 of our own, every delegate had a part to play speaking on a wide range of issues such as Pensions, Housing, low paid workers and the NHS. Speaking to motion 18 on Education cuts Tina Roche pointed out the vital work being carried out in the Region by the PSA in defence of youth services, such as Connexions, and our 2 motions on Local Government Funding and Retired Members were carried overwhelmingly. Merv Butler, Chair of the Regional Labour Link Committee said: ‘It was a superb effort all round from the Northern Region, our speakers were impressive and the messages they got across were important.’
Keynote speakers at the Forum included Ed Balls (Shadow Chancellor), Dave Prentis, Arlene McCartney and Linda Macovin (MEP’s), Lilian Greenwood and Angela Eagle (MP’s) and Jake Morrisson; Health Care Assistant, Liverpool City Councillor, UNISON member and at 18 years of age the youngest person ever to be elected to Council. Speaking on the importance of UNISON’s past and present campaigning Ed Balls said: ‘The partnership today (with Labour) is more important than it ever had been’, while General Secretary, Dave Prentis, said: ‘It’s our link that keeps the Labour Party on its toes – week in, week out it’s UNISON people working on the ground for Labour. We expect Labour to be there for us as well.’
I moved the motion Local Government Funding, see my effort below:
Chair,President,Forum.
Ian Fleming, Northern Region, moving motion 7 on Local Government Funding.
We all know Council’s play a crucial role in the economic, social and environmental well being of people, businesses and communities. Council’s are responsible for a wide range of issues and services which affect peoples lives – caring for and safeguarding adults and children, creating the conditions for economic growth, skills, health, transport, roads, environment, housing, planning, culture and leisure to name but a few.
None of these important areas relate to business rates income – which is a central feature of this Governments proposed reforms for local government finance. In the Northern Region all 12 Councils collect less business rates than they receive from the formula grant. So how the review is resolved and the impact a new system has on the ability to provide a good level of service no matter what your needs are, who you are or where you live is a critical issue for us all.
The 2011/12 and 2012/13 grant settlements for the North East will result in grant losses above the national average in percentage terms and substantially above average reductions in cash grant. The significant reduction in resource equalisation means that Councils can no longer provide the same level of service by charging a similar Band D tax. With an alternative cap on Council tax increases this means that the North East has to make deeper cuts in its revenue budgets, thereby putting greater pressure on the delivery of core services.
We would all agree that the current system we have used for years is far from perfect and it is our union which rigorously campaigned for something better, but at least you could say the system we used attempted to be fair by providing different Councils with different levels of resource to meet different needs. It does this by compensating for different council tax yields and allocating according to different levels of need. Its objective is to financially enable Councils so that residents, our members, across England receive the same level of service, regardless of the resource base of their local area.
Under the reforms Councils will make up their remaining Government grant, which is 80% of the calculation through collecting business rates.
Localisation of business rates would re-allocate resources to Councils with strong economies, i.e wealthy and business rich parts of London and the South East, led by Westminster and the City of London and in areas where there is a vast mix of high value national and international businesses and retail sites. Those losing would be poorer areas, smaller commercial and business areas and those with high rates of out – commuting to neighbouring urban conurbations. Due to the uneven British economy, the vast majority of areas throughout the North East, North West, Yorkshire and Humberside, East and West Midlands and the South West would lose, as would many poor parts of London.
My region would lose 320m. One Council projects losses of 88m per year. My own Council is set to lose 60m in one year making it one of the biggest losers, but this isn’t the end as my Council is still expected to make a 30m saving on top of the 60m, while the likes of Westminster will collect half a billion pounds more than it was previously allocated.
Forum it was Cameron and Clegg in May 2010 who said ‘We will ensure that fairness is at the heart of decisions so that all those most in need are protected’. What a joke!
Forum we need a new funding formula which delivers better financial outcomes for our Councils in the short, medium and long term and provides a fair and equitable formula that takes into account the different needs of different people and places, but most importantly a formula that works to help everyone right across our country, not just for those who live in the likes of Westminster – no offence to colleagues from there.
