Full council report - Conservative/Libdem shambles

This is my personal account as a Labour councillor.  I don't tweet during council meetings as I like to give my full attention but I do like to report back:


Short report:
Full council showed up what a shambles the administration is in:  the Conservatives and Libdems did not have a full understanding of what they were doing, were failing to give residents any sort of adequate notice of changes to their services and charges and getting personal and rude when challenged over policy*.

In contrast the Labour group made well considered, costed proposals, stressed the importance of consultation and focused on attacking administration policies not individuals.


From an electoral point of view there were some telling comments:  Jan Gavin, our candidate in Redlands was referred to as 'Cllr Jan Gavin' by Richard Willis, who was rather red faced in his correction and Cllr Benson complained that "You are going to come in and do the easy stuff" (disregarding the fact that the council is going to have to make MORE cuts next year!) - clearly suggesting that they expect us to take enough seats to win control, and showing where at least one of them is!


*If you don't want to read the full report here are examples of each:  they confused a cumulative 3 year saving with an annual figure (and heckled when corrected), they are sending out notices of changes to bus passes this week to come into effect on Friday, and I was told I should 'get out of the civic centre' (meaning into the community, not that I should resign, at least I don't think the lead councillor was being THAT rude) when I pointed out that we needed to do more to create alternative provision before we put more pressure on carers and the voluntary sector.


Full report:

Full council on Tuesday was another marathon - got back home at ten past twelve, having left the house at 6pm.

We started the evening with a petition regarding council support for Tai Chi for the elderly.  My Grandma goes to this and loves it so I personally hope that support can be found although from the reply I wasn't clear what the administration were saying, but it sounded like 'no'.

Then questions from members of the public council candidates, and the time honoured tactic of using this section to highlight issues that are being used in local election campaigns (honourable exception to the resident from Hill Street - at least I think so!).  Not criticising - but I do think we could find a better way of getting the public involved, maybe a Q and A session without pre scripted replies that rotated round the portfolios?

Then councillor's questions which were the usual attempts to publicise things that he administration are doing, perhaps press releases might be more sensible?  Again I wonder having gone through a full municipal year if we could have a less scripted approach.  For example I would have liked to ask the lead councillor about the late notice for the green bin charges (i only received my letter this morning in fact!), but the deadline had past by the time the administration had decided to implement from 1st April, while issuing notices in the last week of March!  (Incidentally following the uproar you now have a couple more weeks to give notice!)

We then moved on to three presentations, all of which were useful in different ways.

Moving on to the reports and motions there were some items that had all party agreement, for example Chris Maskell's motion that we should formalise the act of remembrance at the Forbury Cenotaph on 11th November (in fact Cllr Willis - belatedly - agreed to second it), or the comments from all party leaders that setting our own allowances (councillor's pay) is a ridiculous practice.  So before I talk abut the remaining three issues please bear that in mind - your councillors don't disagree just for the sake of it but when we have deep and serious disagreements.  I point this out because there were accusations of 'playing politics' flying around, which aside from the fact that we are all like it or not local politicians, suggests that the differences are not real or have been trumped up for the fun of it.

So firstly the transport report.  Much of this is what long serving councillors call 'business' which I believe means "we have to pass this but no-one has anything to say about it".  However there were two very serious and controversial proposals.

Firstly the decision to implement 'stage 2 (Southern)' parking meters during the next year.  This follows up from the cabinet's budget plan to raise £500,000 from parking meters.  Tony Page, in full command of his brief and making the Redland's councillors in particular squirm, explained that this was the parking meters being rolled out in the hospital and university areas.  Cllr WIllis stood up and stated categorically that "We have no plans for parking meters in the University and hospital areas".  Now either this is another one of his famous U-turns or he hadn't read his own report.  As Tony said "I won't use the L word but we all know what it is" (it rhymes with higher).

