Glamorgan Gazette

I popped over to Bridgend today. While I was there I stopped at a caf' for a mug of tea and and a sandwich, and had a read of the Glamorgan Gazette. The headline story was, superficially speaking, almost amusing. It concerned two drunk blokes who had pleaded guilty for nicking "the holy Mary mother of Jesus and the nativity bed" from a local church. A stupid drunken crime basically.

As I read on the facts were revealed. I read how 'one of the men was homeless having been released from prison 6 days earlier.' This did make me angry (not real anger, but the sort of anger you get from reading things which is a different kind of anger from the proper anger when you end up shouting). Why on earth was someone released from prison only to end up on the streets where, vulnerable, they are far more likely to fall back into patterns of drinking, drugs, and subsequently crime? Fortunately, in this instance, the crime was relatively trivial.

This case is indicative of the rehabilitative failure apparent in our criminal justice system. It demonstrates how the emphasis is squarely on punishment rather than prevention. Letting loose someone with past criminal form, very probably with alcohol problems, alone to fend for himself on the streets, is a recipe for trouble in anyone's books.

I understand that people should not be 'rewarded' for criminal behaviour. I appreciate the idea that we are all responsible for our actions. However, there are social forces at work that can exceed individual capacity. With re-offending rates through the roof, violent crime on the rise, and convictions on the up, surely it is time for a fresh approach- an approach based on rationalism and compassion rather than the urge for retribution.

8 Reasons to Dislike the PBR

OK- I've just noticed Adam Price has beaten me to it with a PBR reaction. I haven't read his yet and hopefully I'm not just reiterating what he has already observed. (I expect his observations are acuter than mine. He was there live after all :-) )

My main take on it, as a layperson, is that despite welcome fiscal stimulations and interventions the report neglects and fails the needs of Wales and of
the vast majority of taxpayers across the UK in key areas.

This is a bit suprising. We were led to believe through the numerous leaks beforehand that radical things were afoot. But what we have is a report that offers only crumbs to working people. The mainstream media of course paints it differently. They seem to think that Brown and Darling have embarked on a gamble just short of the sort of radicalism exhibited in early revolution Cuba, even if the CBI themselves welcomed the report this morning. Don't be fooled though-

Spin aside these are the key facts:

1. Growth in public spending is actually set to slow from 1.8% to 1.2 %
2. VAT decreases have grabbed headlines. But the effects of this in the pocket are negligible, crucially there is no need for retailers to pass the decrease onto consumers. Even the lowly 2% decreases may not be reflected in prices. Re-instating the 10% tax band for lowest earners would have had a much more tangible benefit. This, however, is not on the cards.
3. The increase in income tax for highest earners, which should have happened back in 1997, is dated to after the next election. So if Labour lose the next general election the increase will be postponed or reversed by the likely Tory victors.
4. The planned increases in national insurance contributions will hit middle income earners and small businesses hard.
5. Of the £3 billion set aside for public works only £100 million is set aside for green projects. This is a massive missed opportunity. If there was any good side to this recession it was the opportunity to substantially 'green' our economy. It is likely more money will be set aside to increase motorway capacity than for green energy
projects.
6. Big business sees almost immediate benefits with a tax holiday for foreign dividends planned from 2009. Basically there is no tax reduction or exemption for the poorest, but for the rich who spend outside our economy.
7. There is no mortgage relief fund. The 3 month delay before repossession proceedings is good- but any homeowner who finds themselves long term unemployed, or under long term financial pressure, will still be at risk from repossession.

Last but by no means least-

8. There is no new money for Wales. Despite Welsh unemployment rates rising and house prices falling among the fastest in the UK there is no additional help earmarked specifically for Wales. We must instead restructure, if deemed necessary, under the unjust confines of the Barnet formula.

New Labour may have broken fiscal rules, and this was totally necessary under the circumstances. But as ever they are short of innovation. This is because Brown and Darling don't have a genuine social democratic bone to rub between them, let alone a socialist one.

When the first increase in income tax for the highest earners is postponed for at least another 3 years, and we are told that is re-distribution, it sums up the full extent of the neo-liberal crisis we are still in the midst of. New Labour seem to be stage managing the financial crisis by making overtures to the left- while making no meaningful ideological break with the past.

The Tories response to the current crisis meanwhile: Do Nothing.

Right- I'm off to read Adam Price's more immediate reactions. I suggest, if you have not already done so- to do the same....

Remember Warwick Lightfoot....?

I thought not. He was once an important and shadowy figure behind the scenes of the Tory government, and he acted as an adviser over the chancellors who brought us the last recession.

today he was voicinghis opinions over the current recession.

"The exchange rate has fallen sharply this year, by about 16% overall. In my judgement, that's been a good thing...

"But you do not want, even in a very deep recession, your exchange rate to go into some kind of free-fall because it completely undermines confidence in your economy."

The problem with Lightfoot pontificating on the economy was that it was the ethos of financial de-regulation, of which he is such a keen proponent, that brought not only the last recession, but the current one as well. So taking advice from Lightfoot about the economy is a bit like taking advice from Napoleon on the merits of invading Russia.