Forum please support the motion.
Keynote speakers at the Forum included Ed Balls (Shadow Chancellor), Dave Prentis, Arlene McCartney and Linda Macovin (MEP’s), Lilian Greenwood and Angela Eagle (MP’s) and Jake Morrisson; Health Care Assistant, Liverpool City Councillor, UNISON member and at 18 years of age the youngest person ever to be elected to Council. Speaking on the importance of UNISON’s past and present campaigning Ed Balls said: ‘The partnership today (with Labour) is more important than it ever had been’, while General Secretary, Dave Prentis, said: ‘It’s our link that keeps the Labour Party on its toes – week in, week out it’s UNISON people working on the ground for Labour. We expect Labour to be there for us as well.’
I moved the motion Local Government Funding, see my effort below:
Chair,President,Forum.
Ian Fleming, Northern Region, moving motion 7 on Local Government Funding.
We all know Council’s play a crucial role in the economic, social and environmental well being of people, businesses and communities. Council’s are responsible for a wide range of issues and services which affect peoples lives – caring for and safeguarding adults and children, creating the conditions for economic growth, skills, health, transport, roads, environment, housing, planning, culture and leisure to name but a few.
None of these important areas relate to business rates income – which is a central feature of this Governments proposed reforms for local government finance. In the Northern Region all 12 Councils collect less business rates than they receive from the formula grant. So how the review is resolved and the impact a new system has on the ability to provide a good level of service no matter what your needs are, who you are or where you live is a critical issue for us all.
The 2011/12 and 2012/13 grant settlements for the North East will result in grant losses above the national average in percentage terms and substantially above average reductions in cash grant. The significant reduction in resource equalisation means that Councils can no longer provide the same level of service by charging a similar Band D tax. With an alternative cap on Council tax increases this means that the North East has to make deeper cuts in its revenue budgets, thereby putting greater pressure on the delivery of core services.
We would all agree that the current system we have used for years is far from perfect and it is our union which rigorously campaigned for something better, but at least you could say the system we used attempted to be fair by providing different Councils with different levels of resource to meet different needs. It does this by compensating for different council tax yields and allocating according to different levels of need. Its objective is to financially enable Councils so that residents, our members, across England receive the same level of service, regardless of the resource base of their local area.
Under the reforms Councils will make up their remaining Government grant, which is 80% of the calculation through collecting business rates.
Localisation of business rates would re-allocate resources to Councils with strong economies, i.e wealthy and business rich parts of London and the South East, led by Westminster and the City of London and in areas where there is a vast mix of high value national and international businesses and retail sites. Those losing would be poorer areas, smaller commercial and business areas and those with high rates of out – commuting to neighbouring urban conurbations. Due to the uneven British economy, the vast majority of areas throughout the North East, North West, Yorkshire and Humberside, East and West Midlands and the South West would lose, as would many poor parts of London.
My region would lose 320m. One Council projects losses of 88m per year. My own Council is set to lose 60m in one year making it one of the biggest losers, but this isn’t the end as my Council is still expected to make a 30m saving on top of the 60m, while the likes of Westminster will collect half a billion pounds more than it was previously allocated.
Forum it was Cameron and Clegg in May 2010 who said ‘We will ensure that fairness is at the heart of decisions so that all those most in need are protected’. What a joke!
Forum we need a new funding formula which delivers better financial outcomes for our Councils in the short, medium and long term and provides a fair and equitable formula that takes into account the different needs of different people and places, but most importantly a formula that works to help everyone right across our country, not just for those who live in the likes of Westminster – no offence to colleagues from there.
Forum please support the motion.
Tuesday, 5 July 2011
Wishing the NHS Happy 63rd Birthday
As the National Health Service turned 63 today, the Northern TUC and Northern Public Services Alliance were out in force to celebrate one of the most envied healthcare systems in the world - providing free healthcare for all at the point of need. I was in Morpeth speaking to people and asking them to sign the birthday card. 