To an extent I pity the Redland's libdems on this as I think they have been either misinformed or at least misunderstood the situation.  Regardless they rejected Tony's amendment which was to state explicitly that parking meters should only be implemented after full consultation with residents.  If they have no plans for parking meters it is just plain odd that they refused the amendment.

The second amendment was regarding changes to the bus pass scheme.  It's been public for some time that the council is planning to remove free travel for pensioners before 9.30am (incidentally also after 11pm, although I think the clubbing pensioner demographic is limited)  but what even some coalition councillors didn't realise was that this plan included the approximately 3,500 disabled pass holders and 1,500 carers who can travel free when acompanying them.  We know that this will affect parents taking their children to school (who don't want to burden the council with the cost of doing it), disabled workers and those with medical appointments.  Not only is it a very serious and costly change for people but the letter informing people of this was still sitting in the post room on Monday at 4pm.  The changes come into affect from Friday.  Truly a lack of respect for our elderly and disabled residents.
Again our amendment called for proper consultation and communication before any change was implemented.  This was rejected.   Labour was accused of scaremongering during the debate for saying that the Conservatives would cut support for elderly and disabled people. 

The second controversial issue was the issue of elderly care.  This is something that all parties know is hugely important and much of the report was something that all sides could welcome, for example the progress with the free re-ablement program started under my Labour and Whitley colleague, Mike Orton and continued under the current administration.  However there were two big policy differences.  The first is that the lead councillor, Daisy Benson, proposed to cut the eligibility criteria for council help from 'greater moderate' (several day to day functions impaired) to substantial and critical only.  This is something that Labour has always been able to find a way to avoid in the past.  It is not to say it will never ever change but if it did it would have to be after new services and support was implemented not before.  I was proud to second Mike's amendment to this proposal which called for a speeding up of the reassessment program, to develop more preventative and alternative support and to keep supporting those in greater moderate need.  We acknowledged that this might cost up to £250,000 more in the short term and identified where an alternative saving could be made:  through management restructure in the adult social care and adjustments in the grants budget.   Again, the administration rejected the proposal, quoting a figure of £1.5 million a year in savings.  I pointed out (to heckles claiming I was wrong) that this was a cumulative figure, and they had added up total savings over several years.  A large number of administration councillors including cabinet members had clearly not understood their own proposals as it is clearly spelt out in Table 4 of the report.  The other rebuttal line was Cllr Benson's claim that there were already voluntary providers out there.  Of course this is true and I'm very aware of this  (hence my interest in the Tai Chi question) but the real point is that we would be placing an extra burden on family and voluntary carers without having introduced alternative ways of supporting people.  This is reflected in the administration's own report.  One of the reasons the saving is so little is that there is an expectation that those in greater moderate need whose services are taken away will 'deteriorate faster' and thus move into the substantial or critical needs more quickly.  Think for a moment what that means to people - and imagine if that was applied to your Grandparents, parents or maybe even yourself. 
The second amendment we moved had received a lot of publicity elsewhere, and refers to the huge increase in day centre charges.  The administration was planning to reassess people and as they were reassessed move them on to the new scheme (this is what they meant by phasing).  This would have meant that there were people in the same situation paying completely different amounts - some £5.90 some £43.03 for the same service.  =There has also not been consideration of hardship cases.  Our amendment was to say that the implementation should only occur once everyone had been reassessed and secondly that cabinet needed to make provision for those who will be put into hardship by this.
The view amongst Labour councillors was that the smart thing to do for the administration would be to accept this amendment because it sorted out the shambles that the proposed scheme would have led to.

