Monday, December 09, 2013
An 11% pay rise for MPs is indefensible
All the media this morning continues to run with the weekend story of an 11% pay rise for MPs. Quite rightly this headline has caused huge public outrage.
What we do not know yet is how this forms part of the full package. There is talk of changes to pension arrangements and expenses that will make the pay rise revenue neutral, in which case, why bother?
The politicians are caught in a classic dilemma. Almost unanimously, they know how bad this looks and are prepared to forego the rise, and yet as a consequence of the last expenses scandal they have handed over control of these issues to a group of bureaucrats who, seemingly do not have the same sensitive political antennae.
The point is that no matter how justified this rise is when comparisons are made with other professions, no matter what mitigating factors there are, and despite the previous freeze in MPs salaries this rise in salary cannot be justified when consideration is taken of what is happening out in the country.
By all means keep MPs out of decisions affecting their own remuneration, but please make sure that the body who is doing that job has some political nous and understand that their job has much a wider impact than just the 650 Members of Parliament who they work for.
What we do not know yet is how this forms part of the full package. There is talk of changes to pension arrangements and expenses that will make the pay rise revenue neutral, in which case, why bother?
The politicians are caught in a classic dilemma. Almost unanimously, they know how bad this looks and are prepared to forego the rise, and yet as a consequence of the last expenses scandal they have handed over control of these issues to a group of bureaucrats who, seemingly do not have the same sensitive political antennae.
The point is that no matter how justified this rise is when comparisons are made with other professions, no matter what mitigating factors there are, and despite the previous freeze in MPs salaries this rise in salary cannot be justified when consideration is taken of what is happening out in the country.
By all means keep MPs out of decisions affecting their own remuneration, but please make sure that the body who is doing that job has some political nous and understand that their job has much a wider impact than just the 650 Members of Parliament who they work for.
Sunday, December 08, 2013
Does Labour's record in Wales bode ill for the UK?
Toby Young had a particularly scathing comment piece in Friday's Telegraph in which he takes a long hard look at 14 years of Labour hegemony in Wales, and decides he does not like what he sees. More importantly for Ed Miliband he extrapolates Labour's disastrous record on health, the economy and education and suggests that it makes them unfit to form the next UK Government.
In many ways Mr. Young is advancing the UK Coalition government agenda but you have to admit, he does have a point:
The poor showing of Wales in the Pisa international league tables published earlier this week is a reminder of just what a mess Labour has made of the Welsh education system. In 2006, Welsh schoolchildren were ranked 30th in maths, 29th in reading and 22nd in science. In the latest tests, they fell to 43rd in maths, 41st in reading and 36th in science. Wales isn't simply the worst performer in the UK, it's well below the OECD average.
The blame for this pitiful state of affairs can be laid squarely at the feet of the Labour Party, which has been in charge of education in Wales since 1999. The education reforms that successive governments have introduced in other parts of the UK in that time have left Wales largely untouched. League tables were abolished in 2001 and not a single academy or free school has been set up. As the Economist points out in this damning analysis, parental choice in Wales is limited to deciding whether to send a child to a school where lessons are taught in English or Welsh. The country has indulged in what David Reynolds, an educationalist at the University of Southampton, describes as “producerism's last hurrah”. Hardly surprising, then, that 26 per cent of the Welsh population over 16 have no recognised qualifications, according to the 2011 census.
But education isn't the only devolved area that the Welsh National Assembly, which has been Labour-controlled since 2000, has messed up. The Welsh health system is, incredibly, even worse than the Welsh education system. As the Prime Minister pointed out in the House of Commons earlier this year, the Welsh NHS hasn't met a cancer target since 2008 or an A&E target since 2009. (FactCheck confirmed the first of these claims here.) The picture is no better when it comes to waiting lists. Between March and September of this year, the number of patients waiting more than nine months for treatment in Wales more than doubled, increasing from 5,414 to 11,672. The Welsh Ambulance Service has failed to hit its target of responding to 65 per cent of the most urgent calls within eight minutes for the past 16 months.
On the economy too, Wales is lagging behind the rest of the UK. His conclusion is damning:
So there you have it. Thanks to 13 years of Labour misrule, Wales is the sick man of Europe – quite literally. According to the 2011 census, roughly a quarter of the Welsh population claim to have a "long term health problem". Its education system is a basket case, its health service is a death trap and its economy is in the toilet.