Clare Williams, Chair of the Northern PSA and Unison Regional Convenor said: 'It is important to celebrate the creation of the NHS, and to highlight the threat it faces due to the Government's plans for public services. The Government promised no more top down reorganisations of the NHS, but what we are seeing is the biggest reorganisation since its creation. The health budget is not protected and we are having to find £20 billion in efficiency savings, which will inevitably impact on the delivery of healthcare. We have already seen health jobs lost in the North East as a result of the Government's plans.
'Even after the 'pause and listening' exercise the amendments to the proposed Health White Paper do not remove the core: to increase privatisation into healthcare - and to hand £80billion to GPs to commission care, something the majority don't want to do. The public support and satisfaction for the NHS is at the highest it has been for decades. This is why the Northern Public Service Alliance is continuing to campaign against this Government's plans for public services, and the NHS.'
Clare Williams, Chair of the Northern PSA and Unison Regional Convenor said: 'It is important to celebrate the creation of the NHS, and to highlight the threat it faces due to the Government's plans for public services. The Government promised no more top down reorganisations of the NHS, but what we are seeing is the biggest reorganisation since its creation. The health budget is not protected and we are having to find £20 billion in efficiency savings, which will inevitably impact on the delivery of healthcare. We have already seen health jobs lost in the North East as a result of the Government's plans.
'Even after the 'pause and listening' exercise the amendments to the proposed Health White Paper do not remove the core: to increase privatisation into healthcare - and to hand £80billion to GPs to commission care, something the majority don't want to do. The public support and satisfaction for the NHS is at the highest it has been for decades. This is why the Northern Public Service Alliance is continuing to campaign against this Government's plans for public services, and the NHS.'
Saturday, 25 June 2011
Corporate tax dodging and development
In 2008 the world learnt that the banks had gambled away hundreds of billions and as a result the global financial system was in crisis. Many of the world’s major economies were plunged into recession, through the weak regulatory and although measures are being put in place to separate high street banking from stocks and shares little is being done about tax avoidance. In this same year 2008, UNISON passed a motion recognising the resources that could be raised from clamping down on tax avoidance and pledging our union’s support for the TUC’s campaign tax avoidance.
When we talk about corporate tax dodging, the impact that this has on public services and the battle against poverty in the UK and in developing coutries, its crucial that we recognise the role of tax havens.
More than half of the world trade passes - on paper at least, through tax havens.
Over half of all banking assets and a third of foreign direct investment by multinational corporations are routed through ‘offshore’ tax havens.
Research by the Tax Justice Network discovered that ninety nine of Europe’s hundred largest companies use offshore subsidiaries.
The whole point of tax havens is to enable companies and rich individuals to escape from the responsibilities that come from living in and benefiting from a society that is based on rules, laws and mutual obligations by the citizens and organisations that make up that society. All of these things, from which tax dodgers seek evasion, are the hallmarks of any decent civilisation.
As the author Nicholas Shaxson has pointed out in his book Treasure Island, tax havens have a number of tell tale signs.
Tax havens offer secrecy to clients that use their services, including refusal to cooperate with other jurisdictions in exchanging information.
Tax havens all have low or zero tax rates, for their clients but not their own residents.
Effectively these tax havens are supporting a ‘shadow economy’ hidden from the scrutiny of financial regulators.
In 2007 the International Monetary Fund also known as the IMF identified the UK as a tax haven!
So, how can such a system be changed and a framework of rules to protect national tax bases established?
The Tax justice network point out that progress can only be made at global level and that any solution must be rooted in international co-operation and transparency.
One ultimate goal to aim for would be the automatic exchange of tax information between jurisdictions, preventing national elites from escaping their responsibilities and leaving pooer sections of society to shoulder the burden of taxation. This would almost certainly require some form of global institution to protect the integrity of the system.
