Public, Private…or Both

 

This hot topic of the conference season prompted me to recall a branch meeting some twelve months or so ago, when a guest speaker spoke about  Public/Private Partnerships (  PPP’s). As a former Trades Union official he was against them. His case was convincing. So were his suspicions that New Labour could not really be trusted on this one. My guess, listening to the subsequent debate, was that  most of his audience agreed with him.

            This was a bit odd in a way, because PPP initiatives seem to be close to the heart of government policy. During the summer holidays, we witnessed the battle over Ken Livingstone’s policy to protect the re-organisation of London’s underground from the PPP approach preferred by government.

            Private finance was to provide £13 million and commit itself to 30 years of maintenance. For this it would receive a guaranteed income over the lifetime of the contract. At first, government ( i.e. you and me as taxpayers) was to contribute nothing. But on closer analysis this became a subsidy of £1 billion a year, also for the lifetime of the contract.

            Track and wheels were to be separated. Maintenance would be the responsibility of track, but was then to be split three ways, with each company having a monopoly over its portion. Whilst the public sector would have responsibility for results, it would not have unified control. The Treasury argued in favour of risk being transferred to the private sector, but common sense tells us that if a private company goes bankrupt at this level, only the taxpayer can pick up the tab.

            As if to confirm this, we were advised suddenly that the new Jubilee line would have to rip out its hi-tech signalling system which wasn’t working properly so as to replace it with a system closely resembling its Victorian original. The taxpayer will cover the costs….another £100 millions.

            Meanwhile, the nationwide railway system was going through similar, but worse traumas, culminating not only in tragic accidents, unreliability and rocketing costs, but with huge ‘end of contract’ payments to privately appointed Directors dismissed for incompetence, or, as time may yet tell, criminal negligence.

 

 

 

            The taxpayer, however, is assured that PPP has had its ‘successes’. Some are in the prison regime, some are in schools, one or two are in road building, a few are in the health service. The Chair of the PPP’s Programme told us ( 1^st August last) that 22 local government PPP’s are operational, with another 40 signed but not yet operational, and with a further 89 funded but still in procurement. 151 such operations may seem impressive, but not really against the full backdrop of the British economy. Even when we aggregate all PPP initiatives they amount to only 405 agreements. Meanwhile, the recapture by the N.H.S. in August of a London heart clinic from the private sector has to be set against the GMB union’s claim that PPP contractors to the N.H.S.  will cream off between £1 billion and £ 3.4 billions over the next 30 years from our Health Service.

            Two points strike me. First, it is better not to be ideologically driven. That was Thatcher’s way-and see the mess it created without exception. We should be willing to seek pragmatic decisions. A particular remand home, or an isolated home for elderly people in a particular area and for particular reasons may be suitable for PPP experiment. We should be willing to accept that.

            But certainly not our health services generally, nor our national transport system, nor in respect of our children’s education, nor the police force, nor the military. The State, by which I mean you and me, should look after these national assets, ensuring their efficiency, safety, continuity and technical competence.

            This doesn’t mean  driving Labour back to  Harold Wilson’s ‘commanding heights of the economy’, nor seeking refuge in his ‘white heat of technology’ concept. It is much more to do with common sense and public integrity.

            Secondly, however, we might consider putting our faith in ‘not-for-profit trusts’, as the Americans call them or ‘co-operative enterprises’ as my Grandfather called them. Welsh Water is already an interesting and seemingly successful example.

            The railways and London’s underground are ideal candidates for this approach. We could make Railtrack accountable, thereby, to its customers,  its work force and its train operators. As it would not be owned by the State in the old way, it could raise private capital if it   wanted by issuing its own bonds. It could create, for practical purposes, regional businesses where the competition of pre-nationalisation railways could re-emerge as a healthy spirit of enterprise, public safety and lateral thinking. In the process it would break Railtrack’s grotesque monopoly. In the same way a new working spirit could be engendered, as the ‘fat-cat’ syndrome would have no place in such a model.

            Given our majority  in Parliament, the utterly hopeless disarray of the Tories and the manifest fecklessness of the Lib-Dems, it is up to Labour to pioneer the new economic future.

