It just gets worse

Recess has provided no respite for David Cameron.

In another omni-shambolic week for the Tory-led Government, the Budget continued to fall apart with pasty tax, caravan tax, charity tax and skip tax all abandoned.

The Tories have no strategic direction on the economy; its simply short term and desperate fixes. It is no wonder Downing Street staff are leaving in droves; the ship of state is rudderless with no direction.

With a double-dip recession made in Downing Street and a million young people unemployed, the most welcome u-turn would be a Plan B on the economy but the Tories just cant admit it; they called it wrong.

This week showed just how much of an embarrassing onmishambles George Osborne’s Budget has become with four tax u-turns in just five days. Osborne is too focused on fingering Tory political strategy (badly) and not focused on the economy. 

Just a few weeks after Ministers were defending the measures, the Government backtracked on its disastrous pasty tax, caravan tax, charity tax and skip tax. But the Tory-led Government is fooling no-one when it claims to have cleared up its Budget mess.

We urgently need a rethink on the biggest mistakes in the Budget – giving a tax cut to millionaires while millions of pensioners and families are asked to pay more and the complete absence of a plan for growth and jobs.

NHS Waiting times worsen

New figures show that A&E waiting times have increased sharply in the last six months of 2011/12 as A&E waiting times hit an eight-year high and the NHS struggles to make savings.

The NHS is going backwards under the Tories. Since the election, we’ve lost over 3,600 nurses.

David Cameron could save 6,000 nurses by abandoning his NHS reorganisation.

Tory-led Government’s free-market, free-for-all in the health service.

Hunt is toxic and untrustworthy

Jeremy Hunt's (pictured right) appearance at the Leveson Inquiry this week threw up new evidence that he misled Parliament and broke the Ministerial Code on the BSkyB bid.

He should resign.

But the evidence showed something else – that the Prime Minister is up to his neck in this. We now know that David Cameron knew that Jeremy Hunt backed the Murdochs. But he appointed him anyway. And having made that huge mistake, despite all the evidence that Jeremy Hunt broke the rules, the Prime Minister does nothing.

It took just six minutes for David Cameron to decide to clear the Culture Secretary; simply unbelievable  that Cameron is keeping his cronies in office.

Tories totally out of touch

Chatham Waterside green light

The news that 'Chatham Waterside' got planning permission last night is a welcome step in the right direction, and perhaps, just perhaps, represents the first step towards pushing for regeneration for our area.

The man in charge of regeneration Cllr Rodney Chambers was apparently close by when permission was given; sensing that his legacy as a leader hangs with this project? 

Interesting that there was observation on the panel about the total lack of regeneration in the area since Rodney Chambers took the brief; with Cllr Adrian Gulvin (Con) stating that it was "the sort of thing Medway has needed for a long time"

Could not put it better Adrian; not since Labour were in the Council and gave permission for the Chatham Dockside regeneration have we seen a large project come to completion. 

Rochester Riverside is currently weeds and Strood Riverside has been ongoing and on the drawing board since the early-1990s! 

Perhaps Cllr Rodney Chambers has been listening to much to his wife, planning committee chairwoman Cllr Diane Chambers (Con) who said it was a "leap of faith" she was not prepared to take. 

That is half the problem; Tories not willing to make a leap of faith when it comes to external investment. One only looks at why we never applied for the Portas Pilot and we can see this type of attitude pervade amongst some in the ruling administration; if there is private investment for jobs and houses on brown-field sites surely this is a no-brainer. 

There are of course nuances and clauses of review but the principle and message we should be sending is that we want business and jobs and that we are willing to make a 'leap of faith'. 

On the Scally issue; I am not a football fan [of any team] but this is an important club for our towns and so his input must be listened to and taken seriously; and I have read his detailed correspondence despite not being on the Planning Committee.  The argument however that this is the only possible site may be a present fact, but I believe there is plenty of space and scope for a stadium elsewhere in Medway; when Sunderland moved its ground it positioned itself on a former industrial estate; many new stadiums have also been built in locations just out of the urban core (e.g. Brighton & Albion) because it is more cost effective and allows for greater space. Medway has a number of potential sites both in brownfield and greenfield locations which remain under developed, and if there was some innovative thinking things could be explored; I could name a few but wont at this point. Scally is right to position himself in opposition to the site but there was no meat to the bone...

The simple fact is Peel have a reasoned and costed proposal and it is a sensible one in my mind. It will bring 3,500 jobs and much needed investment. 

Regeneration in Medway is woeful at present; someone needs to kick a few of the Cabinet into touch and work as hard as possible to get developments built especially on brown-field urban sites. 

All Medway Matters

With copies of the glossy Medway Matters landing on resident doorsteps across the borough the continued debate around content and impartiality has once again risen its ugly head.

A number of years ago this blog raised a series of online complaints about the editorial appropriateness of conducting an interview with a cabinet member, and known Parliamentary candidate, a few months before the General Election.

