Temperate tax rise

I heartily approve of most of the early decisions that have been made by newly sworn in Mayor of Bristol George Ferguson. The biggest of these is that council tax may have to rise by around 2% (as reported by BBC Points West here). This is moderate, sensible, reasonably progressive thinking - and it would mean that the impact of  imposed Coalition Govt cuts on vital local services would be a little less severe.

Freezing council tax as some other candidates committed themselves to would have meant even more severe impacts on public services. Committment to a freeze over a number of years also showed a lack of realism given the dire financial circumstances.

More information here and here and here.

Austerity applesauce

Any new Mayor of Bristol will have very hard budget choices forced on them it seems, given that, 'One of the first jobs facing Bristol's incoming elected mayor will be to cut an extra £25 million from the city councils budget. The authority has revealed it faces making deeper cuts than first anticipated as funding from central government is reduced.' (see here). However, that should not stop whoever the Mayor is from giving voice to the growing numbers of people who see the complete folly of cuts and austerity economics.

Govt borrowing is up AND we've had savage cuts. In fact Govt borrowing is up in part BECAUSE we've had savage cuts. Cuts are depressing economic activity. Austerity policies, pronouncements, plans and actions have reduced confidence, reduced spending, reduced investment, increased costs to govt, reduced govt income...and have been a big help (!) in causing and then lengthening the recession we are still in (thanks to Dave, George, Nick, Vince and co). I support the case against austerity and cuts and for a Keynsian stimulus for our economy to get out of recession and going in a sustainable direction.

Liberal lacerations

A recent Lib Dem leaflet promoting their mayoral candidate Cllr Jon Rogers says, 'Jon has taken a leading role [note - he's one of the people responsible then] in turning around the city's services...'. It goes on to say, 'The Lib Dems have protected local services from the kind of cuts we've seen in other cities.'. No mention whatsoever of the £28 million they/he cut from the budget last year or the £21 million they/he cut from the budget this year. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-17197392. These cuts are pretty liberal lacerations, so how does one square them with the claim to have 'turned around' and 'protected' local services? The Lib Dem interpretation of the whole truth here, is, well, very liberal - and loose!

Budget below the belt

Wouldn't it have been fairer, more just and better economics to keep the 50% tax rate and bring in additional measures to make sure that people could not avoid paying it so easily, if that's what is happening on a large scale? I thought we had debts to pay off and that the Govt needed the money for this.

There will be many well-off high rate tax payers who have circumstances such that they wont be liable to pay the additional wealth taxes in the budget, who will thus get a large net tax cut. Its a budget that George Osbourne's mates will like and benefit from I'm sure.

More on the budget here and here.

Council Consultation Codswallop

Excellent letter from Anne Lemon Secretary of the Bristol & District Anti-Cuts Alliance here. Reproduced below,

BRISTOL City Council's process of scrutiny and consultation on the budget cuts proposed for 2012/13 is a sham. Discussions are taking place based on the absolute minimum of information that the Lib Dems think they can get away with publishing.

Unless there is a major fightback the budget, which includes the expected savings from closing and privatising care homes and day centres, will be agreed on February 28. But the details of the closures/privatisation and the impact on users and the community won't be announced until mid-March. You can already hear Barbara Janke and Jon Rogers telling us "It was agreed in the budget" if anyone suggests the facilities should stay open. Similarly over £1 million is to be saved by privatising Youth Services, yet no detailed proposals are available.

Either the detailed proposals on these important services must be published now, or the closure/privatisation policies should be removed from the budget. Any attempt by the council to approve the policies as part of the budget without being prepared to discuss the details in public is nothing less than underhand.

Autumn Statement: visionless

George Osbourne's Autumn Statement could have been used as an opportunity to put our economy on the right road. This chance was wasted. It could have been used to set us on the road away from the unequal, unfair, wasteful and polluting rat race we have – it did not. It could have helped create a way of life we can afford in both economic, social and environmental terms – it did not. It could have helped create the jobs that need people, by building on the resources of the people – it did not.

It could have helped to build a more self-reliant and stable economy – instead we are still reliant on a system of international finance which cannot last much longer. It could have started to establish an economy which can be sustained into the future, without killing our environment and exploiting the people – it did not. Instead the Chancellor produced a statement totally lacking is any vision of a better society at all. Actually pretty much par for the course as far as such statements - and budgets - go.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-15937446

Budget for growth - for whom? how? at what costs?