George Osborne however, desperate to be seen as having something to say, that does not remind people of Russian oligarchs and luxury yachts, is spouting the Lightfoot dogma. If, as one would expect, there is not a run on the pound, George Osborne will start to look very silly indeed.... a Tory meltdown starts here? Probably not- but expect George Osborne to take a polite demotion some time soon.

Glenrothes result

A few years back I had the pleasure of watching the England and Wales cricket team contest an Ashes cricket series which was eventually won by England (as they are usually called, somewhat erroneously if for convenience's sake).

At some point, maybe the third test, Australia started celebrating a drawn match. I was stunned, the win at all costs and win easily mentality of the Australians had been transformed. They had taken to celebrating results which would have once been seen as disappointing, or at least expected. Change was afoot. England (and Wales!) went on to win the Ashes.

It is this air of unmerited triumphalism that figures in today's headlines. As New Labour celebrate holding on to Glenrothes, Gordon Brown's neighbouring constituency. A new constituency created mostly from Central Fife this was, until the SNP resurgence, safe territory. Don't be fooled by the spin, the song, and the dance. If they are not to be reduced to a rump in Scotland, as the tories now are, New Labour have to hold some seats like Glenrothes. And the SNP increased their share of the vote by 3%, with a 4.6% swing form Labour to SNP. So while the SNP may be a bit disappointed at failing to get another scalp, this is no time for New Labour to bask in glory.

The headline -LABOUR CELEBRATE HOLDING SAFE SEAT- would have an all together different feel to it. One that points accurately to their current decline.

Calls For A Green Windfall Tax

Earlier this year, after much pressure from the left both inside and outside of the New Labour Party machine, it was announced that a windfall tax was under consideration.

Then- a short time later a windfall tax was categorically ruled out . Just one day after the French nuclear giant EDF announced it would buy the UK's creaky nuclear assets after all. I am not saying the two decisions are connected. But it is foolish to think that a Windfall Tax on profits would not necessitate a restructuring of the EDF offer. Business sense dictates that you will pay a great deal less for, or not bother buying at all, a business that's profits will be taxed, than you would for business which is entirely shareholder friendly.

Going back to at least 2006 there have been calls for a windfall tax based at least in part on Norwegian Oil Legacy programmes. Yet the debate in the UK did not explicitly mention leaving non carbon emitting energy out of the tax. Perhaps this was assumed. But it was not made clear.

A green tax of this nature would be a masterstroke. By ring-fencing carbon tax revenues the government could create a giant capital fund- the interest payments on this could presumably be directed at alleviating fuel poverty. It would also incentivise investment in green technology green energy projects. The energy companies could effectively claim tax back, and this would accordingly be directed at schemes that reduce emissions and create jobs.

That is one possibility. I'd be very interested in running it passed Hilary Benn and Ed Milliband. Given that this New Labour government has presided over one of the lowest tax regimes for the rich ever, while forcing the burden onto the working and middle classes, I won't be expecting a positive response. I'll let you know though. Interesting to note that this proposed tax would exempt nuclear fuel energy providers from paying a penny- while opening up the door for them to receive huge investment grants. Could this make it more attractive to this New Labour government? If we suppose the windfall tax was a consideration for EDF then perhaps it would.

The other possibility is my favoured one. It involves nationalising the energy companies, breaking up the US owned national grid, and encouraging community owned, and produced, green energy. Together with bringing the costs of installing solar energy panels right down- by installing them in every home, and insulating every home (with wool, a commodity we the Welsh are rich in).

This second proposal is the clearly the more radical, and in keeping with my understanding of Plaid's ethos. It is ideas like this supported throughout the grassroots that, as I said at conference this year 'makes Plaid like Plaid, not just New Labour with a red dragon on the sleeve.' However- radical proposals would only be attainable after a period of transition. So the former proposal of a green windfall tax could help facilitate the latter.

I'd be fascinated to hear your thoughts. Clearly something needs to be done. The governments current policies of going nuclear, building an expensive and inefficient Severn Barrage, and making optimistic targets for decades into the future, with no plans of how they will be reached, are failing the climate. Failing the climate is failing our future. To be honest it seems New Labour favour the soft selling of climate change, in order to avoid risking the wrath of big business. The Tories are committed ideologically to more of the same. I despair of English politics, but at least in Wales Plaid offer a green, and progressive, alternative.

election night

It is election night, just gone 11pm GMT- and in a few hours the world will know whether America will elect the most bold and exciting US presidential candidate, certainly in recent history- or John Mcain.

Already the democrats are poised for a legal struggle if the persistent rumours of electoral purging of African American voters and dodgy voting machines appear to have influenced the result. This, like in 2000 when bush stole the election, could prove significant.

I feel sick with nerves. My memory of a tearful November 2004 feels as fresh- when I remember realising how the world was stuck with Bush for another 4 years. So I am drinking wine here as calmly as I can manage, little sips.

I can't concentrate I am that nervous, so no more posting as of yet.

Needless to say- together with 99.9% of Plaid, am routing for Obama.