The third controversial item was Graeme Hoskin's motion on the NHS which bent over backwards to try to make it easy for the Libdems to back us by effectively copying and pasting from the motion passed at Libdem conference.  This was something that both the Libdem councillors who attended the conference had voted for, so we were hopeful the Liberals would break ranks with the Conservatives.  In the event  and Cllrs Daisy Benson and Cllr Kirsten Bayes brought forward a truly shocking motion which mostly praised the government's approach to the NHS.  It seems that they say one thing at Lib-dem conference and another locally.  Is that because they are so concerned about staying onside with the Conservatives or just that they have no backbone?  Soon-to-be ex-Cllr Gareth Epps abstained, which I respected, as I know he's in a difficult position with the rest of his group.  In the debate some of the Conservatives made some truly shocking statements about the NHS.  Cllr Mark Ralph in particular stating that "You seem to have a problem with private companies running the NHS" (Yes!) and "Democratically accountable w
commissioning - well that sounds like a waste of money to me".   It was late at night by now but we'd lerant a lot about the shambolic way that the council is being run, the lack of respect that the Conservatives and Libdems have for keeping residents informed in the most basic way, and that - at best - that some Conservatives and Libdems don't read their own reports to council.

When we take back control (which is looking more and more likely that it will happen this May) we won't be able to reverse everything,  But we will be having a thorough review to change what we can in year. 

What I'm doing tomorrow

I will be marching in London.

Those marching will have many different particular issues they want to hihglight.  For me the biggest single issue I have is the assault on the NHS.  Yes the cuts are way too far and too fast and put our economic growth at risk - ask George Osbourne who has had to downgrade his growth forecast yet again, due to his ludicrous economic policy.  But privatising our NHS is not about economic illiteracy, it is an attack on the British way of life.  There's a really good piece by a midwife here on why she is marching.

Having said that why actually march?  Well there comes a time when signing online petitions and making speeches in council meetings isn't enough - yes 1/2 a million signed up to save the forests, but now any petition which is smaller than that will lose it's impact.  And it's easy to ignore a number on a piece of paper.  When Cameron, Osborne and Clegg look at the news and there are seas of people on the streets of the capital it must have a bigger impact.

I thought seriously about not going.  We have local elections to fight, I am teaching the next day (yes I know that's a Sunday) and I am not convinced that it will make the government actually listen, but the government has u-turned before and not every government minister is ideologically driven to attack public services.

I'll be on the Waterloo train - say hi if you are there!

Growth down, unemployment forecasts up

The big picture on this budget is clear.  Growth forecasts are down (yet again) and unemployment forests are up.  No wonder borrowing forecasts have also had to be revised upwards:  you can't cut a deficit when growth has stalled.  If it's not working a change of policy is needed.

So what has the chancellor done?  He cuts fuel duty by 1p - when his VAT increase alone has increased the cost of fuel by 3p, he revises the regulations for gift aid and in his big policy announcements he cuts taxes for big businesses by approximately £2 billion (according to Robert Peston, the BBC's business editor).  Now I have nothing against big multinational businesses, after all I work for one, but the idea that this is a good use of government money at a time when schools are facing budget cuts, small businesses and sole traders are suffering following VAT rises, families are losing their working tax credits, day centre costs are rocketing and the NHS is being squeezed.

It's a measure of the lack of imagination and thought that the Conservatives government have given to growth that the main transport action is a fund for potholes.  This is something that I am pleased about - but it's hardly going to deal with the unemployment and falling incomes that we're facing.


What would Labour have done differently?  Well the plan was to cut the deficit more slowly in a measured way giving far more leeway for adjusting tax and spending decisions.  Yes it would ahve been painful still but it woudl have meant there was a realistic chance for the private sector to grow.  Even in Reading, a economically successful town (should be a city!) in the private sector we know that a lot of our business is reliant on public sector organisations.


And so much for localism - here's a nice tit bit: local authorities will no long be allowed to prioritise brownfield sites over greenfield for development.  That's crazy!  Isn't it obvious that the old brewery site is a better place to build than Kennet Meadows and shouldn't Reading's residents and council be the one's to determine that sort of priority?

I'm off to deliver Labour party leaflets in disgust at this budget!