 

Brian Walker

Environment Matters

 

One way to get a balanced idea of the Labour Government’s actions is to check the response of non-political organisations. On environmental issues the RSPB is one to watch.  Besides caring for birds, it takes an interest in other species on its   reserves, promotes public access, works closely with farmers, and does have a greenish energy and transport policy. Moreover, it expresses clear and rational views on wider issues like agriculture, habitats and climate change. It’s a major force in environmental debate, and its Chief Executive, Graham Wynne, is one of the eight members of the new Policy Commission on Food and Farming now set up by Labour.

            The RSPB expressed ‘delight’ with Margaret Beckett’s first speech on the future role of DEFRA, which replaces MAFF. Earlier it was full of praise for the new wildlife-protection clauses in the Countryside and Rights of Way Act. A pat on the Government’s back from such a worthy body is a reassuring endorsement of a large chunk of Labour’s green policy.

            Overall, the jury must stay out on DEFRA, which has been born in the middle of a farming crisis and needs time to show its quality. With Margaret Beckett in charge, it should do well. Listening to her forceful and clear-headed response to interviews on TV or radio lifts the spirit. I find her one of the few politicians of any party who can be guaranteed not to embarrass or exasperate me with evasions  or hesitations while she tussles with Paxman or Humphries. I bet she’d do well on BBC Radio 4’s ‘Just a Minute’!

            The only doubt I have is over the ‘E’ in DEFRA. Does marrying Environment off to Rural Affairs mean it will have less influence in equally important areas like Transport and Industry? We shall see.

 

***

 

As I’ve said before, Climate Change is the one green issue above all others which grabs Tony Blair’s attention. However, campaigners who rejoiced in Labour’s promise ( In Trust for Tomorrow. 1994) to phase out nuclear power stations are worried now about the renewed interest in nuclear power. Energy Minister Brian Wilson, ( an able and likeable MP who has for years written a brilliant weekly column in the West Highland Free Press: buy it  when you’re in Skye!) is known to have nuclear sympathies. In the drive to cut CO2 emissions in order to meet our Kyoto commitments, nuclear power may tempt. True, it doesn’t add to atmospheric CO2- merely creating tons of radioactive waste which will remain dangerous for hundreds of thousands of years. No one yet knows how to dispose of it.

            That’s the trouble with simple targets like reducing CO2, cutting hospital waiting lists, or pushing your school up the league tables. The targets can be achieved, but other bits of the system buckle under the strain. Serious operations get postponed; children overdo practice tests in the drive for good SATs results; Norway and Ireland get madder about their radioactive tides.

            Labour’s comprehensive Energy Review –a bold and laudable plan-should extend existing support for renewable energy projects and seek new ways of drastically increasing energy efficiency both in Industry and at home. It should also focus on new technologies like fuel cells and push for more Combined Heat and Power schemes where they are practical.

 

Charlie Haigh

 

*****

A Garden Party to Remember.

 

The unpredictable weather caused uncertainty right up to the last minute on 21^st July when Brian and Nancy once again hosted a Garden Party at their home in Arnside. Would the wind subside? Would those heavy clouds cross the estuary ? Would it be warm enough for guests to eat outside? Somewhat predictably a heavy shower descended within the first half-hour of most people arriving, so the event was held mainly indoors, with small groups scattered around the house. Incessant chatter, the laughter of children and approving comments characterised an unforgettable evening. The food, as usual, was heartily consumed; delicious salmon and asparagus terrine,(Margaret’s favourite), quiches, fine herb salads, cold turkey and sausage, Thai chicken curry, vegetarian chilli, and an inspiring selection of desserts and cheeses. Copious amounts of wine were downed as acquaintances renewed contact, old friends exchanged news, relationships  were forged, and the world was put to rights. A most enjoyable evening raised in excess of £220. Special thanks are due to Brian and Nancy for making people  so welcome and comfortable in their home and for their not inconsiderable efforts in preparing for this event. Thanks also to all those members who contributed food, time and effort towards making this such a successful garden party.

