Illogan Blogger

Kowethas

2012-02-14T10:02:00.002-08:00

Looking for something entertaining over the St Piran weekend?

Why not try the Green Room in Redruth on Saturday 3rd March.

Cornish rock band, Kowethas, will be performing with The Surgeons from 8:45 pm to 11:00pm.

As well as supporting local talent you will also be supporting Little Harbour, the new Cornish children's hospice.

Let Us Pray - Please?

2012-02-13T14:14:00.000-08:00

Following a legal ruling that it is not lawful for local councils to incorporate prayers into their formal agendas, Cornwall Council's Chairman, Pat Harvey, has decided that prayers are off the agenda - at least for a few meetings. Instead there will be an unofficial ten minute 'period of reflection' before the official council business begins.

The ruling that has caused this reorganisation of council agendas across the UK was the result of legal action brought by the National Secular Society against Bideford Town Council.

Eric Pickles, the Local Government Minister has criticised the ruling and says that he will fast track the commencement of a section of the Localism Act 2011 which will enable local councils to hold prayers as part of their official business if they so desire.

For me the question is whether religion should be allowed to influence or be a part of government at all and, if so, should there be a presumption in favour of Christianity or the Church of England?

Are we a Christian society or are we a multi-faith society?

If we are a multi-faith society then how can we justify saying Christian prayers and not conducting similar religious activities for other faiths? How do we justify unelected Church of England bishops having the right to influence legislation?

If we are a Christian society then shouldn't we be honest and open about it and make it clear that, although other faiths may be 'tolerated', Christianity is the 'official' religion.

These are the questions that are hard to resolve as, whatever answer you come up with, it will seriously upset a large section of society. This is why many politicians try to avoid having an opinion on the subject at all.

I think that this issue is going to run and run.

For example, if Mr Pickles is correct, and his Localism Act allows councils to make their own decisions, does this mean that in some areas there may be Islamic services as part of council meetings where the local councillors are predominately Muslim or does the law apply only to allow Church of England prayers? How will Christian councillors feel about being summoned to Muslim prayers?

The problem is that the divisiveness that the convergence of different religions inevitably brings, is set to become a growing dilemma now that this particular genie is out of the bottle. Perhaps the judges have got it right and the best thing is to keep religion and government separate?

The Jobs Black Hole at the Rotten Core of the Council's Strategy for Cornwall

2012-02-12T11:03:00.005-08:00

It seems the only plan that the Cornwall Council cabinet and planning officers can come up with for economic regeneration in Cornwall is to build more houses.

It's bad enough that the figure that is being bandied around is 48,000, in fact it is likely to end up a lot more.

Why? Well let's look at what Cornwall Council says.

First of all the 'target' is a MINIMUM of 48,000. If this figure is simply a target why not just say 48,000 - why do you have to say a minimum of 48,000. It seems to me that this is the sort of hidden agenda language that is used when there are secret plans to do something different - such as 'we have no plans to raise VAT' in a an election campaign and then do just that within 6 months.

Perhaps I am being paranoid or overly cynical? If I am why did the council publish the 'Can Do Cornwall' strategy which claimed that Cornwall could build 30,000 houses in just 10 years.

I would be willing to bet a pretty hefty sum that if the people of Cornwall don't stand up and tell the council to 'bin the core strategy' then we will be looking at more than 60,000 houses being built in Cornwall over the next 20 years - back to the bonkers 68,000 target of the last Labour government. Does anyone want to bet against me?

The Can Do Cornwall document proudly claims that Cornwall can build 30,000 houses and create 15,000 jobs. Is it not obvious that 30,000 houses will be occupied by around 65,000 people how is creating 15,000 jobs for 65,000 people a good thing, or something to be proud of?

Last Friday, at the Trelawney Alliance public meeting, George Eustice (Tory MP for Camborne, Redruth and Hayle) proudly declared that there were "three whole pages of the Core Strategy document devoted to job creation". So three pages of the Tory plan about jobs and 25 about housing - about right for this nonsense approach to Cornwall's future.

Even allowing for this pitiful lack of joined up thinking between increasing population without making adequate provision for job creation, the way that the council calculates it's new jobs is laughable.

Take the East-West road about to be imposed on Pool and Camborne to provide the infrastructure for new houses.

It is claimed by planning officers that the provision of a certain amount of hectares of commercial/industrial land space will mean that a certain number of jobs will be created.

This is utter nonsense. Merely providing the infrastructure and capacity for places for people to work does not create jobs - it takes more than simply building industrial units and 'innovation centres' to create jobs.

The planners point us to the recently completed Pool Innovation Centre as a beacon of what can be achieved.

Now don't get me wrong. I think that the Pool Innovation Centre is a good thing for Pool and for Cornwall. It provides Cornish businesses with state of the art facilities to ensure that they can compete with the rest of the world. This is crucial for a modern, forward-looking Cornwall. However, I would say that it has not created any more than a few jobs, mainly needed to administer the centre. We are told that the centre is over 80% full and that 300 jobs have been created by the businesses working there. My question is - how many businesses already existed before the centre was built and simply transferred there? Or - how many businesses actually set up just because there was the facility available to occupy? Is it really 100% as we would be asked to believe.

Basically the Council's plan and strategy for job creation is to build lots of places for businesses to occupy and then count anyone that transfers their business place to the new premises as creating new jobs.

You only have to drive around some of the half empty industrial estates in Cornwall to see that this isn't going to work.

But never mind we will have lots of shiny new units that are just as empty as the old rusty ones - and to look on the bright side we will have lots of new houses with higher unemployment to help disguise the black hole at the centre of the plan.

Of course the only solution in twenty tears time will undoubtedly be to build more houses to stimulate growth .......

Core Strategy Focus Groups

2012-02-12T03:21:00.004-08:00

Hidden away on page 75 of this week's West Briton, I discovered a small piece on the Council's upcoming Focus Groups on the Core Strategy.

Apparently the Council would like to hold four discussions with a dozen people at each who normally don't have anything to do with planning.

There will be two groups at New County Hall on Wednesday 15th February and two groups held at the Camborne One Stop Shop on Friday 17th. On both days the groups will be held between 2pm and 4m and 5:30pm and 7:30pm.

I wonder if there will be alternative views presented at these focus groups or whether this will just be another manufactured opportunity for council planning officers to use their glossy presentations and gobbledygook jargon to bamboozle ordinary folk into believing that hyper-development is the only way forward for Cornwall?

I also wonder how much weight will be given to the outcome of these sessions - or might that depend on the results?

If you want to volunteer for a focus group, contact the council on 01872 224293 or at cornwalldf@cornwall.gov.uk by noon on the day before.

.... 20,000 Cornishmen will know the reason why

2012-02-11T01:00:00.000-08:00

Last night I attended a public meeting organised by the Trelawney Alliance. A panel including George Eustice, Mark Kaczmarek and Council planning officers faced the wrath of local residents over the content of Cornwall Council's Core Strategy.

Despite much obfuscation and many statements designed to hide the truth it was clear that the residents were not in the mood to be bamboozled by jargon and planning-speak.

The same old, same old tired arguments as to why it was vital for the future of Cornwall to build 48,000 houses were trotted out. How building an East-West road was crucial to providing jobs (not at all about providing the opportunity to build more housing). How we had to build unaffordable houses so that our children might have a shot at getting on the housing ladder at some point in the future. How it was stale projections and old, out of date statistics that controlled levels of housing demand - and not policies set by the people that we elect.

Even though Cllr Stuart Cullimore asked the question several times there was no answer to one of the conundrums posed by the 'Can Do Cornwall'. It is Cornwall Council's desire to build 30,000 houses in 10 years but only create 15,000 new jobs - how does that work on any basic economic platform?

Cllr John Rowe also summed up the Council's approach very well. Reminiscent of fast-food chain hustling it seems our planners are obliged to ask "Do you want housing with that?" whenever there is any real opportunity for economic regeneration.

George Eustice did what he does best - talked at great length about nothing. He handed out copies of his answer to the Tory Core Strategy which basically boil down to do nothing for 10 years (when he will probably not be requiring votes anymore) and 'Lets build on Brownfield sites before Greenfield'. The problem here is that he doesn't define what he means by brownfield and as CoSERG have pointed out many times many of the technically defined 'brownfield' sites around Camborne are actually green fields.

The person next to me said that she was even more depressed on leaving the meeting than when she went in. She felt it was clear that there was no intention on behalf of the powers that be to listen to anyone - just to go through the motions and tick the boxes.

This sentiment is probably accurate but if we allow ourselves to think in this way it will be self-perpetuating. It is essential for the future of Cornwall that ordinary people and groups get together and force the planners to listen - silence just indicates acceptance.

There are a few weeks left of this round of 'consultation' if you care about how Cornwall will look in twenty years then get out there and do something now!

St Piran Play 2012 - Update

2012-01-28T05:51:00.000-08:00

Rehearsals for this year's St Pran Play are underway and being held at The Seiners, Perranporth on Mondays at 7.30 p.m. Anyone who is interested in taking part is welcome to come along to a rehearsal.

The Play istself will take place on Sunday 4th March. Anyone who wants to come and watch should arrive at 1.30 p.m. for 2 p.m. start at Gear Sands. There is free parking at Perran Sands Holiday Centre and the car park and play will be signposted from the entrance on Perranporth to Goonhavern road.