Oscar Nominee and BAFTA winner visit Reading schools

As I said on Monday we had a great visit from Duncan Bruce, BAFTA winning producer, Poss Kondeatis (Until The River Runs Red) and Oscar nominated director and Student Academy Award winner, Tanel Toom (The Confession)

Well the visit was a great success, the children loved the film that was shown - and rather excitingly they were the first children to see it, as it had only been completed 2 days earlier.   

I went along to Wilson Primary School, Geoffrey Field Junior School as they had invited me to join the visit and I both learnt a lot and enjoyed myself.  There were plenty of questions and the children seemed really interested in what was involved in film making, along with the inevitable questions "do you know anyone famous?" (Geoffrey Rush met with blank looks until Duncan explained he was the baddy in Pirates of the Carribean!)
 Here's a picture of us with some of the children that will be in either the Midweek or the Chronicle:

Legal action regarding Libdem leaflets

I won't be publishing comments on this post and will not be giving my own opinion.  The reason for this will be apparent from the information below which is a press release published by the Reading Labour party after legal advice.  However for the record I thought it was worth publishing.  I will publish a more upbeat post later regarding an event yesterday.

Solicitors acting for the Association of Labour Councillors have written to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) asking him to carry out an investigation to determine whether any criminal act has been committed in the publishing earlier this year of a “Focus on Redlands” by the three LibDem Councillors for Redlands Ward. The DPP has a duty to do so under Section 181 of the Representation of the People Act 1983.

In their letter, Steel and Shamash Solicitors say that they had previously written to the persons responsible for the leaflet asking them to retract an attack on Labour’s Jan Gavin - which they say is “totally false” and contravenes Section 106 of the Representation of the People Act 1983. There has been no response to that letter.

The Act says that anyone who before or during an election publishes a false statement about a candidate is guilty of an illegal practice; that if a candidate guilty of an illegal practice is elected then their election may be declared void; and that others guilty of an illegal practice may be barred from elective office and even from voting.

Labour Group Leader Jo Lovelock, who contacted the ALC following recent attacks on Reading Borough Council’s “facilities agreement” with the trade unions, says: “The original false allegations regarding the secondment of Council staff to represent the workforce on a range of issues was one of the worst attempts to smear the Labour Party locally that I have seen, but the attack on Jan Gavin takes this to a new low and we have no choice but to ask for this to be referred to the Director of Public Prosecutions.”

Oscar &BAFTA glamour and local schools

My friend Duncan Bruce (occasional blogger and prolific tweeter @duncanqbruce) has organised a bit of a treat for 3 schools in Reading tomorrow.  I'm not a film buff but even I get excited when I'm told a BAFTA winner and Oscar nominee want to visit some junior schools in Reading to talk about the film industry.

I'm going along to two of the school's events as I am a governor at one and the ward councillor at another, and they asked me along.  Really looking forward to it, but I've asked Duncan to invite Colin Firth, next time.

The press release is below:

Film Editor and Thames ward candidate, Duncan Bruce has organised for BAFTA winner, Poss Kondeatis (Until The River Runs Red) and Oscar nominee and Student Academy Award winner, Tanel Toom (The Confession) to visit three of Reading’s schools tomorrow to talk about the film industry and answer questions from Reading’s young people.

Wilson Primary School, Geoffrey Field Junior School and Katesgrove Primary School are the three lucky schools.  The children will also be shown a short film and encouraged to think about writing scripts and producing short films to tie in with their other work.

Duncan said “Having worked with Tanel and Poss I know they are really keen to give back to the community and encourage more young people to think about the film industry”.

Tanel Toom said “It is great to be able to share our passion for film with young people – and who knows one of them could be walking up the red carpet in a few years!”

A weekend in the sunshine!

I joined canvass teams in Katesgrove and Church ward this weekend – it was great to support our excellent candidates Matt Rodda and Paul Woodward. 

I also went out in Whitley delivering the latest Whitley news and chatting to people – lots of people in their front gardens pleased to say hello!  I also checked on the progress of the works to prevent flooding in Kingsley Close, something as Whitley councillors we are really pleased to see happen.