The content of course was pretty vacuous; talking about foods and hobbies etc etc, but the symbol was that the Council had allowed content, which so happened to coincide with the timing of a General Election campaign period.  There is of course a wider debate about whether finding about the hobbies and food preferences is really appropriate to be spending money on.

In this blog’s mind it wasn’t appropriate for the reasons indicated at the time.

At the same time a Freedom of Information request revealed that despite the comment that the Medway Matters is funded 100% by advertising that this hid some interesting facts.

By 100% coming from advertising you make an assumption that this comes from private contributions and sponsorship from perhaps private organisations, small businesses and those SME’s that are the backbone of our area. Instead, 32% came from ‘internal’ advertising from Council divisions and only 68% came from external advertising; and of this two thirds a large majority came from publicly funded organisations.

I want to say I have no major issue with Council newsletters and newspapers. I think it sensible that the Council uses its resources to highlight events, good news, public service access and contacts for local politicians, police and local health services. I don’t jump on the bandwagon that everything the Council does is propaganda and self-serving; mainly because it isn’t and there are some true public servants doing great things in Gun Wharf. Medway Matters is always well written, its layout is highly professional, and the majority of its content is factual. And unlike me; someone can spell!!

However there is a real risk with the last two editions, and in future editions, that we are seeing a change in tack once again.

This being subtle, but noticeable, to those who regularly analyse and read the content; this last edition deviated in my mind from being something which should be impartial, to one which favoured through content one group of Councillors - which happen to be the ruling group - at the expense of the good working being undertaken by all other Liberal Democrat, Labour and Independent Councillor's.

Maintaining editorial independence must mean more than just endorsing a particular party; it is also the content given to the respective party representatives. Medway Matters is always careful not to endorse a view; it does however seem to favour content from Conservative Councillor’s and the Cabinet almost exclusively.

This is important not only from a democratic representation perspective but also geographically as well; many inner urban areas are not represented and so news items tend to skew towards sanction news items (e.g. X fined for dropping Y). The good news of the Rochester East PACT, CCTV in Luton or the ward Clean-ups in Chatham Central; all funded and worked by the Council get little or no content.

My point is that all Group’s should be asked to contribute to the content to the magazine if there is a good news item of Council investment in the ward.  This is definitely not a partisan point as I want equality of access for all.

I am also minded to compare and contrast whether having debate is a good thing. I was struck by the way in which, when the official opposition was asked to contribute a piece to the airport debate, that subsequently was seen to diverge from official sanction. So long as the individuals are referenced why should some form of editorial licence be given in such cases?

It is partly the reason why I feel a referendum on the airport necessary; not because I believe a word of what the pro-lobby say; but because they have a right to be heard.

There needs to be a collective responsibility and mindset shift from the Council on this; is this a publication highlighting good news and investment from all; open to all; accessible to all; irrespective of partisan affiliation; or is this just the next re-worded version of the Conservative Cabinet in-Touch under the guise of giving people information on events.

If the content is not opened up mutterings about whether it really has value will continue to resonate; why should the public continue to spend close to £100k to endorse the work of Tory Councillors only? 

Kent Sheriff turnout concerns

The charismatic Jan Berry

With the shortlist for the Conservative nominations now complete it is clear this blogger does not know the minds of the Tory Selection panel; Cllr Mike O’Brien was not even shortlisted to the position which must be a big slap in the face, to not only this blog for calling it totally wrong (mea culpa), but also to the Portfolio holder’s public and press management which had, despite the ridicule, been managed effectively. Mike even had an agent no less if his press output footer is to believed, which I didn’t realise was necessary pre-shortlisting; but such is hubris.

The selection of Craig MacKinlay must be bitter-sweet to the Portfolio Holder; the Medway Tories are known for open-warfare (aka Mayoralty fame) but this is simply cruel, and rather enjoyable to behold for an opposition Councillor.  

Even if Craig is not eventually selected for the candidacy it will be noted by Medway Councillor's and residents that when it came to crunch on selection; Craig piped-the-post over Mike with little or no media output at all. It does not bode well for the replacement of Cllr Rodney for the Rainham brigade...

Craig must be pleased; but it appears this result has peeked little or no interest beyond the Medway commentariat; on looking at the twitter output of the Medway Conservatives over the weekend hardly any had bothered to congratulate or re-tweet the River Councillor, which either shows they don’t support his candidacy or, and more likely, there is a total lack of interest and they were out enjoying the sun.  

This total lack of interest could be the destroyer of this particular wonk idea as the rather desperate article, complete with well placed Union Jack, in today’s Medway Messenger by David Cameron highlighted.

The fear in Tory-circles is that if you cant sell directly elected mayors then how are you going to sell a sheriff?  

The pro-camp had one big argument which has now been blown away; that having high profile and charismatic candidates from all parties would introduce vigour and dynamism into the police governance process. It would allow the public to see a figure-head to the Police locally; someone who could be held to account by voters and who could set an agenda. Indeed; that was the fear this blog expressed that we could end up with someone jumping on rank populism which could see police objectives distorted to political priorities elsewhere in Kent.