A well as the Play, pilgrims can look forward to seeing various Cornish bands/groups - Kowethas, White Noise, Perraners, Robin Holmes (piper).

Haven have kindly agreed to open one of their leisure bars will be open for refreshments, entertainment and film show.

Since when was tweeting the same as broadcasting?

2012-01-25T13:35:00.000-08:00

It is being claimed that the leader of Cornwall Council, Cllr Alec Robertson is looking pretty foolish tonight after 'banning' tweeting from a cabinet meeting.

The Broadcasting Code of Practice sets out the procedures and conduct required by Cornwall Council of any person or organisation to enable them to be permitted to film, record or broadcast any Cornwall Council meeting. - from the Proposed Broadcasting Code of Practice, Cornwall Council. (Thanks to Cllr Jeremy Rowe for this reference.)

The code goes on:

For the purposes of this Code, any reference to: “broadcast” includes references to filming, recording and any other form of electronic retention or transmission of information and references to “broadcasting” and “broadcaster” shall be similarly construed.

Nowhere in the code is Twitter, tweeting, Facebook or any other social media mentioned.

It is extremely doubtful that 'information' could ever be construed to include tweets given the context established by the code.

The natural construction of 'broadcast' in the context of this code clearly revolves around TV and radio and relaying pictures and sounds of actual events - whether live, or recorded to be 'brodcast' at a later time.

Twitter, Facebook and blogging are not 'broadcasts' of events they are clearly comment and critical analysis. As such the only difference between tweeting from a meeting and writing a report for publication in a newspaper is the absence of any time delay.

It seems that Cllr Robertson was annoyed at the satirical comments coming from the Lib Dem tweeters in particular and waded in with a kneejerk over-reaction. I think there will be a lot more satire to follow following the ban and then the immediate climbdown afterwards.

Apparently Cllr Robertson was concerned about the 'inappropriate' nature of some tweets and the impact they would have on the council.

The tweets that seemed to cause Cllr Robertson concern were making the point that Cllr Robertson was not in attendance at the cabinet meeting but was perhaps attending an awards ceremony instead.

Were some of the tweets less than academic - certainly. Did they make a relevant serious point - almost certainly.

In my opinion, if it is true that Cllr Robertson was collecting an award (rather than attending his own cabinet meeting) then this shows disdain for elected councillors and demonstrates, yet again, that Tories simply want to put CV building ahead of Cornwall.

Ok some of the tweets were rather silly - but they would have had nowhere near the negative impact on either Cornwall Council or Cllr Robertson as his subsequent action has had.

PS According to the code all requests for 'broadcasting' should be made 48 hrs in advance - I wonder if anyone has ever requested to tweet 48hrs in advance and whether this has ever been mentioned before a meeting?

Community Chest Funding

2012-01-20T05:56:00.000-08:00

Back in September my son, who is studying media journalism at Staffs Uni, told me how he had approached Stoke on Trent Unitary Council and asked them for details of the councillors' community grants. Stoke Council provided the information immediately and even went on to put this information on the internet for all of Stoke's people to view.

In Cornwall we have a similar system, called the Community Chest. Cllr Alex Folkes has recently blogged about this here. Alex mentions a recent FOI about this subject which, I guess is mine.

All Cornwall Councillors have £2195 available to them to spend on grants for community organisations within their electoral district. I believe that this is a great scheme and a great way to allow councillors, who obviously know their local communities well, a chance to make a positive difference in their locality.

Back in September I asked Cornwall Council the same question that my son had asked in Stoke. Two FOI requests later (both of which have taken longer than the time that they are supposed to be dealt with) and I have been promised the information on Monday.

I have asked for this information to be posted on the Cornwall Council web site because I think it is a brilliant scheme that could do with some publicity. I guess we have to wait and see about that.

Posting the details of the kind of things that councillors and the council have been able to do to help local groups can only be a positive thing - can't it?

In Stoke no FOIs were needed to get the information, the request was dealt with speedily and efficiently and the information was made available to the public in general very quickly. I despair that, in Cornwall, where we have a council that purports to be open and transparent, things take so much longer and are so much more difficult.

Consultation or Indoctrination

2012-01-19T05:00:00.000-08:00

Yesterday I visited the ~~indoctrination~~ consultation roadshow for Cornwall Council's Core Strategy at Pool Innovation Centre. There was a nice set of display boards with various key pieces of information and several planning officers available to answer questions.

One of my concerns about this whole process is the nature of this whole 'consultation' exercise.

The fact is that there is no consultation on the main concepts of the strategy (such as whether we need a minimum [see the PS below] of 48,000 new houses). This was quite openly admitted by the planning officer that I spoke to when I asked whether there was any real point to the consultation.

Then again, what is the point of consultation if it is ignored? During last year's round of consultation, CoSERG submitted detailed proposals with a strategy that indicates that much less housing is needed (14,000 houses at the time). This had apparently been ignored because it 'was not backed up with evidence'.

I asked what weight would my opinion carry if the council weren't prepared to listen to the advisory panel specifically set up to advise the council and who used the 'evidence' that planning officers themselves had provided. The reply was that the councillors on the panel had not acted in line with the evidence presented to them and that the figure of 48,000 was the correct one from the evidence base.

However, when I questioned whether the 'evidence' of the last few years of low numbers of new house building warranted 48,0000 houses I was told that this evidence wasn't accurate because the planners expected demand to pick up in the long term. It all seems a bit selective to me?

We should also remember that last year one of the options that we were 'consulted' on was a growth figure of some 30,000 odd houses. What 'evidence' were the planners using when they thought that this was a viable figure to use in the core strategy and why isn't it applicable now?

Another problem that I have with the current consultation is that the documents provided are couched in planning jargon and full of meaningless or ubsubstantiated assumptions. For example, I had to ask what 'Transformational Regeneration" was. As far as I could follow (even the planner had difficulty in providing an explanation) it is regeneration focussed on providing regeneration rather than simply as part of other aims and objectives - a kind of regeneration plus - or, to a cynic llike me, development max.

The document is also littered with vacuous phrases such as 'We are part of it, not apart from it.' Most worrying is the totally uninspiring and vapid 'achieve a leading position in sustainable living' - most worrying because this is the Council's 'vision' that is supposed to be the bedrock on which the whole strategy is based. Apart from this gobbledygook much of the document is simply a long wish list of nice things - it might be a perfect portfolio for a contestant in a beauty show (who wished for world peace and an end to hunger everywhere) but it doesn't really cut the mustard as a document which is supposed to tackle issues of deprivation and social injustice and shape the way that Cornwall will meet the future.

If you ignore the question of whether there is a point to this consultation or if any evidence that is provided will be the 'right kind of evidence' there is still the problem of indoctrination rather than consultation.

The current round of roadshows are happening across Cornwall. At each roadshow are great looking display boards with bright colourful graphics depicting 'key facts'. There are several professional planners available to answer questions and assure the public that the council knows best.

But where is the alternative view?

Now I'm no expert on planning technicalities but I have been learning to question some (or most) of the information and 'facts' that the council puts into the public domain. Most of the 'key facts' that were being presented were simply opinion or not as important or relevent as they were being made out to be - they just sounded impressive.

What is needed for this to be a true exercise in consultation (as opposed to indoctrination) is for an alternative point of view to be available alongside the council's slick propaganda. Opposition groups should be given the opportunity (and funded) to attend alongside the professional planners (who are paid for their time as part of their job). This would give ordinary people who attend the roadshows, and know nothing of planning or local government, a chance to have a balanced picture of what they are being consulted on - instead of the loaded messages and selectively presented facts that are being used to encourage the particular synthesis that is the Core Strategy.

Finally, the planning process should be about policy shaping the future rather than the past shaping policy. We need politicians who will put Cornwall first and are prepared to put the interests of the people of Cornwall ahead of being seen to be getting something done.

What I mean by this (my very own bit of vacuous gobbledygook) is that politicians need to be brave enough to say that Cornwall should be planning to meet the needs of the people of Cornwall rather than those elsewhere. We need to end the situation where public funding is dependent on gleaning the scraps falling from the developers' banquet. Instead of encouraging hyper-development so that politicians in the council cabinet can be remembered for getting things done, we need to have faith in, and listen to, our communities who are screaming out for a respite from growth and a chance to recover.

PS the word 'minimum' has appeared in the core strategy document as a direct result of the gung-ho, 'presumption-in-favour-of-development' Tory led (with Lib Dem whipping boys trailing behind) coalition's Loclism Act. You see it is no longer possible for the council to plan for 'just' 48,0000 houses because the Cornish public could always call for more if they so wished!

Illogan to Develop a Neighbourhood Plan

2012-01-18T13:37:00.000-08:00

Tonight Illogan Parish Council voted to begin the process of devloping a neighbourhood plan as envisaged by the coalition's (anything but) Localsim Act.

It was clear that, across the board, there was frustration with the whole planning process which will not allow the people in Illogan to decide how Illogan is to be developed or more importantly if it should be developed at all.

We voted unanimously to constitute a body to take the neighbourhood planning process forward.

What was particularly heartening was the desire of the whole parish council to involve the community in the way the plan will be completed.