If this is the future you want for the rest of the UK after 2015, vote Labour.
First Minister, Carwyn Jones may be the most senior elected Labour figure in the UK, but that position also carries a huge potential problem for Ed Miliband. Labour's electability in 2015 could be judged by many people on what happens in Wales.
If the Welsh Government continues to fail in key areas such as health, education and the economy then many might conclude that Labour will have the same negative impact in Number 10.
In many ways Mr. Young is advancing the UK Coalition government agenda but you have to admit, he does have a point:
The poor showing of Wales in the Pisa international league tables published earlier this week is a reminder of just what a mess Labour has made of the Welsh education system. In 2006, Welsh schoolchildren were ranked 30th in maths, 29th in reading and 22nd in science. In the latest tests, they fell to 43rd in maths, 41st in reading and 36th in science. Wales isn't simply the worst performer in the UK, it's well below the OECD average.
The blame for this pitiful state of affairs can be laid squarely at the feet of the Labour Party, which has been in charge of education in Wales since 1999. The education reforms that successive governments have introduced in other parts of the UK in that time have left Wales largely untouched. League tables were abolished in 2001 and not a single academy or free school has been set up. As the Economist points out in this damning analysis, parental choice in Wales is limited to deciding whether to send a child to a school where lessons are taught in English or Welsh. The country has indulged in what David Reynolds, an educationalist at the University of Southampton, describes as “producerism's last hurrah”. Hardly surprising, then, that 26 per cent of the Welsh population over 16 have no recognised qualifications, according to the 2011 census.
But education isn't the only devolved area that the Welsh National Assembly, which has been Labour-controlled since 2000, has messed up. The Welsh health system is, incredibly, even worse than the Welsh education system. As the Prime Minister pointed out in the House of Commons earlier this year, the Welsh NHS hasn't met a cancer target since 2008 or an A&E target since 2009. (FactCheck confirmed the first of these claims here.) The picture is no better when it comes to waiting lists. Between March and September of this year, the number of patients waiting more than nine months for treatment in Wales more than doubled, increasing from 5,414 to 11,672. The Welsh Ambulance Service has failed to hit its target of responding to 65 per cent of the most urgent calls within eight minutes for the past 16 months.
On the economy too, Wales is lagging behind the rest of the UK. His conclusion is damning:
So there you have it. Thanks to 13 years of Labour misrule, Wales is the sick man of Europe – quite literally. According to the 2011 census, roughly a quarter of the Welsh population claim to have a "long term health problem". Its education system is a basket case, its health service is a death trap and its economy is in the toilet.
If this is the future you want for the rest of the UK after 2015, vote Labour.
First Minister, Carwyn Jones may be the most senior elected Labour figure in the UK, but that position also carries a huge potential problem for Ed Miliband. Labour's electability in 2015 could be judged by many people on what happens in Wales.
If the Welsh Government continues to fail in key areas such as health, education and the economy then many might conclude that Labour will have the same negative impact in Number 10.
Saturday, December 07, 2013
Hitting them where it hurts?
The Times reports that a new code of conduct for the House of Lords is proposing to extend the sanctions that are available to use against those peers who misbehave.
The paper says that at the moment, the chamber can suspend peers, but for no longer than the duration of the current parliament. It can also demand written or oral apologies for smaller demeanours:
The new rules would ban peers who have misbehaved from claiming any money from the House of Lords.
In addition, such peers would be forbidden use of amenities within Parliament, including IT and library facilities, car parking, meeting rooms, desk space and stationery. They would also forgo dining and banqueting rights.
Although a suspension can only be enforced for a limited period, the sanctions could be applied for any period of time. They could be used to deter disgraced peers from attending the Lords.
In contrast to the Lords rules, MPs are automatically disqualified from the Commons if they are jailed for more than a year.
Take away their dining rights! That should do it. If ever there was a sign of an archaic institution that needs reforming this is it.
The paper says that at the moment, the chamber can suspend peers, but for no longer than the duration of the current parliament. It can also demand written or oral apologies for smaller demeanours:
The new rules would ban peers who have misbehaved from claiming any money from the House of Lords.
In addition, such peers would be forbidden use of amenities within Parliament, including IT and library facilities, car parking, meeting rooms, desk space and stationery. They would also forgo dining and banqueting rights.
Although a suspension can only be enforced for a limited period, the sanctions could be applied for any period of time. They could be used to deter disgraced peers from attending the Lords.