Time has proven otherwise

Only Labour has delivered some punchy names, mostly politicians, into the process and is treating it seriously; which is ironic given we opposed the process in the first place as being a total waste of public money. The Tories have failed to manage their own policy if the quality of candidate is to be assessed.

The problem for Cameron is two-fold; firstly he has publicly antagonised and undermined the Police who will certainly use this as a proxy to undermine Conservative candidates, and will perhaps generate a small anti-turnout as a result; but secondly the Tories have failed to select half-decent and charismatic candidates for most forces, and have instead opted for a motley collection of third-raters and Councillor's in their mid-late 40/50s, or the ‘sunset’ brigade as part-time Collins dubbed them. Add into the mix a plethora of bureaucrats and pen-pushers who appear to have zero footprint beyond a few wonks and plutocrats in Whitehall and you end up with a major problem - having any mandate to make change.

It is with a particular hubris therefore that Mark Reckless; my local MP has penned a piece taking credit for the Policy this last weekend despite all the obvious (and they really are obvious) warning lights; if turnout is less then 20% fingers will be wagging in his direction.

Indeed, the use of public taxpayers money for this government programme is the major reason why; we will spend millions on an election at a time of austerity; turnout will be extremely low because there is little charisma; and we may even end up with a grey Conservative candidate with little or no mandate to make change.  

Rest assured all those arguments Tories have been using on cost for the referendum for the Estuary Airport can just as much be used against them on this extravagance; add up the cost of the combined process across all boroughs in Kent and you could see millions wasted on an election, at a time of front-line service cuts, on an idea not one member of the public demanded.

There was a reason why Labour so desperately opposed this idea; it is the reason why Kent Conservatives and Lib Dems so opposed this idea.

The Cameron article today for the KM Group is code (and fear) of a low-turnout; if Labour wins in Kent, and that is a tall order given our defect in 2010, we will have a candidate with charisma and clear policy ideas; but the biggest problem will be energizing the public at all.  

Should the Tories select Jan Berry we may replace one bureaucrat with a non-partisan agenda with another, with a mixed reputation, who has had to make a Faustian bargain with Kent Tory Associations. Woop-see-do-dah; watch the hordes turnout in November.

A reckless policy, baseless foundations, shameless cost, frivolous expense with a voteless turnout. 

We will wait to see what November 16^th will bring; but egg on the face for the author of this policy may certainly be one

Opportunity for Portas Pilot missed

The news that two areas of Kent and many beyond the county borders have been awarded Portas Pilot status should send a waning light to residents that Cllr Chitty and Chambers are simply not prioritising small and medium sized business in Medway.

Medway Labour have been robustly challenging the Conservative administration over its poor handling of local economic decline; from abject denial about the situation we are in; to a position where having a major portfolio tasked with inward investment in Cllr Chitty's hands is not appropriate.

Medway needs to treat economic investment seriously; with countless regeneration schemes on the back-burner and whole swathes of our towns no more then muddy holes because of private-sector withdrawal we have a two cabinet members living in laa-laa land. 

Take one look at Mountbatten House which towers over the Medway sky-line. It has been empty for months.

The Tories in Medway have lost grip on regeneration; why is that every area but ourselves took the Portas Highstreet review seriously enough to put in bids; with numerous highstreets in Medway this should have been an absolute priority for Cllr Chitty; instead she sneered at the author and two competitor highstreets are to have significant investment.

Why is it that no one has lobbied for Medway to be included in Economic Enterprize Zones; we have a huge blue-collar workforce and a Chatham economic centre desperately in need of private-sector interest. The Tories should stop apologising for government policy and start engaging through our MPs to make Medway an area which could be considered feasble.

As the biggest conurbation outside London the South East why are we not pushing the boat out on bids for economic regeneration and investment; instead the total lack of focus from our local blue-rinse brigade is giving weight to those like DRINK who are calling for regeneration and jobs with a mega-airport.

It is time the current administration took small business and the local economy seriously; we have seen nothing but hot air from Chambers on regeneration. His legacy is fast becoming a regeneration quagmire; Strood Riverside under-developed, Rochester Riverside a collection of weeds, Gillingham regeneration mired in squabbles and continued threats to Capstone Valley; as the Deputy Leader even acknowledged now a major risk under his government. 

It is all piece-meal, late, overbudget and the result is visible swathes of our town centre no further forward.

Of course the econony can be blamed; but when there is the potential for Portas pilots and other Economic initiatives it sends the wrong message that Medway is never in the room; beating the drum for our innovators and small businesses.

Chambers needs to step up; may I suggest putting in a 'capable' portfolio holder for Regeneration and to give Cllr Chitty her marching orders. A Cllr Mackness / Irvine or Bright would have a far better grasp of the policy nuances and be able to influence key stakeholders in Westminster and Whitehall and would probably build bridges with business instead of scaring them witless through inaction.