We want to engage in real consultation and not the indoctrination being carried out by Cornwall Council in relation to the Core Strategy (but more of that in another blog).

Of course we won't be able to produce the plan that residents have already indicated they want when the Parish Plan was finalised - but we hope to ensure that the door is not left open to developers to move in and push for more development than even Cornwall Counil's agenda for growth demands.

A Message From CoSERG

2012-01-17T14:29:00.000-08:00

The Core Strategy: Time for a breathing space

Over the last 50 years Cornwall’s population grew by 208,000 (the equivalent of 19 Truros). The number of houses doubled from 132,000 to 255,000.

Back in 1989 CoSERG called for a breathing space so that Cornwall and its communities could cope with this unprecedented growth, safeguard the environment and retain what makes our place special, its Cornishness.

Sadly, the juggernaut of housing and population growth rolled on.

Cornwall Council’s Core Strategy now proposes pushing the current growth rate even higher. They are planning for between 48,000 and 54,500 houses plus a number of ‘eco-communities’. This means the built-up area of Cornwall will grows by over a fifth. In just two decades.

Population will grow by between 105,000 and 125,000 (or by 10-11 more Truros). In just two decades.

This level of growth will mean

the loss of significant areas of countryside

the urbanisation of our towns and villages

much more traffic and congestion

irresponsible depletion of our natural resources

It will not solve our housing crisis.

And it is certainly not sustainable. Extrapolating this growth rate means that our children and grandchildren will be living in a Cornwall of more than a million people, twice the current numbers.

Is this what we want? When did we ever vote for this?

The Core Strategy is crucial as the higher the housing target the easier it is for developers to get planning permission for more houses in your community. This is why developers and the big construction companies are frantically lobbying the planners.

The Core Strategy asks us to give our views on this level of growth.

CoSERG intends to call for stable population planning that meets local needs and allows for 80% of current gross in-migration. We calculate this requires building 12,500 houses.

We have only seven weeks left to make our views known. It is essential that we organise. As many of us as possible need to tell them we do not accept this unsustainable growth.

Visit the new Facebook page here.

Party Political Point Scoring - My Concern

2012-01-17T06:39:00.000-08:00

Yesterday I blogged about councillors' allowances. I suggested that allowances we paid to councillors should be at a level to attract younger councillors - and at a level so that someone wishing to do the job wholeheartedly should be able to afford to do so.

Today we had Radio Cornwall, courtesy of Graham Smith, spending several hours discussing the rights and wrongs of Cllr Alex Folkes, the Deputy Leader of the Lib Dem group on Cornwall Council, not paying council tax until he was summonsed by a magistrate.

Cllr Folkes' apologised. He stated that he believed a person's tax affairs were private and should remain so. He also said that he had been finding that he depended on his councillor's allowance and that he had found it hard to manage his personal finances on that allowance leading to the non-payment of his council tax bill.

Unlike many, trying to score party political points, I have sympathy for Alex Folkes. For what it is worth to him, I would like to offer my public support for him on this issue. I probably disgree with more of his Lib Dem views than I agree with, but I have to recognise that he passionately believes that he is trying to do his best for the people of Launceston. He works extremely hard and I would imagine that in return, if you worked out his hourly rate (from his allowance) it would be way below minimum wage levels. I think it is wrong not to pay your tax but for me the question is whether there was an attempt to avoid paying it altogether or just being unable to pay it on time.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of not paying your tax bills, I think that this highlights the need to find ways to encourage a diversity of people into local government and that allowances are one way to do this as long as they are connected to robust performance criteria.

Alex, himself, has touched on this last point here. Of course Alec Robertson would be opposed to increasing the diversity of social background of councillors - his Tory chums are probably the ones who most fit the retired, or 'of independent means' bracket.

.... and this brings me to the point of this blog.

Alec Robertson, in his radio interview, was quite unforgiving, gleeful and categoric in calling for Cllr Folkes' resignation. He stated that if a member of the Tory group had failed to pay their tax then they would be dealt with by the Conservatives (or words to that effect).

There are a few reasons why I am concerned with this performance from Cllr Robertson.

First, it seems very hypocritical of a person who voted against the incinerator and then wrote secret letters in support of it to be pronouncing on this sort of issue.

Secondly, this whole issue is being brought down into the Westminster party political gutter by the way that the Tories seem to be as one in their condemnation.

As a final thought - Graham Smith has been unable to obtain information from Cornwall Council relating to the 17 councillors who have had unpaid council tax arrears. Surely, as leader of the Council, Alec Robertson would have access to this information? If he does have access then it begs the question whether there are any Tories in the infamous 17. If there are then, given his categoric stand on the future of Alex Folkes, why isn't Alec Robertson doing anything about it - as he vehemently declared he would on Radio Cornwall. If there aren't any Tories on the list then no wonder that he can so glibly call for Alex Folkes' resignation.

If he does have access to this information, is that information now being used for party political purposes? Of course, I'm not suggesting that this is the case - but it would be interesting to know if Cllr Robertson does indeed know who the 17 are.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of this whole sorry affair, it does show that in Cornwall we need politicians who will put Cornwall first - even above their political party.

Reviewing remuneration - but what about perusing performance

2012-01-16T04:31:00.000-08:00

At the full council meeting tomorrow (Tuesday 17th Jan) councillors will be asked to approve the convening of the Independent Remuneration Panel (IRP).

It will also be proposed that the council adopts the position of calling for a legally binding statutory independent review system to be created.

This current council has a record of voting against awarding themselves pay rises and as a consequence councillors have seen an effective decrease in their allowance of some 24% compared to what it might have been if previous independent recommendations had been accepted.

Of course the matter of how much politicians are paid is an issue which can become very emotive and it is easy to see why councillors would vote against giving themselves a pay rise.

One of the reasons given for convening the IRP is to asses the remuneration of councillors following the 2013 elections - thereby removing the need for them to have to do it for themselves and be put in the same position that the current council has been. This would also provide up to date information for potential candidates in the 2013 elections.

I believe that a completely independent review process is essential for good governance.

One problem that adds to controversy surrounding how much councillors are paid (and who decides it) is the dichotemy between councillors doing the job as a public service and the need to attract people capable of performing what can be a very technically demanding role which can have a massive impact on personal quality of life.

Although it may be very commendable for the current councillors to vote themselves an effective substantial pay decrease over the term of the council's life is this actually good for Cornwall?

Look at the make up of the council and (without any intention to be rude) you will see a lot of middle aged and retired people. This is because people who are retired, or have reached a position in their career that they can afford to take time off from work, are more likely to be the sort of person that has the financial security and time that this brings to be able to put something back into the community.

If we want a council that is more in touch with real life in Cornwall isn't it about time we made it possible for a wider diversity of people to consider standing for election? We need to encourage people to stand who want to contribute to public life but are not able to because of financial reasons.

As I understand it (and in very simplistic terms), when allowances are reviewed the review is based on looking at what councillors are required to do at a basic level to perform their role satisfactorily. This is converted in hours which can be translated into a monetry remuneration.

As I see it there is one big problem with this approach. Not every councillor is 'average'. Some councillors do a massive amount of work above and beyond what has been calculated that they need to be doing. A few councillors seem to do a lot less and are able to claim exactly the same allowances for simply turning up to a few meetings every year. This situation can't be right and is surely not good for Cornwall.

As well as an independent review of remuneration we need an independent review of exactly what councillors should be doing and how councillors perform their role. We should expect to pay for a good job but then have a mechanism (besides the ballot box) for ensuring that councillors are performing their responsibilities and, by so doing, justifying the payment of their allowances.

We need to pay councillors more for performing a very demanding role in society - but we should expect to scrutinise whether the people we have elected, and entrusted with that role, are actually doing what they were elected to do.

Chris Ridgers - still out of touch

2012-01-14T05:51:00.000-08:00

A while ago I blogged about Chris Ridgers (Cabinet member for Economy and Regeneration) being rude, arrogant and a little out of touch.

The mischievous Cllr Ridgers has been on Twitter today, urging us not to rejoice at France's loss (presumably a bit of Tory 'yah-boo' politics following the announcement of the downgrading of the French credit rating) but to celebrate Cornwall's success instead.

Cllr Ridgers provides this link.

As you can see the link is to the eGov site and features a propaganda press release from Cornwall Council which claims that the deeper and earlier than necessary Tory ideological cuts have resulted in a triple A rating for Cornwall Council.

An AAA rating is important because "The rating means that the Council will find it easier and cheaper to raise funds from the money markets if it needs to finance big capital projects. "

My question is this:

What big capital projects are Cornwall Council planning and how will these benefit the poverty-stricken people of Pengegon?

People who are probably a bit more concerned about the impact that the Tory cuts are having on their ability to feed their children than the CV's of the Conservative cabinet members.

Lets all join Chris and celebrate the abandonment of the least well off people in the UK.

Just Believe

2012-01-11T11:29:00.000-08:00

The last few days have seen a focus on Britain-wide nationalism following a crass attempt by David Cameon to dictate to the people of Scotland and to attempt to sieze control of the Scottish referendum on independence.

This devolution delerium has even reached that remote, outlying corner of Britain, Cornwall. The idea of Cornish autonomy, normally ignored (or reserved as a light-hearted '... and finally' type story) by the mainstream media is suddenly hitting the chat shows and editorial columns - albeit it is usually to be rubbished as nonsense by the ignorant presenter who seems to have been coached in pro-union rhetoric.