In contrast to the Lords rules, MPs are automatically disqualified from the Commons if they are jailed for more than a year.
Take away their dining rights! That should do it. If ever there was a sign of an archaic institution that needs reforming this is it.
Friday, December 06, 2013
Rest in peace Nelson Mandela
"During my lifetime I have dedicated myself to this struggle of the African people. I have fought against white domination, and I have fought against black domination. I have cherished the ideal of a democratic and free society in which all persons live together in harmony and with equal opportunities. It is an ideal which I hope to live for and to achieve. But if needs be, it is an ideal for which I am prepared to die." Nelson Mandela on trial for his life at the Rivonia trial, (Pretoria Supreme Court, April 20, 1964)
The father of a nation, a giant amongst men. We will not see his like again.
The father of a nation, a giant amongst men. We will not see his like again.
Thursday, December 05, 2013
Good advice on coalitions that was never given
The evidence given by former First Minister, Rhodri Morgan to a House of Lords committee investigating coalition governments is worth reading if only to gauge the mood within the Labour Party immediately after the 2010 General Election and the problems they had in taking negotiations with the Liberal Democrats seriously.
Rhodri Morgan told the committee that it was “odd” that Labour did not use his experience when the party was trying to form a coalition to stay in power after the 2010 election. He said that the team working to prevent a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition Government in the days after the 2010 vote could have called upon the advice of former first ministers of Wales and Scotland:
Sitting alongside former Plaid Cymru Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones, who was in post during the 2007-2011 Labour-Plaid coalition, Mr Morgan said: “I did think that in 2010 if Labour had been serious about trying to outwit the idea of a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition they should have called in [former Scottish Labour First Minister Jack McConnell] and myself and possibly [ex-Scottish Labour First Minister] Henry McLeish as well as three wise Celts to give them the benefit of our experience.”
Mr Morgan said he thought it was “odd” that his experience was not put to use.
He said: ““I certainly learned a great deal from Bertie Ahern, the Irish prime minister, and [then-New Zealand prime minister] Helen Clark.”
When asked what advice he would give, he said: “I would have told Gordon Brown that he, sadly, had to go and that another Labour leader should be asked to take over.”
In his written evidence to the peers, Mr Morgan advised party leaders to stay out of direct coalition negotiations.
He said: “My view is that party leaders should not be involved because the ‘hard stuff’, the brinkmanship bits and bobs in the negotiation of an agreement may leave behind bad blood which could vitiate the process of government, where the FM/PM to DFM/DPM relationship depends on the ability to rub along together. Negotiation should be carried out by a key Minister or equivalent, with the personal qualities of having touchy-feely diplomatic skills. Alpha Males need not apply!”
He added: “My view is that the negotiating parties should spend as much time as possible drawing up a Green Book or Bible, stating exactly what the putative coalition is going to do, if confirmed in office. An extra week of negotiations may well lead to an extra year of stable coalition government.”
The comment about Alpha-Males is especially illuminating as it seems that Labour's negotiating team in 2010 was dominated by this particular specimen. Perhaps a lesson for Labour in 2015.
Rhodri Morgan told the committee that it was “odd” that Labour did not use his experience when the party was trying to form a coalition to stay in power after the 2010 election. He said that the team working to prevent a Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition Government in the days after the 2010 vote could have called upon the advice of former first ministers of Wales and Scotland:
Sitting alongside former Plaid Cymru Deputy First Minister Ieuan Wyn Jones, who was in post during the 2007-2011 Labour-Plaid coalition, Mr Morgan said: “I did think that in 2010 if Labour had been serious about trying to outwit the idea of a Conservative-Lib Dem coalition they should have called in [former Scottish Labour First Minister Jack McConnell] and myself and possibly [ex-Scottish Labour First Minister] Henry McLeish as well as three wise Celts to give them the benefit of our experience.”
Mr Morgan said he thought it was “odd” that his experience was not put to use.
He said: ““I certainly learned a great deal from Bertie Ahern, the Irish prime minister, and [then-New Zealand prime minister] Helen Clark.”
When asked what advice he would give, he said: “I would have told Gordon Brown that he, sadly, had to go and that another Labour leader should be asked to take over.”
In his written evidence to the peers, Mr Morgan advised party leaders to stay out of direct coalition negotiations.