Jean Ellis

Talking Point

 

Recently I wrote a personal letter to Estelle Morris protesting about the proposal to increase the number of ‘faith’ schools. A report on racial tension in Oldham highlighted the racial/religious division of schools as one important factor in that tension. Religious labels tag the community divisions in Northern Ireland and obscure their shared concerns. Human beings have an innate tendency to suspicion, fear and hostility towards different groups of which they know little. Presumably, this had an ancient survival value, but it’s out of place in a civilised world. What better way to foster misunderstanding than to divide children up according to their parents’ opinions? Merely teaching pupils about other groups doesn’t work as a counter- measure. It’s well established that information alone doesn’t dispel prejudice. It  needs contact and shared experience to do that.

            I believe, quaintly, perhaps, that parents shouldn’t inculcate political or religious faiths in young children, but should leave them to form their  own judgements when they mature. Otherwise we risk raising adults with fixed un-thought out notions instead of free opinions.

 

Charlie Haigh

 

Do you have a point of view on this topic? If so, please share it with readers. The address is below. Ed.

 

*****

 

A Few Words from your Chairman   

 

Still Room for Improvement!

 

It is now over two years since  the Minimum Wage was introduced by the Labour Government. The policy was one that clearly distinguished the Labour Party from the Opposition who gloomily predicted then that tens of thousands of workers in certain groups would be priced out of their jobs. In fact, the very converse appears to have happened. The employment of working age women, young people ,and ethnic minorities has shown a significant increase. For most age groups, males and females, unemployment has fallen to record low levels. As the following table  shows, National Minimum Wage levels are to be increased this year.

 

 

 

Date        Adult Rate       Development   Rate

               (22yrs+)              ( 18-21 yrs)

1.10.00     £3.70                   £3.20

1.10.01     £4.10                   £3.50

 

It is unfair that 18-21 year old workers are paid less when doing the same job as older workers. It is also inconsistent with the legislation on equal payment for work of equal value. The adult rate should be paid at 18 years of age.   The fact that 16 and 17 years old have no protection at all is patently unfair.

            Official Government statistics show that more than 1 million people were paid less than the minimum wage in 1998; 580,00 in 1999; 300,000 last year. Only 20% of young workers are aware of the rise in the youth rate in October. Low paid workers from ethnic minorities also tend to be poorly informed, as do workers in retail, security, textiles, cleaning, catering and hairdressing businesses.

            The Inland Revenue polices the minimum wage. A worker does not have to do anything except notify them if an underpayment is suspected. The helpline number is:- 0845 6000678 or visit http://www.lowpay.gov.uk/ if advice is needed.

Syd Tierney                                                                

*****

 

Looking for details of a Christmas function for members? We thought a Spring get-together might be more attractive…you know…. an opportunity to dispel those winter blues…regeneration…and all that! More information in our next issue.

 

*****

 

Farewell and Good Luck!

 

Margaret Goff is shortly moving house, leaving the area, saying ‘Goodbye’ to friends in  KELP,  and numerous other organisations which, like us, have valued her commitment, energy and expertise in recent years.

So, Margaret…..Thank-you for being an outstanding honorary treasurer, for being a great colleague, and for being such fun! We shall miss you dreadfully but wish you well. Please take good care of yourself and keep in touch. J.E.

 

*****

 

Reassurance from the P.M.?

 

As a result of the devastating events in the United States, Tony Blair was not able to make his much awaited speech to the Trades Union Congress in Brighton this month. ( September 11^th 2001). I remember meeting him for the first time in 1996 and thinking ,  ‘Here, without doubt, is a man with a mission’. The speech he would have made is filled with the same passion which inspired me then, and continues to give me confidence in our Labour Government despite the occasional setback. Here is an extract on the theme of public services;

‘Expectations are high.  The legacy of years of neglect and under-investment is strong. But my determination to deliver is absolute. And why? Because of the basic belief that has driven me all my political life.; that everyone, every man, every woman, every child, deserves the chance to make the most of themselves within a strong and cohesive society. Public services, and the ethos of public service, are vital to making that happen. We are all in politics, or in public service, because we believe it can make a difference for the better.’

Now, that’s why I’m proud to be a member of the Labour Party!

Jean Ellis

 

 

Produced by Kent Estuary Labour Party for its members and supporters, Labour Leader is published three times per year. Articles, letters or other contributions are invited and should be sent to the editor, Jean Ellis, Rather Heath, 44, Church Hill, Arnside. LA5 0DW  or, via e-mail  to

jean.ellis2@virgin.net