A recurring theme that seems habitually to be trotted out on these occasions is the old chestnut of 'How can Cornwall afford autonomy?'

We listen in great detail to how Cornwall is too poor, Cornwall is too small and Cornwall is too incapable. It would be impossible for the Duchy to be trusted with its own governance.

Often we are told that if Cornwall wants to run its own affairs then it should be cut off without a penny from the bosom of the Union, like a recalcitrant child. Or, alternatively, the commentator will pronounce, in sarcastic tones, that Cornwall wants autonomy but also wants Westminster to pick up the tab.

The truth is that Cornwall is not too small - there are several independent European countries with a similar population to Cornwall that function very effectively. Why shouldn't Cornwall function just as well with a devolved assembly? Why shouldn't Cornwall be able to govern itself and balance its own books?

To those who say that Cornwall would never make it without being bailed out by UK tax-payers I would say that we could hardly do a worse job than Westminster is doing right now! I believe that, given the opportunity, the people of Cornwall - who live here, work here and play here - would provide more than enough talent to out-perform the Westminster career politicians who have proved that they are incapable of regarding Cornwall as anything but the theme park of the UK.

There are interesting and exciting times ahead for Cornish nationalists - and there is a truly great opportunity for the people of Cornwall to gain control of their own destiny - just believe.

Tourists Are More Important to 'Tourism' in Cornwall Than Anywhere in the UK

2012-01-04T13:53:00.000-08:00

I have been doing some research into tourism recently. Most recently I have been looking at the way the economic benefit to an economy from tourism is calculated and how various statistical ratios and percentages and measures are calculated and what they all mean. It's a bit of a nightmare really!

One of many reports and papers that I have been looking at is the 'Sub-Regional Value of Tourism in the UK - 2008' produced by the Office for National Statistics.

GVA - or Gross Value Added is a measure of economic activity related to GDP. (Dick Cole recently blogged about the drop in Cornwall's GVA here.) Cornwall's GVA was £7.2 billion in 2008.

The ONS report provides a TD-GVA figure of £0.79 billion for Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly.

TD-GVA, or Tourism Direct GVA is that which can be directly attributed to tourism. From this we can calculate that tourism, in 2008, was less than 11% of the Cornish economy - surprising considering that we are always being told that Cornwall relies on tourism so heavily and that we aren't capable of doing much else!

There was one indicator where Cornwall & IoS came top of the leader-board in the report. This was the 'Tourism Ratio'. Cornwall & IoS has a TR of (also) 11%. A median TR would be around 3% - 4%.

The report states:

"The Tourism Ratio itself represents a good measure of the economic importance of the tourism
sector within regions, as it shows the relationship between tourism demand and supply, in other
words the importance of tourism expenditure in driving output in these areas."

Now, at first glance, this seems to provide succour to those who say that we are dependent on tourism (given that Cornwall & IoS has the highest TR in the UK).

In fact this would not be correct as you need to understand the technical terms being used.

The key to understanding what the TR tells us is in understanding that tourism supply does not always cater for tourism demand (?).

Tourism demand is measured by looking at the spending by groups of consumers classed together as 'tourists'. Tourism supply is the output of businesses classified as being in a tourist category e.g food and drink, accomodation and sports and recreation etc.

The fact is that many tourism products and services are acutually consumed by locals 'at leisure' rather than visitors.

Thus the high Cornish TR demonstrates that, in Cornwall, the tourism businesses are more dependent on actual tourists than anywhere else in the UK. To put it another way - less recreational (tourist) goods and services are consumed by locals at leisure than anywhere else in the UK.

A bit of a kick of the teeth for those that preach that living inCornwall is all about 'lifestyle choice'.

The Stadium - National Aspiration or an Exercise in CV Enhancement?

2012-01-04T06:21:00.000-08:00

Yesterday Alex Folkes blogged about the apparent lack of a robust business case for the stadium.

I am a member of a re-enacting society which is in turn a member of an association of societies, run as a company limited by guarantee. The Association has had considerable difficulty recently because its Articles of association weren't really suitable for a re-enacting association. The problem was that, when the Articles were created, the lawyers knew little about re-enacting and the re-enactors knew little about the law.

I think that Cllr Folkes has hit upon the result of a similar problem that we face in Cornwall with the cabinet led Unitary authority.

Alex Folkes had asked Cllr Ridgers, Cornwall Council's Cabinet Member for the Economy and Regeneration, several times on what he based his seemingly extremely optimistic claims for the economic benefits and business case for the stadium - particularly the projected new spending and jobs that a stadium would bring.

Finally, Cllr Ridgers provided the report, carried out by consultants, that provided the figures that Cllr Ridgers was working from. However, it seems that not only does Cllr Ridgers quote incorrectly from the report, but some of the assumptions in the report are simply plain daft.

I suppose that this is what happens when you have an insurance salesman who seems to know little about economic assessments overseeing a global consultant company that knows little about Cornwall.

There is much divided opinion about the proposed stadium project.

On the one hand we have Tory cabinet members and high ranking council officers who may simply want to have a stadium built in order to 'enhance' their CVs. These people argue the Conservative ideology of profit and business and are, perhaps, interested in showing that the stadium can be profitable simply to justify the improvement of their CV.

On the other hand there are those that simply aren't interested in sport and believe that building a couple of thousand houses on green fields is far too high a price to pay to indulge the sports fans.

There are also questions about the proposed location of the stadium - 10,000 capacity and nowhere near a rail link is one question that doesn't seem to have been answered effectively.

Personally I believe that if a 10,000 seater stadium could be justified on a purely economic basis then someone with real business sense would have already built it and be banking profit right now.

For me a stadium on the proposed scale is a national aspiration rather than a vehicle for profit. I believe that if the people of Cornwall have the confidence and desire to stage local, national and international events then they should have that opportunity - but they should also have the opportunity to make the choice rather than have it foisted upon them.

We need leaders who will put Cornwall first. Leaders who will consider building a stadium for the right reasons and who will approach the project from the aspirational point of view rather than because it looks good on their CV.

What about the cost?

Well the all singing, all dancing £24m stadium could be paid for by the people of Cornwall for around £2 per month increase in band D council tax over five years.

What if I don't want a stadium, think it's not good for Cornwall and don't want to pay for it?

Let's take advantage of the provisons of the Localism Act. Or if these aren't appropriate then lets take Kevin Lavery up on his idea!

Iconic projects such as a national stadium should be about Cornwall's place in Europe and the world and not reduced to creative balance sheet exercises and furthering careers.

2012-01-01T09:02:00.000-08:00

Well over a year has passed since the Cornwall & Isles of Scilly LEP came into being. Rob Simmons has discussed what the LEP had achieved and contrasted it with the Black Country LEP.

If you look at the minutes of the LEP meetings it does seem that they manage to discuss the same things every month without seemingly moving on.

However, the LEP does appear to have had two successes - or have they?

First of all it was announced that Newquay Airport was to become an 'Enterprise Zone'.

Now if I were a military man I would, at this point, be quoting the well known axiom that 'failure should never be reinforced'. It seems that there aren't many military people involved in British business governance or this would never have been allowed.

Newquay airport has been failing ever since Cornwall Council took it over as a commercial enterprise. Since the embarrassment of the takeover, when it had to close because of poor Council preparation, it has been losing services and customers. It is now well away from the number of passengers required to make it profitable.

Throwing good money after bad is not a good way of spending my taxes so why is this happening with Newquay airport and why is the LEP involved in this shameful waste of money?

More recently, it has been announced that the LEP has successfully been granted £4 million from the Growing Places fund.

This fund backs up the Tory led presumption in favour of development at any cost. Though normal Tory dogma would advocate letting the market find its own level, it seems that their well heeled backers are concerned at the current inability to make an obscene enough profit from building houses. This GPF is specifically for creating the infrastructure that might otherwise be paid for by developers through S106 agreements. The rationale is that the monies provided to LEPs should be 'recycled'. The LEP uses the funding to create the infrastructure to allow development to take place and then recoups the outlay to use to kickstart the next project.

To me this just seems like a variation on the PFI as a means of moving money from tax payers to business. No doubt once the developer has built their houses, and banked their profit, they will mysteriously go bust and be unable to meet their S106 obligations.

The LEP has made a commitment to openness and transparency. Let's hope it's more honest than Alec Robertson's version. I shall be very interested to look at the LEP's Pre-Qualification Questionnaire and to see just how the LEP is going to play its part in the concreting over of Cornwall rather than concentrating on providing real jobs for the people of Cornwall.

Illogan Parish Hub, the Problem with Tory Ideology - a Case Study

2011-12-30T07:07:00.000-08:00

Before the Christmas break Illogan Parish Council set its budget and precept for 2012.

This was only achieved after a long and sometimes hotly contested debate. The underlying budget was basically flat compared with the previous year, which meant a saving in real terms. However, the final budget was increased considerably over previous years (+28.9%) because the Council decided to make allowance for the cost of the Illogan Hub project, should it go ahead.