He said: “My view is that party leaders should not be involved because the ‘hard stuff’, the brinkmanship bits and bobs in the negotiation of an agreement may leave behind bad blood which could vitiate the process of government, where the FM/PM to DFM/DPM relationship depends on the ability to rub along together. Negotiation should be carried out by a key Minister or equivalent, with the personal qualities of having touchy-feely diplomatic skills. Alpha Males need not apply!”
He added: “My view is that the negotiating parties should spend as much time as possible drawing up a Green Book or Bible, stating exactly what the putative coalition is going to do, if confirmed in office. An extra week of negotiations may well lead to an extra year of stable coalition government.”
The comment about Alpha-Males is especially illuminating as it seems that Labour's negotiating team in 2010 was dominated by this particular specimen. Perhaps a lesson for Labour in 2015.
Wednesday, December 04, 2013
Amazon, drones and an Owl service
The South Wales Evening Post is very exercised by the proposal by Amazon to one day use unmanned drones called Octocopters out of their Jersey Marine fulfilment centre to deliver goods to customers within 30 minutes of them being ordered. I had to check the date, but no, it is not April 1st.
The company's Chief Executive Jeff Bezos claims the Octocopters could deliver packages weighing up to 2.3kg, but that it could be five years before we start seeing them hovering above Swansea or Neath rooftops for example:
"I know this looks like science fiction, but it's not," Mr Bezos told CBS television's 60 Minutes programme.
"We can do half-hour delivery... and we can carry objects, we think, up to five pounds (2.3kg), which covers 86 per cent of the items that we deliver."
The service will be called Prime Air and will get around that annoying thing about online shopping - having to wait a day at least before receiving what you have ordered.
Amazon has even posted a video on its website showing a drone picking up a package from one of its warehouses and delivering it to the doorstep of a customer's house.
The response from Amazon's rivals has been admirable and robust. Waterstones have announced that they are to launch their own alternative service. Called the Ornithological Waterstones Landing Service, they say it is a brand new way to receive your favourite books:
O.W.L.S. consists of a fleet of specially trained owls that, either working individually or as an adorable team, will be able to deliver your package within thirty minutes of you placing your order.
Putting O.W.L.S. into commercial use will take a number of years as it takes ages to train owls to do anything and we only just thought of it this morning.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. Isn’t this just what they did in Harry Potter?
A: Yes, this is exactly what they did in Harry Potter. You’re asking that as if this is a bad thing.
Q: Won’t this be really expensive?
A: No, it’ll only cost you £2.75 per parcel. (Price subject to inflation between now and the as yet undisclosed point in the future when we will launch the service.)
Have they told J.K. Rowling?
The company's Chief Executive Jeff Bezos claims the Octocopters could deliver packages weighing up to 2.3kg, but that it could be five years before we start seeing them hovering above Swansea or Neath rooftops for example:
"I know this looks like science fiction, but it's not," Mr Bezos told CBS television's 60 Minutes programme.
"We can do half-hour delivery... and we can carry objects, we think, up to five pounds (2.3kg), which covers 86 per cent of the items that we deliver."
The service will be called Prime Air and will get around that annoying thing about online shopping - having to wait a day at least before receiving what you have ordered.
Amazon has even posted a video on its website showing a drone picking up a package from one of its warehouses and delivering it to the doorstep of a customer's house.
The response from Amazon's rivals has been admirable and robust. Waterstones have announced that they are to launch their own alternative service. Called the Ornithological Waterstones Landing Service, they say it is a brand new way to receive your favourite books:
O.W.L.S. consists of a fleet of specially trained owls that, either working individually or as an adorable team, will be able to deliver your package within thirty minutes of you placing your order.
Putting O.W.L.S. into commercial use will take a number of years as it takes ages to train owls to do anything and we only just thought of it this morning.
Frequently Asked Questions
Q. Isn’t this just what they did in Harry Potter?
A: Yes, this is exactly what they did in Harry Potter. You’re asking that as if this is a bad thing.
Q: Won’t this be really expensive?
A: No, it’ll only cost you £2.75 per parcel. (Price subject to inflation between now and the as yet undisclosed point in the future when we will launch the service.)
Have they told J.K. Rowling?
Tuesday, December 03, 2013
A serious misstep on homeless
I have an article on the Wales Eye website on homelessness and the Welsh Governmnt's proposal to scrap the priority need category for ex-prisoners.
A taxing view to consider
Social media has many uses, but one I had not considered before is to help track down evaders.