I took time out this morning to watch the half marathon with family members and cheer the runners on.  My Grandma used to run it and then for many years handed out water on Liebenrood Road, this year for the first time she didn’t because of hand trouble so we watched together and really enjoyed the atmosphere – hats off to all the runners, including Councillors Paul Gittings and John Ennis, and candidate Matt Rodda!  Really impressed by the dedication… the race for life is about my limit!

January and February Councillor's reports (late!)

Summary:

January and February - a long time ago, but I still thought it would be worth putting this up.  There has been so much happening, and I'm sorry for not doing a separate January report, but I was literally about to draft it when I received the phone call that told me that Jim Hanley had died.  The other very major event has been the council meeting that set the budget.  So all round a difficult couple of months for the council.  This is a bit briefer than usual, not because I've been less busy but rather the opposite so haven't time to flesh out more.


Council
We had two council meetings the second of which set the budget.  I blogged about them here and here.  I had to give my apologies to the SACRE meeting due to family reasons.  I attended cabinet on Valentine's Day (yes my husband was very impressed!) to ask ask a question of Cllr Ralph and support Carla Allamby, the local parent who submitted the Whitley Excellence Cluster petition.

I also had a large number of discussions with officers (council staff) about ward matters some of which have been more successful than others.

Out and about in the ward:

We held our regular monthly surgeries both in the Whitley Advice Shop on Northumberland Avenue.
I also met parents at school gates around the ward including Whitley Park, Geoffrey Field and Christ the King.  Although outside the ward a number of resident's children go to George Palmer so it was good to do some campaigning there with our excellent Redland's candidate Jan Gavin (who is a school governor there), and bump in to some familiar faces.  Additionally I did visits, phone calls and general walk abouts!


Labour party and campaigning
 We've been counting down to the local elections and I've been helping out around town with canvassing, leaflet delivery and other campaign support.  I've been mostly focused on Church ward (the neighbouring ward to Whitley) and Whitley ward although I have also been helping out with other wards as well.  There's a lot to do and help is always welcome - just drop me a line!  We're determined that we will take as many seats as possible from the Conservatives and Libdems in May.
I also joined the RCRE and other members of the public in a public display of unity in reiterating the Reading declaration, which is our commitment to a diverse but united town and against discrimination (this was before the political storm between RCRE and the Conservative/Libdem administration)

Looking ahead to March/April:
This month has continued to be packed full of activity, which is one reason why you've have noticed my blogging has been sporadic.  April looks to be similar!

NHS privatisation - Cameron is just looking silly

The Government's plan to privatise the NHS surely has to be stopped.

Cameron resorted to attacking doctors and the British Medical Association at Prime Minister's questions today.  But if they are so awful why hand over power to them (especially when they don't even want it!)?

The BMAs objections are:
1.  There is no evidence that the reforms will work, and in fact some evidence it will actually cause  problems and in particular lots of evidence about greater cost.
2.  A competitive market doesn't work when you can't have 'businesses failing' (hospitals killing patients in health terms). 
3.  The scope of the 'reforms' is so huge it could be catastrophic for the health service and the lack of consultation puts at risk the success of the reform.

A costly, unpopular policy that the Conservatives promised not to implement (no more top down reorganisations remember!) shouldn't be hard to ditch!

Sadly I know it becomes harder to abandon a position the more you've previously defended it.   I learnt that lesson as half of the only comprehensive school team in a regional final coming away from a debate about regional assemblies convinced that a) we were robbed and b) that regional assemblies were the future of democracy.  I was 17 and hadn't given regional assemblies a minute's thought before that evening, and realised that the next day.  It was a good lesson to learn, you can have emotional attachment to even the least exciting of issues!


I watched Prime Minister's Questions (my weekly TV treat, what a glamorous life I live!) and while I wouldn't like to compare my 17 year old self to the Prime Minister I can see that the more people attack the policy the more he wants to defend it.