I'm watching as Chancellor George Osborne is 'setting out plans to kick start Britain's stalled economy in what he says is a "Budget for growth".' Er...growth for whom, how and at what costs? Will growth enable: current and future needs to be met; a fairer more equal society and world; a less wasteful society; a more renewable society; less polluted environments; improving health and general wellbeing? Will it make local communities stronger and more self-reliant? If George's growth does enable these things then we will genuinely have made real progress - but I'm afraid they dont even enter his head and he's not even assessing and measuring them properly. Such is his fixation with GDP growth that his only interest is more money flow through the economy.

Senator Robert F Kennedy's words on growth as measured by GNP:

"The Gross National Product includes air pollution and advertising for cigarettes and ambulances to clear our highways of carnage. It counts special locks for our doors and jails for the people who break them. GNP includes the destruction of the redwoods and the death of Lake Superior. It grows with the production of napalm, missiles and nuclear warheads.

And if GNP includes all this, there is much that it does not comprehend. It does not allow for the health of our families, the quality of their education or the joy of their play. It is indifferent to the decency of our factories and the safety of our streets alike. It does not include the beauty of our poetry, the strength of our marriages, the intelligence of our public debate or the integrity of our public officials. GNP measures neither our wit nor our courage, neither our wisdom nor our learning, neither our compassion nor our devotion to our country…"

Part of the solution to our problems is to assess and measure the right factors in our society and economy, as long as we dont at the same time get obsessed with and tied in to a rigid, narrow approach to measurement. Progress should be assessed in terms of: efficiency; renewability; respecting environmental limits; stronger local communities; meeting needs now and in the future; local and global fairness; health, wellbeing and quality of life; and the interconnection between these. An evidence-based, reasoned, systems-thinking approach needs to be taken.

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2007/11/sustainability-reconciling-economy-with.html

http://vowlesthegreen.blogspot.com/2008/01/what-sorts-of-economic-growth-are-good.html

Man ring-fences his beer from spending review cuts...

Very interesting exercise, easily showing the limits of the governments comparison of the UK budget deficit to a household budget or a person's credit card bill.

BBC News - 'My own personal Spending Review'

...the coalition government has used the comparison with household budgets to make the case for its own cuts....At the Liberal Democrat party conference, Nick Clegg compared the UK to a family which earned £26,000 while spending £32,000 a year on top of £40,000 debts. David Cameron has also described the deficit as "a bit like our credit cards - we all know the longer you leave it, the worse it gets".

Nonetheless, this line of reasoning has its limitations, Malcolm Sawyer, professor of economics at the University of Leeds, says.

He argues that, because about a third of the government's debt is owed to pension funds, repayments are going from one set of taxpayers to another.

"Politicians like to refer to the image of the housewife doing her weekly shopping budget - it's a powerful analogy that's easy to understand," he says.

"But the reality of why governments run up deficits is harder to explain in a soundbite - it's because tax revenues collapsed."...

NEW logos for Bristol's museums service that cost more than £73,000 have been revealed.

For me this is £73,000 wasted - and the work didn't even go to a local company, supporting the local economy! Its a crazy system that requires a council to go out to tender for this kind of work much of which is perfectly do-able to the same standard in-house with half decent computers and software. Just think of how many care workers could be employed for a year for £73,000...This kind of council waste - and there may well be worse examples - must be cut out now.

NEW logos for Bristol's museums service that cost more than £73,000 have been revealed.

New logos for Bristol's museums service that cost more than £73,000 have been revealed.
Bristol City Council paid Manchester design company True North £73,200 to come up with new identities for all of its museums...

Budget for people and planet?

Spot the serious green measures in this week's budget? There weren't any! The budget showed no respect for our real wealth and was unfair both for present and future generations. The VAT rise, benefit cuts , public sector freeze, govt departmental budget cuts of 25%, and failure to begin planning for and investing in a greener society will all hit the people, communities and the environment that is our real wealth. In 1997 Robert Costanza estimated that the total value of all our planet's ecosystem goods and services was a massive US $33 trillion - that's US $ 33,000,000,000,000, greater than the economic growth of the all the world' economies combined! Well worth protecting I'd say. There are huge problems with producing such estimates of course - is it water or diamonds that are more valuable to thirsty and hungry people? A subject I will return to I'm sure. If you accept the premises and methodology you are also likely to accept that this US $33 trillion figure is a vast underestimate!

http://www.teebweb.org/Home/tabid/924/language/en-US/Default.aspx

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v387/n6630/abs/387253a0.html

http://www.actionbioscience.org/environment/polasky.html

http://www.grist.org/article/what2/