According to this website, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs Inspectors are increasingly turning to Google Street View as a monitoring tool to catch suspected tax evaders.
UHY Hacker Young, which is one of the top 20 accounting firms have said, that based on recent cases, HMRC are using Google to try to prove people have undeclared income:UHY Hacker Young:
Street View provides a kerbside view of homes and businesses, giving inspectors a quick way to assess a person’s lifestyle and see whether it matches declared income.
In one case, the firm revealed Street View was being used to provide clues as to whether a family was using a private school, thanks to the practice of advertising school fêtes on signs in parents’ gardens.
Roy Maugham, UHY Hacker Young tax partner, said: “HMRC believe there’s a big discrepancy between what people are earning and what they are declaring, which is driving a massive push to recoup some of the loss.
“They are using every possible bit of information that the internet is making available, and Google Street View is being seized on as a quick and cheap alternative to visiting someone’s home,” he said.
Officials are also looking for home improvements or expensive cars parked in the driveway as clues to earning levels.
Ingenius or just downright disturbing?
According to this website, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs Inspectors are increasingly turning to Google Street View as a monitoring tool to catch suspected tax evaders.
UHY Hacker Young, which is one of the top 20 accounting firms have said, that based on recent cases, HMRC are using Google to try to prove people have undeclared income:UHY Hacker Young:
Street View provides a kerbside view of homes and businesses, giving inspectors a quick way to assess a person’s lifestyle and see whether it matches declared income.
In one case, the firm revealed Street View was being used to provide clues as to whether a family was using a private school, thanks to the practice of advertising school fêtes on signs in parents’ gardens.
Roy Maugham, UHY Hacker Young tax partner, said: “HMRC believe there’s a big discrepancy between what people are earning and what they are declaring, which is driving a massive push to recoup some of the loss.
“They are using every possible bit of information that the internet is making available, and Google Street View is being seized on as a quick and cheap alternative to visiting someone’s home,” he said.
Officials are also looking for home improvements or expensive cars parked in the driveway as clues to earning levels.
Ingenius or just downright disturbing?
Monday, December 02, 2013
Spitting in the wind
There is no doubt in my view that at some stage we will have to address the issue of whether there are enough Assembly Members to properly run a legislature.
This is not about the workload of individual AMs. It is about whether there is enough time in the working week for all the committees and Plenary to do justice to the policy, scrutiny and law-making job they have been given.
To do it properly there needs to be more Plenary meetings and more committee meetings, but unless we have more Assembly Members then these bodies cannot be populated, simply because members are already engaged on other committees.
However, this is not the time to press it, simply because there is no consensus for such a change and, in times of economic hardship, when we should be focussing on cost of living issues instead, our constant obsession with the size of the Assembly and its powers looks self-serving.
In the first instance, I direct this advice at the Cardiff North AM, Julie Morgan, who is reported in the Western Mail this morning as raising precisely these issues. She has told the paper that a shortage of AMs mean that backbenchers are more “controlled” by whips due to the delicate balance of support in the Senedd. She has pointed to the fact that half of Labour’s 30 AMs have some sort of role in governance, either as a Minister, Presiding Officer or Chief Whip:
“I think we need more government backbenchers. Part of the role of the backbenchers is to criticise the government. It’s an accepted role of the backbench role that you do praise them and try and push your policies and that sort of thing.”
She added: “It would be commonly accepted in Westminster that a government minister would be given a hard time - or questioned very acutely in a very challenging way - by people from his or her own side. That would be completely accepted as part of the culture. But because it’s so small here, it’s quite difficult to do that. I think it makes it more tribal really.”
Mrs Morgan also called for an overhaul of the committee structure, saying a decision by the Labour Chief Whip Janice Gregory to replace her and two other members of the Children and Young People’s Committee in April at very short notice, allegedly over a Plaid Cymru proposal to write the issue of writing a smacking ban into the Social Services Bill, was an example of something that could not happen in Westminster.
Actually, none of these are good reasons to increase the number of Assembly Members. The fact that half the Labour Group are on the Government payroll is their choice. It has not always been thus. If Julie Morgan has a problem with that then the person to address her complaint to is the First Minister.
There is nothing to stop Labour backbenchers engaging in constructive scrutiny or holding the executive to account, indeed one or two of them do so rather effectively. The problem is when it comes to legislation they meekly accept the whip on issues they have felt very strongly about at stage one.