Still there's a chance that he might turn so here's that petition link again

Things worth doing before April 1st

I'm subscribed to the Money Saving Expert email list and have found the site extremely useful over the years.  This week's email was particularly interesting and had a list of things to do to before April 1st.  I'll certainly be off to superdrug to stock up on stamps!  All links are to MSE.

• Visit dentists now. English NHS dental charges rise by c. 3%. If you're due treatment, go now to save. Welsh charges are frozen at 2006 prices while Scotland & NI still charge for individual treatments.
• Beat 12% stamp rise. On 4 April, 1st-class stamps jump 5p to 46p and 2nd-class 4p to 36p. Stock up on any labelled 1st or 2nd now and they'll stay valid. Plus Superdrug has 5% off 1st-class; see Cheap Stamps.
• Prescriptions UP 20p in England. Charges jump from £7.20 to £7.40; regulars can beat this with prepay certificates. See Cheap Prescriptions.
• Water bills rise 4.6% in England & Wales. If you've MORE bedrooms in your house than people, consider a meter (see Water Savings).
• Top up your state pension. On 6 April the full state pension rises £4.50 to £102.15. To get the full amount, you must have paid enough National Insurance. Whether you've already retired or are close, buying missed NI years may boost future payouts; applying by 5 April makes it cheaper and could mean a rebate. Full guide with calc in Pension Top Ups.
• Housing benefit slashed in April. A million people face average £600/yr cuts. See the Housing Benefit Cuts Help guide for help.
• Sign up to childcare vouchers NOW. Higher-rate taxpayers wanting to join a work scheme to pay for childcare from pre-tax income must do it asap. On 6 April, the max drops from £55 vouchers/week to £28 for them, UNLESS already in a scheme. So even if you don't need 'em quite yet, as voucher dates are long, join the scheme at the min level, to be eligible for the bigger maximum later. See Childcare Vouchers.
  
• BT line rental increases. On 28 April BT hikes line rental from £13.60/mth to £13.90 (£167/yr). Yet Primus's Line Rental Saver* (via this link) is currently £6.79/mth or its Home Phone Saver* is £7.99/mth with inclusive eve & wknd landline calls. To stick with BT, its Line Rental Saver* is £120 for a year upfront, equiv to £10/mth incl wknd calls; see Cheap Home Phones.
• Give to charity asap. Tick Gift Aid on donations and charities can reclaim tax, so if a basic taxpayer gives £1, they get £1.28. Tax spods will spot that's actually more than the tax we pay as the Govt chips in an extra 3p per £1 donated. This extra disappears 5 April. See Give More To Charity.
  
  
  He adds:
  "And that's just the start, on 5 April a host of tax & benefits changes hit, though with most of those there's little you can do to impact it."
  
  

Personally installing solar panels - part 2

Well after much debate (including on here!) we've decided to go ahead with installing solar panels. 
We have joined with others in the Reading Energy Pioneers to make it more economical and as importantly to take advantage of the experience and knowledge of those who have had the installation done in the past.   The quote we got was already competitive and we will be receiving a further discount depending on the number of people who go forward.  Apparently there are over 20 of us currently planning to go ahead!  (They are accepting people on this roud still, but you will have to go with the supplier we've chosen, just click here for details)

We've submitted a request for a lawful development certificate, I gather it's not normally needed as it's a permitted development (unless you were in a listed building or something) but since I am a councillor I wanted to be sure - it would be a bit embarrassing to say the least to get into trouble with the planners!*

I will update this blog as we go to let you know our experience, including recording the financial return in the first month or so.

Incidentally I am still waiting for the council to actually go ahead with taking advantage of the feed in tariff scheme, as I was promised by the former lead councillor and was agreed at a full council meeting, following the motion I proposed!

* I'd still advise you to call the planning department to get proper confirmation of this, my blog doesn't give legal/planning advice!