The main thrust of the arguments (for and against the Hub project and therefore the 28.9% increase) were as follows:

For:

a) The Hub project will deliver a much improved Village Hall faclity which will benefit the community as a whole and reflects the thrust of the research undertaken when the Parish Plan was created.

b) The project will provide new office facilities for the Illogan Parish Council (the first time the council has ever had its own premises). This will result in long term savings for the people of Illogan as there will be no need to rent office space.

c) The project, as a whole, will hopefully attract funding, thereby reducing the final cost.

Against:

a) In the current economic climate any increase in the precept is a lot to expect people to pay.

b) If we were to continue to rent an office then there would be no increase in the precept.

In the end a recorded vote was requested. I voted in favour of allowing for the project to continue and the overall result was 5 - 4 in favour.

The reason that I voted for the project and, therefore, increase in precept was that I believe that the project will be a big boost for the community when it is completed and will also deliver long term savings to the expenses sheet.

One of the things that we considered was postponing budgeting for the project until we were absolutely convinced that the technical and legal problems that face the project had been surmounted. We might also have made a smaller allowance now and looked to increase further in subsequent years.

For me these last two alternatives would have been preferable. What made me decide against was basically Tory ideology.

The problem that all Local Councils face is that in the future they may well face a cap on their expenditure by a Tory led coalition which believes that cutting all public expenditure is the only way to organise public finance. If we had decided to wait until better economic times or gone with a staggered increase then we may have found that we were unable to proceed with the project at all as we would have been prevented from doing this because of capping.

I believe that there is far too much 'short-termism' going on at the moment. If we want a society that looks after itself then we need to invest real capital expenditure in it. PFIs and all the other ways of keeping expenditure away from the balance sheet simply end up in a long term deficit in the profit and loss account. In other words a short term saving now results in a long term loss to our children.

I believe that we should try to do what we can now in order to help our children and grand-children - rather than saddle them with our debts.

The Cost of Transparency

2011-12-15T06:52:00.000-08:00

Cllr Andrew Wallis has written a blog entry looking at Freedom of Information requests.

He discusses a research document "Town Hall Transparency" .

In general, both the original document and Cllr Wallis's comments are informative, balanced and well presented.

The report concludes:

" .... the survey showed that FOI was viewed as overwhelmingly positive not only in terms of impact on the public but also on the organisation in terms of improving record keeping and the provision of a framework for access decisions with some limited evidence of improvements in decision-making. "

So it seems that FOI has been a good thing.

However at what cost? This is where my views begin to diverge from the accepted wisdom and that presented by Cllr Wallis.

Although I may be wrong (and I would welcome clarification of this if I am) it looks like the cost of answering FOI requests is calculated in a very simplistic way.

The calculation looks at how many FOI requests are made and how many officers hours are spent in dealing with those requests. From this a mathematical calculation gives you the average cost of FOI requests. Cornwall Council calculate this at £150 and, using Cllr Wallis's figures this would mean that there has been an annual average cost to the Cost Cornish tax payers £180,000 over the last two financial years (with requests and therefore costs rising all the time.)

Now I said that this is a very simplistic way of measuring the cost. The problem with this calculatuion is that it doesn't take into account the fact that, surely, the council should have already been dealing with requests for information anyway. Cllr Wallis was kind enough to explain that if you sell a portion of chips the cost of that sale includes all of the food, wrapping, labour etc. That is certainly true, but the cost doesn't vary if I call my bag of chips a 'bag of chips' or 'a portion of chips'. Whatever I call the product it costs exactly the same to produce.

If I ask the council for information, but don't ask for it as a FOI request, does that mean it doesn't cost anything? Surely the true 'cost' of FOI requests should take into account why answering a FOI request would cost more than answering any other request for information. If there are legitimate reasons why a FOI requests costs more to answer then it would be good to know them.

Of course you could apply the normal standard of Lys Kernow spin and argue that actually FOI reduces the cost of supplying information to the public.

This is because there is a dedicated team that acts efficiently and productively in turning around requests from the public and so there are associated savings related to gains in efficiency.

Although, given the horrendous mess that the Council often makes in answering requests accurately, I think that savings gained through effiicency might be hard to argue - even by Messrs Robertson and Lavery.

I believe that this official extrapoltion of 'cost' of openess and transparency is an economically spurious way of discouraging FOI requests.

I recently made two FOI requests. The Council claims that all FOI requests should be answered within 20 days - neither of mine were.

Inappropriate Development - Fightback?

2011-12-01T07:36:00.000-08:00

As you may have gathered, if you have read some of my recent posts (here , here and here for example) I get quite riled by the way Westminster uses words. The London parties use definitions of everyday words and phrases to make what they are doing appear to be what normal people would think was a good idea. In fact the very reverse is always closer to the truth.

Nothing provides a better example of this than the ConDem approach to 'Localism', 'Affordable Housing' and development in general.

I have decided to see if there are any like-minded people in and around Illogan who feel the same way.

Westminster pretty much has things sewn up - but perhaps, with support, we could fight back a little.

here is the text of a letter that I have sent to Illogan residents.

Dear Friend,

Westminster politicians¸ of all hues, are guilty of cynically misleading us!

They use terms such as ‘Localism’ and ‘Affordable Housing’ in order to appear as if they know and understand the problems that we face in Cornwall related to housing and development. The truth is that when you look closely at the small print and official definitions of these terms they are actually ways of encouraging development, creating profits for developers on the back of houses which local people can’t even begin to hope to afford to buy.

I would like to do something to stop this travesty. It is probably a near impossible job but somebody has to try! If you would like to support my campaign to uncover the Westminster development lies then please join me at The Meeting Room, Melting Pot Café, Krowji on Wednesday 14^th December 2012 at 7:00pm.

I will be chairing a meeting to discuss the issues surrounding development and what Mebyon Kernow stands for please come along and help me to make a difference for Illogan and to put Cornwall first!

Of course, if anyone from outside of Illogan wants to come along to the Melting Pot Cafe, Krowji, Redruth on Wednesday 14th December at 7:00pm, you would be very welcome.

The Silence is Deafening

2011-11-26T06:11:00.000-08:00

Loathe as I am (not!) to keep going on about Cllr Dr Loveday Jenkin's spectacular win for MK the other day, I feel I have to say that I think that some of the most telling comments are those that have not been made.

For example, when Jude Robinson won for Labour in Camborne North there were loads of news stories and even TV and radio features. This time round, however, almost nothing - even from Cornwall's own, Graham Smith (maybe he's on holiday). Perhaps it was the fact that Jude is the only and first Labour representative at Unitary level that made her election such a special occurrence that warranted the (proportionate) media hype that accompanied it?

When Loveday was elected she became the fifth MK Cornwall Councillor - five members - a bit old hat now I suppose - and not so newsworthy. I mean I'd hate to think that the BBC and establishment media could be in any way biased.

Then again, unless I have missed it, the Tories seem to have gone deathly quiet. Perhaps they are still shocked that they didn't win a seat that seemed to be there for the taking. After all they were in 3rd place back in 2009 and this time around, while there was MK and two other supposedly left of centre parties standing, there was no UKIP candidate to drag their vote down. So how come the Tories still ended up third? (... and worse still for them, I'm sure, behind the Lib Dems). I imagine that Alec Robertson and his team of bloggers and tweeters are too busy occupied worrying about what will happen if they take the government up on the offer to subsidise council tax payments to try and spin the MK triumph in Wendron as a Conservative moral victory.

It's also strange that Jude Robinson hasn't produced yet another spreadsheet that shows how Labour are making a strong comeback in Cornwall. I suspect the last few election results have rather dented her statistics - is she holed up in an office somewhere working out how to justify leaving out the last few results from her mathematical calculations?

MK isn't about to start making wild claims about taking control of the Unitary Authority in 2013. To put things in perspective Loveday was an exceptional candidate, well respected and known for her hard work in the area. If we had lost then then we would have had to re-evaluate a great many assumptions and policy foundations. As it is Loveday won and this was on the back of an excellent conference and several other encouaraging events in November discussed by Rob Simmons here. So no extravagant claims and spin from MK - just a promise of a positive outlook and hard work developing policies that will put Cornwall, and her people first, from Parish ward to Westminster constituency.

...... and then there were five

2011-11-25T00:13:00.001-08:00

Congratulations to Dr Loveday Jenkin who won the by-election for Cornwall Council in Wendron yesterday.

The results were:

MK 427 36.4%
LD 262 22.3%
Con 227 19.4%
Ind 177 15.1%
Lab 80 6.8%

Not just a win but a bit of a landslide really. Many congratulations Loveday well done!

A brilliant finale to an excellent month for MK. We have gained one parish, two town and now a unitary councillor - bringing MK's total of Cornwall Councillors to 5.

To echo a sentiment expressed by Cllr Jenkin just after her resounding victory, who's up next for MK? Let's get to work!

The Council Tax Subsidy - Electoral Bribe or Cutbacks Silver Bullet?

2011-11-24T09:34:00.001-08:00

The government has promised to subsidise council tax bills next year where the local authority freezes their take. On the face of it a good idea?

But wait. Why link the subsidy to a freeze in council tax at the current rate. Well the idea is to keep services at the same level but without an icrease in council tax due to inflation. Fair enough you might think.

Is it really that simple though? You see the problem is that the subsidy is only planned for next year so what happens after that?

If you were paying £1000 in counciul tax now then next year you would pay the same but the government would 'top it up' by £25 so that you were getting £1025 worth of services for your £1000.

