Tuesday, 11 December 2012

Mebyon Kernow councillors back committee form of governance


The second key debate at Full Council today was the future governance arrangements for Cornwall Council. Two options had been worked up by the Governance Review Panel of which I am Vice-Chairman.

These were a revised form of Cabinet and a “Strategic Committee” alternative. I moved the “Strategic Committee” option, but this only won the support of the five MK councillors and about twenty others. 

It is a disappointing result but one that was expected.

Mebyon Kernow councillors oppose "Strategic Partnership"


Today was Full Council and the first agenda item was the so-called Strategic Partnership. In the first vote, councillors voted against the full BT outsourcing option – known to many as the “thick-JV” option. It was rejected by 71 votes to 30.

The second proposal to be put to the vote was to keep services “in-house.” This was lost by 50 votes to 46. The fifty councillors were mainly Conservatives and independents, but included at least six Liberal Democrats.

Early in the afternoon session, councillors voted to back a less comprehensive, but still extremely significant, “thin-JV” option.  This option includes ICT, document management, telehealth and telecare, and will involve the transfer of over 300 staff into a private company.

It is a sad day for Cornwall Council and the public sector.

For the record, all five MK councillors at the meeting (myself, Stuart Cullimore, Loveday Jenkin, Andrew Long and Tamsin Williams) backed calls to keep services in-house and opposed all the other options. Our sixth councillor, Neil Plummer, was not present because he is ill with pneumonia. 

Sunday, 9 December 2012

Coalition needs to discover the spirit of Beveridge


In this coming week’s Cornish Guardian, my column will note the 70th anniversary of the Beveridge Report and contrast it to the actions being perpetrated by the Coalition Government. Here’s the preview:

December 2012 marks the seventieth anniversary of the Beveridge Report. Produced during the Second World War, this document sought to tackle what it described as the “five giant evils” of “idleness, ignorance, disease, squalor and want.” Beveridge himself said that they were operating within a "revolutionary moment” in the history of the world and that it was a “time for revolutions, not for patching.”

The recommendations of the Report were truly far-reaching, and the Ministry of Information stated that it had been “welcomed with almost universal approval by people of all shades of opinion and by all sections of the community” and that it was seen as “the first real attempt to put into practice the talk about a new world.”

The Beveridge Report led to real societal change, including the creation of the National Health Service and the welfare state. Indeed, there was a whole raft of post-war legislation which covered areas such as national insurance, family allowances, pensions, housing and rent control.

Seven decades on, we should be celebrating how the work of Beveridge and his colleagues benefited millions and millions of families.

But I am fearful of how the policies of this present government are undermining the traditional fairness that has been at the core of British society for so long, much of which emanated from the reforms of the late 1940s.

We have had the Health and Social Care Bill, which has privatised great tracts of the NHS, ignoring unprecedented levels of opposition from nurses, doctors and ordinary people.

We have received report after report demonstrating that government policies are impacting most on the less-well-off and the vulnerable.

And only days ago, 59 charities and other organisations (including Oxfam, Barnardos, the Children's Society and the Child Poverty Action Group) joined together to condemn attacks on the welfare budget.

Describing the government’s approach as “punitive and unfair,” they argued it would hurt children and families, and “risk losing the very safety net” instigated by Beveridge.

Their joint letter also stated “the truth is that the vast majority of those who rely on benefits and tax credits are either in work, have worked, or will be in work in the near future … while the chancellor paints a picture of so-called ‘strivers’ and ‘skivers,’ our organisations see the reality on the ground: families scraping by in low-paid work, or being bounced from insecure jobs to benefits and back again."

I believe that the Coalition Government needs to listen to those groups campaigning to end all forms of poverty and social injustice, and to act accordingly, with the spirit of Beveridge foremost in their minds. 

Gwinear, Gwithian and St Erth by-election result


The latest by-election for a seat on Cornwall Council has returned a Conservative.

The winner was former Penwith District Councillor Anthony Pascoe, who out-polled two prominent local independents who came second and third.

MK put forward John Gillingham, who polled 6.2% of the vote. This was John’s first-ever election campaign and he was also MK’s first council candidate in this area since the 1970s.

John worked extremely hard and I would like to congratulate him and his team for their efforts. I understand they were very well-received on the doorstep, though sadly this did not translate into more votes.

The full result was as follows:

Anthony Pascoe (Conservative) – 332 (35.3%; down 2.8%)
Sheila Furneaux (Independent) – 167 (17.7%; down 16.4%)
Michael Roberts (Independent) – 163 (17.3%; up 17.3%)
Yvonne Bates (Liberal Democrats) – 121 (12.9%; down 9.3%)
Malcolm Hurst (Labour) – 76 (8.1%; up 2.5%)
John Gillingham (Mebyon Kernow) – 58 (6.2%; up 6.2%)
Derek Elliott (Independent) – 24 (2.6%; up 2.6%)

Saturday, 8 December 2012

The Leveson Inquiry


My latest column in the Cornish Guardian focuses on the Leveson Inquiry. It is as follows:

Lord Justice Leveson’s wide-ranging Inquiry into the “culture, practices and ethics of the press” has reached its conclusion. After sixteen months, and numerous hearings, he has produced a hard-hitting report some 1,987 pages long and containing over one million words.

It is to be welcomed that “regional” newspapers such as the Cornish Guardian have been praised as “playing an important social role” and being “good for our communities, our identity and our democracy.”

But tellingly, the main bulk of the report tackled how elements of the press had (i) failed to respect privacy, (ii) obtained information illegally or unethically, and (iii) harassed individuals.

The behaviour of certain journalists, investigators and their editors were rightly condemned by Leveson as “outrageous.”

The report contained a range of recommendations, including a “new independent press regulator” underpinned by legislation to ensure that it has the power to act.

The Prime Minister David Cameron has already refused to support the key proposal of a “statutory body” to oversee the regulator, expressing concerns that it could infringe both “free speech and a free press.”

I do not share Cameron’s view and feel that it is the Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg who has summed up the situation rather better.

He has noted that there are two principles at play. One is the belief that a “raucous and vigorous press” is the “lifeblood of a healthy democracy.” And the other, is the belief that “the vulnerable, the innocent and the weak should be protected from powerful vested interests.”

This is an extremely important balance that must be achieved in the future.

I would not want to see an end to high quality investigative journalism, but it is important that action is taken against those who have undermined reporting in the UK.

There have been so many shocking examples of how hundreds of people, both celebrities and ordinary folk, have had to endure invasive surveillance, and have also had their phones hacked and their computers compromised.

To give just one example, I was pleased that Leveson condemned one of the tabloids who “obtained” private medical information about Gordon Brown’s four-month-old son, and then published the fact that young child had been diagnosed with cystic fibrosis.

Such intrusions are unacceptable and cannot be allowed to continue.

We need a responsible media and that is why I support Leveson’s full recommendation for a new independent press regulator, underpinned by legislation.