Public meeting @Northumberland Ave shops - this Wednesday

There will be a public meeting at 7pm in the South Reading Youth and Community Centre (appropriately on Northumberland Avenue).  It is being hosted by the police and the council and we'll be discussing the problems outside the nearby shops.

Please come along if you have concerns to raise.  It is something I have had concerns about for some time and have raised various, often related concerns over the last year.

It is in Whitley ward but it does affect neighbouring wards too so if you don't live in Whitley ward, but do use the shops (for example if you live on the other side of Northumberland Avenue in Church ward) you are welcome to attend.

Hope to see you there! 

Powerful image

You know I said there's probably going to be a campaign about the government taking disabled people's wheelchairs at this rate?  Well there is:

Here's the press release:
"“We don’t want to be ‘Left Out In The Cold’ ”, say Britain’s disabled people.
On the eve of the second reading of the government’s controversial Welfare Reform Bill on 9th March, a stark image of disabled campaigner Kaliya Franklin aims to convey how vulnerable some of the bills proposals will leave sick and disabled people across the UK.

The photograph depicts a naked Franklin lying on the sand on a wintry beach, next to her empty wheelchair.

Just like Franklin’s wheelchair in the image, social care and support will be left out of reach for many of those most in need if these reforms go ahead, literally leaving many “Left Out in the Cold.”

“We decided to use one thought provoking image to make our point,” explains Franklin. “Sick and disabled people are often left voiceless in society, so we hoped using a single image might reflect this.”

Says Franklin, “It’s vital we all remember we are just an accident or illness away from becoming disabled. Many people think if they do become disabled that the state will look after them.

“But the fact is that even under current provisions, disability benefits are not enough for disabled people to live on. If the Welfare Reform Bill is passed, the situation will become unimaginably worse.”

In January, Franklin released a video on YouTube that explained how able-bodied people would be in for a major shock if they found themselves needing to apply for disability benefits. The video can be seen at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q7EXSpmrVMU.

The Broken of Britain group has been campaigning since summer 2010 to raise awareness of the government’s wider anti-disability policies. The group has consistently drawn attention to disabled people being the target of unjust government rhetoric and sham consultations, tabloid slander and political myths.

It says: “We are now the targets of deep and damaging cuts to disability services that are contained in and symbolised by the Welfare Reform Bill. The Bill disguises cuts and changes to a number of benefits, from housing benefit to Income Support that will punish disabled people.”"

This government would sell your blood - no really it would

I actually thought this wasn't true when I first saw it.  I rarely blog twice in one day.  Recently more like twice a week.

But Andrew Lansley really, really is thinking that it would be a good idea to sell off all or part of NHS Blood and Transplant.  To a private company.  There's a thought piece by the Cheif Executive of the Anthony Nolan trust about it.

In the Labour group office at the council someone has pinned up a really old caricature which shows some 1990s Tory (I forget which) saying "The NHS is safe with us, the NHS is in Michael Howard's veins".  Inevitably Michael Howard is shown as a vampire in the background.
I don't doubt David Cameron is genuine when he says he appreciates the NHS, no parent wouldn't be.  But this policy is at best dangerously misguided.  The piece from the Anthony Nolan Trust saya:

"Firstly, what will be the impact on individuals when they are asked to donate blood when a company will make a profit from that donation? Will there be a move to allow payments to be made to donors, raising the overall costs and removing the philanthropy from the act of donation? 
...Privatisation of something so essential also demands cast iron assurance of quality and safety standards through regulations and inspections. As a charity handling human tissues, we’re subject to a rigorous regulation regime, but we don’t have a profit motive that conflicts with that drive for quality and safety. Furthermore, if foreign companies are to bid for NHSBT, to what extent will we be increasing the acquisition of blood from territories where we don’t get to choose how often or how thoroughly laboratories and facilities are inspected, even if their regulations are harmonised with our own?"