In two years time though, in order to keep the same level of service you will have to pay £1050.63 (assuming the 2.5% rise that the government is working on). Now of course in pragmatic terms it is a no-brainer to accept the government subsidy because at least you get £25 back this year.

My problem is this. The government is making out that it is a caring government that wants to do what it can for families in these hard times of austerity. In actual fact it is offering an electoral bribe now, knowing that next year local authorities will be having to make further cutbacks or face sending out massively inflated council tax bills.

I have been having a blogosphere discussion with Alex Folkes the Lib Dem Cornwall Councillor for Launceston Central here about this subject.

It seems to me that the Westminster parties are simply using this idea to score party political points with each other.

Cornwall is rather an exception to the UK where there will be Unitary elections early in 2013. In many parts of the UK these local authority elections have only just been held. This means that Alec Robertson's Tories will be announcing even more cutbacks going into the election or posting out council tax demands much higher than the previous two years - electoral bribe/cutbacks silver bullet.

So we have Tories/Lib Dems in Westminster offering bribes, knowing that in most of the UK their local authorities will have had a year or two to lessen the effect of cutbacks/increased council tax. Whereas in Cornwall the 'pick and mix' Lib Dems (they seem to be able to pick and mix whichever policies they think will get them re-elected, even if it isn't the official policy of their Westminster bosses) are gleefully advocating acceptance of the subsidy, fully aware of why the Tory administration in Lys Kernow is a little more reserved in its enthusiasm for carrying out the orders in from London.

In order to keep to my Golden Rule 1 I would just say that, rather than try to bribe local electors I would use the money to do some real good and tackle child poverty issues - or maybe increase our pblicly owned housing stock. Of course these probably aren't vote grabbing ideas but they would provide more long term and sustainable benefit for the people of Cornwall. If you want to see some other great examples of MK's alternative way of looking at things see Rob Simmons excellent piece here.

OMG - Just stop it now!

2011-11-23T06:55:00.000-08:00

It really drives me mad.

A few days ago we had the ConDems pretending to be building 'Affordable Homes' - which of course don't exist.

Now we have Jude Robinson telling us how Labour were so brilliant at building non-existent 'Affordable Homes'.

There is no such thing as Affordable Housing in Cornwall (that ordinary people can actually afford) according to Westminster definitions. It is an indictment of the Westminster unionist parties that they have the gall and cynicism to squabble over which of them is trying to sort out the housing crisis. Give us a proper definition of Affordable - one that relates to what the word means - and then tell us what you have done to address the problem.

MK believe that the only way to sort this problem out is to abandon the Tory policies of the Tories and the Torylite policies of the Lib Dems and Labour, and build houses for public ownership or that are not dependent on developers having to make a big profit to get them built.

The house building market is not building because the market is shot. Developers can't make a profit so they don't build - market forces in action.

Westminster believes in subsidising developers profits to build homes that only MPs and people earning more than them can afford.

MK believes that Cornwall should be offering a fair price for a good quality product where it is required to meet a local need.

The St Piran Play 2012

2011-11-22T14:23:00.000-08:00

The St Piran play is one of Cornwall's most iconic St Piran's Day events. It takes place on Gear Sands close to Perranporth on the Sunday closest to St Piran's Day. The audience partake in a pilgrimmage across the dunes to various sites of special relevance to St Piran and watch the legend of St Piran unfold.

This year I volunteered to help the St Piran Trust as they took over the production of the play. I was part of the team which set up the props for the cast to use.

I have volunteered again to help with the same task next year. If anyone is interested in joining me, and gaining a fascinating insight to what goes on behind he scenes of this world famous event, then let me know. You will just need to be able to make an early start at Perranporth on Sunday 4th March 2012.

If you wanted to be even more involved and could spare a few evenings before the play (for rehearsals) you might consider becoming one of the cast - I know the St Piran Trust is planning an even bigger production than last year and are looking for people to take on a role in the play.

More information on the St Piran Trust can be found here.

Two Golden Rules

2011-11-21T14:11:00.000-08:00

At the risk of following in Gordon Brown's footsteps I would like to announce that I will be following two Golden Rules in my blogging future.

Both Golden Rules have been inspired by events and people at the MK conference!

Golden Rule 1

Positivity: inspired by Kenneth Gibson MSP.

I will only allow myself to whinge about Westminster politicians and policies if I can put forward a positive alternative.

Golden Rule 2

Relevance: inspired by Matthew Clarke's presentation.

I will only blog about events or items that are relevant to normal, everyday people.

If I have any regular followers out there in the blogosphere, please help me by leaving a comment, or 'Golden Rule Alert' if you think I have broken my Golden Rules.

Mur ras puponen :-)

Why do we want to build new homes?

2011-11-21T03:34:00.000-08:00

Why do we want to build more homes?

It sounds like a bit of a daft question really? We need homes to solve the 'housing crisis' is the answer.

But is it?

I recently blogged about the fact that there is no such thing as an affordable house for the average person in Cornwall. So why is the government trying to 'kick-start' the house building market? What is the point in using our taxes to enable developers to build homes that only someone earning the salary of an MP can afford? Building new homes will not solve the housing crisis as long as people can't afford to live in them.

This is the problem with Tory market-driven ideology. We are told that it is important to build new houses in order to provide homes for people - in fact it is simply using our taxes to keep the developers profits going.

How many times do we hear that the free market is the only way to get sutainable growth? If this is true then why does the government want to interfere in that process and keep developers' profits going? It is because houses are to expensive that nobody is buying them - not because there are not enough available. It is the market, which successive governments have allowed and encouraged to get out of control which is the problem. It is no use simply building houses if ordinary people can't buy them - am I completely wrong?

Over the last few days, at our annual conference, MK has spent time in developing a detailed and coherent policy on housing.

We believe that Cornwall needs its own Assembly which can take a different approach. We believe that good quality housing is a fundamental human right and not a privilege for the rich. It is the duty of any responsible government to meet this basic human need - not to boost developers' profits.

What is wrong with building houses for people to live in? What is wrong with building houses that people can afford to rent and to buy if that is their aspiration?

A Cornish Assembly led by MK would not be driven by the need to make a profit or the need to satisfy it's finaciers. One third ofthe cost of a house is profit for the developer. If you eliminate that need then that is an immediate reduction in the cost of a house by 33%.

The buy to let market is functioning 'very nicely thank you' at the moment. Buy to let magnates make a profit by purchasing housing stock and then renting houses to ordinary people. The rent they receive covers the cost of the mortgage and gives the landlord a bonus profit. All the time their capital asset appreciates in value it is being paid for (and then some) by the inflated rent receipt.

If private speculators can make this work, and make large profits, then MK believes that it is possible for the people of Cornwall to build their own houses with a rent that covers the cost of loan without the need for profit. In other words, schemes like this would be self-finacing and would not cost the tax payer anything.

As I stated above, we have a whole raft of policies and proposals for dealing with the housing crisis in Cornwall. Meeting Cornish problems with Cornish solutions - putting Cornwall first.

Mur Ras

2011-11-21T02:01:00.000-08:00

I would like to take the opportunity to say a mur ras bras to everyone that pitched in and helped to make sure that the conference ran very smoothly over the two days. I was very much heartened to see everyone work together as a team to create a professional and inspirational event. A particular mention should be made of John Rowe who not only did a lot of work behind the scenes but facilitated the superb presentation from Matthew Clarke. I would also like to thank Pedyr Bennetto whose tireless work on the registration desk and Rhisiart Tal-E-Bot's catering skills meant that I was free to work with Peter Dudley to ensure that the 'big picture' was maintained in focus.

Paul Jenkin put together a great night's entertainment with Hanterhir, Kowethas and An Dysken. Thanks Paul.

I would also like to mention Stuart and Helene Cullimore who were there with the MK stall, raising money for our election campaigns. At least the Shire House Suite was an improvement on the muddy field on a saturday morning that they are used to :-).

Finally - thank you Dick Cole. Thank you for providing inspiration and a vision of a future Cornwall that is fit for purpose for of the people of Cornwall. Thank you for all your tireless efforts throughout the year (not just at conference time) and especially for providing the opportunity for us to listen to Jonathen Edwards and Kenneth Gibson. Our grass roots activists need more of that to encourage them and to show that we are not alone but part of a wider movement that believes that people who live in a place the best people to decide how they should live in that place.

It really was a team effort - a team that I am extremely proud to be a member of.

Let's take this forward and work on the challenge of getting greter electoral representation. A good place to start is with Loveday's campaign in Wendron. Just a few days to go so get in touch with her if you can help in any way.

MK - 'Ahead of the Curve'

2011-11-20T12:55:00.000-08:00

The 60th Anniversary Mebyon Kernow annual conference was a statement of positive intent.

MK believe that the best way to take Cornwall forward is to do it for ourselves. We know what the problems that we face and we know the way to build a better Cornwall for all of the people of Cornwall.

The conference agenda recognised the need to engage with groups accross the political and cultural spectrum. This is why we invited and listened to nine different organisations from accross Cornwall, Wales and Scotland. We know that Cornwall can have a great future and we know that the best way to achieve that is by teamwork and by providing a conduit through which organisations, that are devoted to putting Cornwall first, can channel and amplify their hard work.