Another way would be set up a county-by-country reporting requirements in international financial standards for companies.
Let’s make it absolutely clear tax avoidance and evasion are unacceptable furthermore addressing them could help provide an alternative to the cuts.
Tackling tax dodging through tax havens is a huge challenge – but it is the challenge of our age.
When we talk about corporate tax dodging, the impact that this has on public services and the battle against poverty in the UK and in developing coutries, its crucial that we recognise the role of tax havens.
More than half of the world trade passes - on paper at least, through tax havens.
Over half of all banking assets and a third of foreign direct investment by multinational corporations are routed through ‘offshore’ tax havens.
Research by the Tax Justice Network discovered that ninety nine of Europe’s hundred largest companies use offshore subsidiaries.
The whole point of tax havens is to enable companies and rich individuals to escape from the responsibilities that come from living in and benefiting from a society that is based on rules, laws and mutual obligations by the citizens and organisations that make up that society. All of these things, from which tax dodgers seek evasion, are the hallmarks of any decent civilisation.
As the author Nicholas Shaxson has pointed out in his book Treasure Island, tax havens have a number of tell tale signs.
Tax havens offer secrecy to clients that use their services, including refusal to cooperate with other jurisdictions in exchanging information.
Tax havens all have low or zero tax rates, for their clients but not their own residents.
Effectively these tax havens are supporting a ‘shadow economy’ hidden from the scrutiny of financial regulators.
In 2007 the International Monetary Fund also known as the IMF identified the UK as a tax haven!
So, how can such a system be changed and a framework of rules to protect national tax bases established?
The Tax justice network point out that progress can only be made at global level and that any solution must be rooted in international co-operation and transparency.
One ultimate goal to aim for would be the automatic exchange of tax information between jurisdictions, preventing national elites from escaping their responsibilities and leaving pooer sections of society to shoulder the burden of taxation. This would almost certainly require some form of global institution to protect the integrity of the system.
Another way would be set up a county-by-country reporting requirements in international financial standards for companies.
Let’s make it absolutely clear tax avoidance and evasion are unacceptable furthermore addressing them could help provide an alternative to the cuts.
Tackling tax dodging through tax havens is a huge challenge – but it is the challenge of our age.
Tuesday, 14 June 2011
Cable says Red Tape Challenge has backfired
Business secretary Vince Cable said the red tape challenge has “backfired” because not enough retailers are responding to it.
He said at the British Retail Consortium (BRC) Symposium that the website is being targeted by lobby groups who want more regulation, and that retailers “haven’t won the argument” over reducing regulation yet.
“The challenge in some ways has slightly backfired. People who want regulation are bombarding the website so we’re getting more people clamouring for regulation.”
While the scheme was intended for business groups, it is becoming a “bit of a political tug of war” because groups representing disabled employees, for instance, are making their voices heard.
He said to retailers: “If you want to get your voice heard you have got to muck in. It gets drowned out by others if you don’t.” If a more moderate approach to regulation is to be taken, he said, the case needs to be made for it.
The government has so far identified 100 redundant regulations to be scrapped that relate to the retail sector. Another 80 are being consolidated.
By Rebecca Thomson
He said at the British Retail Consortium (BRC) Symposium that the website is being targeted by lobby groups who want more regulation, and that retailers “haven’t won the argument” over reducing regulation yet.
“The challenge in some ways has slightly backfired. People who want regulation are bombarding the website so we’re getting more people clamouring for regulation.”
While the scheme was intended for business groups, it is becoming a “bit of a political tug of war” because groups representing disabled employees, for instance, are making their voices heard.
He said to retailers: “If you want to get your voice heard you have got to muck in. It gets drowned out by others if you don’t.” If a more moderate approach to regulation is to be taken, he said, the case needs to be made for it.
The government has so far identified 100 redundant regulations to be scrapped that relate to the retail sector. Another 80 are being consolidated.
By Rebecca Thomson
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)