 Well that puts it rather less hysterically than I might have done.  But my big question is who voted for this?  I don't remember it being in anyone's manifesto, I think if I'd asked the Conservative and Liberal Democrat parliamentary candidates "Will you privatise the NHS, including the National Blood and Transplant Service?" they'd have said no, or would they?

No wonder the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats are losing ground.  It's bad for politics in general though.  Perhaps it starts to explain why UKIP trounced both of them in the Barnsley By-election?

However back to the matter at hand.  Here is a link to the petition again.  I seem to be constantly signing petitions against silly ideas at the moment.

What's next?  I tried really hard to think of a mad policy the government could produce that I could mock here e.g.  "A petition to stop the government from taking disabled people's wheelchairs?"
But then I remembered they are already planning to cut mobility allowance for severely disabled people, so perhaps not an appropriate suggestion.  This government seems determined to go beyond hyperbole, surely some thing's got to give.

(I should disclose for full honesty that I don't give blood.  I've tried to twice and both times I didn't fill the bag.  As soon as I am medically allowed to again I'm going to try one more time.  My husband gives regularly but always requires much pampering afterwards.)

Fresh ideas - Labour is listening.

Yvette Cooper led an event in Reading town hall yesterday to listen to ideas that people in have for the future of our country.   it's easy to be cynical about this exercise, and I hadn't really known what to expect.  But yesterday I walked into a room full of people: a few councillors and Labour party members around the room but a real range of people, far more than I had expected turned up at late notice on a Thursday lunch time.  Some of them were sympathetic to labour, and at least one person I spoke to was planning to join the party as a result of the meeting others were more guarded. 

What everyone shared was a real enthusiasm to discuss the 'big picture'.  Our table talked about issues that you just wouldn't normally even raise with strangers.  We spent most time on education and the balance between fitting people for the jobs they will go into and at the same time give people a rounded education.  We also raised the really important impact of early years, and how to give the best start.  We had a dilemma about what the best way forward for sure start is given the reckless cuts.  I had a good chat afterwards with James (sorry didn't catch your last name!) about how to ensure that it benefits the children who need it most, without excluding other parents, who will also benefit it.  I think we synthesised our views that it should be open to all but that the outreach and focus should be to encourage disadvantaged families to take the benefit.

We also discussed immigration briefly and a really interesting point came out that it's not so much immigration that people are worried about but living standards and wages.

All in all it was a great exercise and more than just an opportunity to see Yvette Cooper, (although in my view she is one of the county's best politicians and a nice person too!).  I'll certainly be taking away some ideas from it!

The Post showed this interview:

Whitley Excellence Cluster update

We won't be walking away from this campaign and will be looking for ways to support the schools, WEC and the associated charity, ASPIRE2.

I've just send this email out:
"Dear All,

As a signer of the petition to Save Whitley Excellence Cluster I wanted to email you to pass on a message from Carla, who presented the petition to the council on everyone's behalf.  Please consider joining the facebook group: http://www.facebook.com/#!/home.php?sk=group_111351388943271

"I would like to thank everybody for their support in signing the petition to Save the Whitley Excellence Cluster which was handed over to Reading Borough Council on Monday 14th February.  You probably know we were unsuccessful in getting the Coalition council to do anything to help save this vital service. 

However, we are still going to continue our fight to get more funding for this important issue.  I have set up a Facebook page in order to keep the cause in the public eye and make more people aware of the good work achieved by the Whitley Excellence Cluster.  I urge all of you that signed the original petition to join the group and share your experiences of the WEC.  If you know of anybody that has not signed the petition let them know about the group, anyone can join, we will have links to the on-line petition which is still active and will have information on how you can get involved and help make a real difference.

Without your support nothing will change.  Thank you for your time

Carla Allamby
(Mum of two children helped by the WEC)"


PS You've received this email because you signed the petition either online or by paper and gave us your address and at the time you chose to be contacted.  If you have changed your mind, just reply and let us know.