The political landscape of the United Kingdom has been changing rapidly over the last few years and is accelerating all the time. With a referendum on Scottish independence now a certainty we are entering territory never witnessed before in living memory. Exciting times - and doubly exciting to be told that MK are 'ahead of the curve' by the SNP who have been responsible for much of that change.

One of the conclusions that we have reached, during an action packed two days, is that our plan will include ways to reach a public that has been turned off politics by the Unionist parties in Westminster, all of whom (without exception) either peddle Tory or 'Torylite' ideology. We will present Cornish solutions to Cornish problems and we will celebrate and communicate Cornish success stories.

Part of the flesh on the bones is the comprehensive policy document on housing and development that has been created. This is another statement of intent. Bespoke Cornish solutions to Cornish problems.

And even more flesh will be added soon. With policy reviews on a Cornish Assembly/Recognition, education, Europe and the environment already well under way (and other sbject areas in the pipeline) we will continue to add substance to the intent.

A Very Constructive Meeting

2011-11-07T15:41:00.000-08:00

Tonight I attended a Mebyon Kernow branch meeting.

What struck me was the sheer determination of our members to put Cornwall and the people of Cornwall first.

At the beginning of every meeting (after apologies and the usual formal rigmarole) we have reports from our councillor members - a chance for councillors and other members to catch up and communicate about what is happening in their own individual localities. Over the last year this section has begun to take up a significant amount of time. Tonight we had eight councillors present, from Parish to Unitary level, talking about a wide range of issues from protecting heritage to setting budgets. It was extremely rewarding to see how Mebyon Kernow continues to be involved in local communities, to take part and to lead the way.

At the same time we discussed policy proposals for our upcoming national conference. In particular, tonight, we looked at housing and development policy. Mebyon Kernow is in the process of developing a comprehensive policy that will provide innovative Cornish solutions to Westminster imposed problems.

We are also looking forward to and actively planning for the 2013 unitary elections. We already have three fully ratified prospective candidates in our branch - Cllr Stuart Cullimore, Cllr John Rowe and myself. We also have a list of eight other potential candidates that we are fitting into the jigsaw that is our campaign plan. We are well on course to provide our branch's quota of MK's national target to field 50 candidates in the 2013 elections and with more members joining with each meeting we are looking to do even better.

There is a real 'buzz' in the branch at the moment - and I am hearing the same thing from other branches of MK across Cornwall. This is reflected in the recent flurry of members and councillors defecting from the tarnished Liberal Democrats.

We always welcome new members who want to make a difference and work for a better Cornwall. Please contact me if you think you might want to be part of something exciting and special over the next few years.

starichardson@btinternet.com

That's My Boy!

2011-11-07T07:11:00.000-08:00

My son, Sam, has just been elected as a Student Councillor at Staffs University where he is studying Broadcast Media.

I would like to say he is following in his Dad's footsteps but I fear he is already far ahead of me!

He has set up his own political blog (Stoke Elected) and recently managed to secure an exclusive interview with the Leader of the Stoke on Trent Unitary Council. A few months ago he met David Miliband following a debate at Staffs Uni. While he maintains his blog (and keeps his academic studies at a very high grade level) he also helps to report for and present a weekly politics show on student radio.

His involvement in student life at Staffs follows his work at Camborne College where he produced his own newsletter and served on the Student Union, resulting in a Star Award in 2010.

When see reports of young people being involved in gang culture and rioting I believe that I am particularly blessed to have three extremely socially minded children, each of whom I like to think bring something good to the world.

MK Develop Ties With Small Nations

2011-11-07T06:55:00.000-08:00

MK Deputy Leader and Cornwall Councillor for Callington, Andrew Long, recently visited Estonia.

See here for Cornish Guardian report.

With a population of just over one million, Estonia is one of many small nations that show that being small doesn't mean you can't be viable as an economic entity.

Affordability - Another Westminster Red Herring

2011-11-05T07:21:00.000-07:00

Over the last month or two I have tried to show that the Conservative (supported by their Lib Dem whipping boys) idea of 'Localism' is anything but - especially when it comes to development policy.

There is, sadly, another term that seems to be being scattered like confetti by Westminster politicians. A cynical attempt to fool us into believeing that they are trying to solve the housing crisis in Cornwall.

'Affordable Housing' is the mantra of the politcian that wants us to think that he or she understands the situation and wants to do something about it. If some LibLabCon person mentions Affordable Housing and the dire need for homes for local people it demonstrates their empathy for the struggle that the people of Cornwall are facing. Yeah - right!

The problem is what they mean by 'Affordable Housing' and what we would like to think they mean are very different things.

'Affordable Housing' is actually a specifically defined term to be found in the Department for Communities and Local Government's Policy Statement . There is also information on Cornwall Council's website.

There are basically two parts to Affordable Housing - the rented sector and purchase sector. As the subject of Affordable Housing usually comes up in the media in the context of people being able to buy their own home I mainly looked at what the policy means for people who want to do just that.

Basically Affordable Housing is available to Eligble Households who earn less than Stephen Gilbert MP and who have a development building Affordable Housing within 10 miles or so of where they currently live. If you want to buy your home outright then you may be able to find a house with a "20% - 50% discount" compared to market value.

Given that the average house price in Cornwall is now over £220,000 even a 50% dscount would be £110,000.

I have asked for more information from Cornwall Council as to exacly how many discounted Affordable Homes have been provided in Cornwall over the last year and what the average discount has been and I will blog again when I get this information.

However, in the meantime I will make a few assumptions.

First of all the average price includes all housing and will be distorted by higher value detached houses. I will use £185,000 as the basic market value price. This is the figure for the average semi-detached house in Cornwall.

Secondly I will assume the discount is 25%. I have seen a few schemes where a 20% discount has been offered but never any where 50% was available, so I think 25% is being generous.

This means an average Affordable Home would cost £138,750.

Given the average wage in Cornwall is now £17,000, this means that the average Affordable House is more than 8 times the average wage. Of course this means that, as everyone knows, even an Affordable House isn't affordable.

So what does all this mean?

Well it means that there is no such thing as an Affordable House for the average person in Cornwall.

It means that politicians in Westminster parties are at best being disingenuous at best when they talk about their committment to Affordable Housing because they are merely talking about a committment to something that doesn't exist.

However, there is more harm being done by the Affordable Housing red herring.

The hidden problem is that supposed Affordable Housing is being used to drive development in Cornwall using the fairy tale that housing is being provided for local need as well as developers' greed.

The media allows people who have a vested interest in seing houses built to make comments such as:

"There is a pent up demand for houses."

"There is a housing shortage so we need to build more."

What nobody is ever allowed to say is:

"Building more houses - even Affordable Housing won't allow the average person in Cornwall to buy one."

So who are all the houses for?

They must be for people who can afford them - whoever these people are they are not your average Cornish person on the streets of Camborne, St Austell, Bude or Penzance!

A Duchy Algebra Poser

2011-11-04T06:44:00.000-07:00

If the Duke of Cornwall retires to bed at midnight and is woken for breakfast at 9:00am by his staff, will he have trousered more or less than the average person in Cornwall earns in a year?

The answer:

Income from the Duchy = £18m per year.

This is £2054 each and every hour of every day.

9 x £2054 = £18486.

Average Cornish annual wage = £17,000

Therefore, Charles makes approximately £1486 more by getting a good night's sleep than a hard working Cornishman earns in a year.

A while back I saw comments on Facebook which maintained that it was obscene that prima donna footballers were earning hundreds of thousands of pounds while soldiers in Afghanistan were being payed peanuts for possibly sacrificing their lives.

I totally agree with those Facebook comments. The point is though, that it is society that chooses to pay over-inflated ticket prices at football matches while it elects a government that not only fails to look after its soldiers but fails to equip them properly as well. If society really wanted to change things it could refuse to pay the ticket price and could elect a government that would look after its soldiers.

It is obscene that footballers earn so much more than people who are prepared to lay down their lives. It also obscene that Charles Windsor, through an accident of birth, should receive more money for going to bed than a normal person would earn in a year and that all this is cloaked in secrecy and never subject to any electoral review.

Private Estate Myth Unravelling Fast!

2011-11-03T08:19:00.001-07:00

The Duchy of Cornwall website informs us that the Duchy is a 'private estate'.

Earlier this week the Guardian headlined the news that the Duke of Cornwall, by rights accrued through the Duchy of Cornwall, had been consulted on parliamentary legislation and could have possibly vetoed that legislation.

Of course the question is how can a 'private individual' have constitutional rights?

None of this is news to Cornish constitutional campaigners who, for decades, have been questioning how the Duke can claim all of the benefits of a constitutional body (which is what the Duchy really is) and yet completely ignore the responsibilities that it brings.

Today the decision defining the duchy as a public body under environmental regulations was made by the First-Tier Tribunal on information rights, a court that deals with disputes relating to freedom of information.

It seems that the myth of the Duchy of Cornwall being merely a private estate is unravelling fast.

Apparently Duchy officials are: "reviewing the Tribunal's reasons for reaching its conclusion with a view to establishing whether to appeal the decision"

Not an easy decision for an organisation that has sought to peddle the private estate myth and shroud the Duchy in secrecy.

Mebyon Kernow has consistently called for a full inquiry into the true status of the Duchy of Cornwall.

Save £1.1 Million or Spend a Penny?

2011-10-19T06:29:00.000-07:00

Today Cornwall Council voted to reccommend dropping funding for 114 public toilets in order to save £1.1 million.

Before, during and after the debate, leading members of the twitterati and blogosphere had a field day - mainly opposed to the idea.

I, for one, am all for it. In fact, I don't think the proposal goes far enough.

Some claim (including me) that the Unitary Council has been a complete disaster for Cornwall. Some of its misdemeanours have ranged in cost from a few hundred pounds to possibly millions include: ordering silk ties to improve the 'corporate image', helping to fund Devon in a wasted bid to bring world cup football to Plymouth and the on-going incinerator debacle.

In the meantime Kevin Lavery's salary remains extortionate, Officers pay is out of control (while normal people face redundancy) and CC Cabinet members claim huge allowances.

I strongly believe in subsidiarity (in the true meaning of the term) rather than the ideological cost cutting that forms the basis of Tory 'localism'. This is what makes me think that Cornwall Council should stop funding all public toilets and leave it to local communities to manage.

The Unitary Authority should be there to make high level, strategic decisons that affect the way that Cornwall operates as a complete entity. It should be responsible for things like education, healthcare and the co-ordination of emergency services.

In my mind there is no justification for Cornwall Council to micro-manage thing like public toilets. I believe that there would be many benefits, both financial and organisational, if they were managed by towns and parishes.

For example the local community could decide if it wanted the toilets in the first place. They could then decide the best way to mange the service and aspects of that service such as opening hours etc. Local councils could join together to share the costs of maintenace, so as to not lose the efficiencies af scale, and yet still make the contractors far more accountable for the service that they provided. Some toilets might be 'pay as you go' (perhaps in tourist spots) while others might be 'contract' for the benefit of locals. Indeed, there could be a mixture of PAYG and contract at different times of the year - the possibilities are endless and would be down to local people to decide what would be best for them.

Now I can hear, some of you saying "This lets CC off the hook. They are just saving money by badgering local councils into taking responsibility." Well, maybe it does - but ultimately the cost of the service is paid for by through the UA portion of council tax or through the local precept. Surely it will work out better value for money if the service is managed by and made accountable to local people.

There should be more services being devolved to local councils - but we have to face up to the fact that the balance of local taxes has also to swing in favour of the local councils in order to allow this to happen.

This does not mean that I believe that Cornwall Council cabinet have brought about this debate because they believe in subsidiarity. Far from it. They have done it because they are driven by Tory cost cutting ideology, however, why not play them at their own game and rise to the challenge.

At the same time we could throw down a few challenges of our own. Why not transfer car parks to local authorities to manage for the benefit of their residents rather than to (incorrectly as it has turned out) provide funds to subsidise the aforementioned silk ties, Devon football and construction schemes lacking planning permission. Of course, as all these myriad small services that could be provided locally are transferred into local ownership there would be less justification for Kevin Lavery's salary as he would not be resposible for so many different things. There would be less need for so many officers as there would be nothing for them to do. Finally, there would be no need at all for Cabinet Support Members or indeed quite so many Cabinet Members on high 'volunteer' allowances.

Azook!

2011-09-29T07:13:00.000-07:00

The Cornish word 'azook' is used by the pilot of a gig when he wants his crew to pull hard together.

It is something that Cornish nationalists need to learn to do.

Today I spent a glorious couple of hours in the company of Claire White of Azook CIC.

"Azook is a UK based not for profit Community Interest Company, dedicated to strengthening cultural confidence and social cohesion across communities." A major part of Azook's work is providing learning resources for schools across Cornwall.

Claire, who was previously a teacher, became frustrated with the way that educational resources seemed to take children away from their Cornish communities in order to learn. She believes that children need to learn about the world in a way that also teaches them about their roots and where they live.

Claire and Azook have developed a unique way of providing learning resources that cover the whole of the national curriculum. Azook is a shining example of traditional Cornish innovation being applied in a modern and forward looking way. Their work is steadily providing a massive online source of resources for teachers. 'A Sense of Place' is "a flagship project in Cornwall delivered by Azook CIC in partnership with Cornwall Council. It enables teachers in primary and secondary settings to deliver the curriculum with distinctiveness and diversity."

Cornwall deserves a network of well-funded, high-quality primary and secondary schools, under
local authority control that all provide a consistently high standard of education. Teachers should be allowed to teach and students to study in ways that ensure that our young people are properly equipped for their adult lives.

The marketisation and fragmentation of the education system through the creation of academies and free schools has to be stopped before it does irreparable damage.

As Public services spokesman for Mebyon Kernow I am helping to develop our policy on education and I hope to be able to follow Azook's example in creating a vision of education that has it's feet set firmly in Cornwall while giving children a chance to embrace the whole world.

What Colour Do You Want The Front Doors?

2011-09-25T00:56:00.000-07:00

The Tory government, with its Lib Dem side-kick is intent on gathering in power to Westminster. This is all being done under a cloak of 'localism' or 'empowerment'.

For example we are continually told that the localism Bill will give power to local neighbourhoods to plan how they want their development. This is quite simply not true. Unless a local neighbouhood actually desires to concrete over every square inch of green (in which case it can demand that the local planning authority does just that), it will have no greater opportunity than to say what development goes ahead than to (maybe) determine the colour of the front doors of the houses that have already been pre-destined for its locality.

I recently wrote to Cornwall Council to ask what help the Council would have to assist neghbourhoods in producing a local plan. Part of the reply included this telling phrase:

"Furthermore, I would ensure you are clear as to what you would be
seeking to get out of the process - to ensure that a Neighbourhood Plan
is indeed the right approach to be taking. A couple of points to be
clear on is that a Neighbourhood Plan has to be in conformity with the
Cornwall Core Strategy (i.e. the neighbourhood plan has to plan for
housing/economic growth which is at least of the same scale as the Core
Strategy is targeting for Illogan, or in excess of it)."

So there you go. At least the same scale as the Core Strategy, or in excess of it. Lys Kernow is under no illusion as to what powers neighbourhoods will have - isn't it about time our 'local' Westminster politicians were just as honest with us?

Local neighourhoods will only be able to increase levels of development which are set by Cornwall Council. In turn Cornwall Council will have to base their development strategy on a policy of a 'presumption in favour of development' imposed by London.

What colour should we paint the front doors?

Wow! I'm number 53

2011-09-13T07:07:00.001-07:00

The Total Politics blog awards have begun to be announced.

I am absolutely amazed and thrilled that anyone at all would take the time and effort to vote for this blog - but it would appear that enough of you have to make me a new entry in the Top 75 Left Wing Blogs (in at number 53). Mur ras to everyone who voted for me, I really do appreciate it.

Congratulations also to:

Cllr Dick Cole - http://mebyonkernow.blogspot.com
Cornish Zetetics - http://cornishzetetics.blogspot.comRob Simmons - http://robscornishblog.blogspot.com
Simon Reed - http://theinsaneramblingsofavillageidiot.com

All doing their best to put Cornwall on the map and all appearing in the Top 75.

I wouls also like to thank all of those people who have taken the time to Tweet, email and Facebook congratulations.

Pickles' Breathtaking Hypocrisy

2011-09-10T06:34:00.000-07:00

A hat tip to @Tredhek for this. Apparently Eric Pickles, keen to override Cornwall's elected representatives when it comes to the installation of waste disposal sites, is not so keen on having similar facilities in his own back yard. Is this the definition of NIMBYism or just pure hypocrisy?

Jude Robinson - Queen of Empathy (part 2)

2011-09-07T11:12:00.001-07:00

Jude Robinson, the Queen of Empathy, has struck again.

Perfectly demonstrating her lack of understanding of Cornish identity (and her selective amnesia on the subject) she voted with Tories at Lys Kernow in an attempt to further cement 'Devonwall Creep'

Just a year ago, Jude was extolling the value of Cornwall's proud heritage and historic national border and censuring MPs who "betray their contempt for local concerns" . Her amnesia (or is it her total lack of understanding of Cornish concerns) leads her to different conclusions this year.

The tone and content of her blog demonstrates her total contempt for any suggestion of Cornwall exerting her national identity and a lack of understanding of the evils of a creeping Devonwall. Clearly her posturing during the Keep Cornwall Whole campaign was just that. A blatant piece of party politics which she denounces so readily when it suits.

It seems, however, that Jude isn't just rude to me but also to any Cornish nationalist who might challenge her stance on Cornish issues.

For someone, who is often heard complaining about the uncouth and patronising treatment that she receives from political critics, it would seem that she is easily able to hold her own on this score.

Hubbadullya

2011-08-25T04:32:00.000-07:00

Today I was a guest of Radio Redruth on a show hosted by Mike Chappell and Tony Leamon - Hubbadullya. Hubbadullya is a Cornish word meaning 'riotous noise' and Mike and Tony's mix of Cornish news, views and music certainly fits the bill!

Following on from the likes of Sarah Newton and George Eustice I was very nervous, but hope that I gave a good account of myself during my first ever radio interview.

We discussed topics such as the Localism Bill, planning and an Assembly for Cornwall as well as looking at the role of a Parish council and several other subjects.

Many thanks to Mike and Tony and to Redruth Radio who will soon be up and running on FM.