The fact is that even with 80 members the same culture would prevail. That is because Welsh politics is tribal by its nature and it is still easier to control a small group of 30 to 40, squashed into one building than it is one of 250 to 350 spread out amongst several office blocks around Westminster.
There is no committee structure that would prevent Labour whips acting in the way they did on the Children and Young People's Committee. Even in Westminster, whips make sure that troublemakers do not get on to Bill Committees.
The fact is that when we start to look closely at this call for more members, it is not about the size of the Assembly at all. It is about the control-freakery of the Welsh Labour Party. It is a culture Julie Morgan and others have been part of all their political lives. Thank goodness some are now starting to question it, even if only by proxy.
This is not about the workload of individual AMs. It is about whether there is enough time in the working week for all the committees and Plenary to do justice to the policy, scrutiny and law-making job they have been given.
To do it properly there needs to be more Plenary meetings and more committee meetings, but unless we have more Assembly Members then these bodies cannot be populated, simply because members are already engaged on other committees.
However, this is not the time to press it, simply because there is no consensus for such a change and, in times of economic hardship, when we should be focussing on cost of living issues instead, our constant obsession with the size of the Assembly and its powers looks self-serving.
In the first instance, I direct this advice at the Cardiff North AM, Julie Morgan, who is reported in the Western Mail this morning as raising precisely these issues. She has told the paper that a shortage of AMs mean that backbenchers are more “controlled” by whips due to the delicate balance of support in the Senedd. She has pointed to the fact that half of Labour’s 30 AMs have some sort of role in governance, either as a Minister, Presiding Officer or Chief Whip:
“I think we need more government backbenchers. Part of the role of the backbenchers is to criticise the government. It’s an accepted role of the backbench role that you do praise them and try and push your policies and that sort of thing.”
She added: “It would be commonly accepted in Westminster that a government minister would be given a hard time - or questioned very acutely in a very challenging way - by people from his or her own side. That would be completely accepted as part of the culture. But because it’s so small here, it’s quite difficult to do that. I think it makes it more tribal really.”
Mrs Morgan also called for an overhaul of the committee structure, saying a decision by the Labour Chief Whip Janice Gregory to replace her and two other members of the Children and Young People’s Committee in April at very short notice, allegedly over a Plaid Cymru proposal to write the issue of writing a smacking ban into the Social Services Bill, was an example of something that could not happen in Westminster.
Actually, none of these are good reasons to increase the number of Assembly Members. The fact that half the Labour Group are on the Government payroll is their choice. It has not always been thus. If Julie Morgan has a problem with that then the person to address her complaint to is the First Minister.
There is nothing to stop Labour backbenchers engaging in constructive scrutiny or holding the executive to account, indeed one or two of them do so rather effectively. The problem is when it comes to legislation they meekly accept the whip on issues they have felt very strongly about at stage one.
The fact is that even with 80 members the same culture would prevail. That is because Welsh politics is tribal by its nature and it is still easier to control a small group of 30 to 40, squashed into one building than it is one of 250 to 350 spread out amongst several office blocks around Westminster.
There is no committee structure that would prevent Labour whips acting in the way they did on the Children and Young People's Committee. Even in Westminster, whips make sure that troublemakers do not get on to Bill Committees.
The fact is that when we start to look closely at this call for more members, it is not about the size of the Assembly at all. It is about the control-freakery of the Welsh Labour Party. It is a culture Julie Morgan and others have been part of all their political lives. Thank goodness some are now starting to question it, even if only by proxy.
Sunday, December 01, 2013
Filming Dr Who episodes in the Senedd
I don't often look at the disclosure log on the Welsh Assembly website, detailing the responses to Freedom of Information requests. It makes a fascinating read, not just for answers but for some of the queries too.
As we have just celebrated the 50th anniversary of Dr. Who I particularly focused on the question as to how much the Welsh tax payer received as a result of renting out the Senedd for filming Dr Who episodes? The answer it seems is not a great deal.
The response is that the Assembly is keen for the Senedd to be used as widely as possible in ways that might benefit Wales and the Assembly. It therefore does not request fees from broadcasters for filming carried out on the estate, unless the filming would result in additional costs being incurred by the Assembly.
They add that the Assembly’s view in this respect has been that it is beneficial to encourage TV coverage: Accordingly we did not receive a fee or income for the filming of Dr Who.
We do recharge any additional operating costs incurred as a result of any filming and recharged the following costs to the BBC as follows:
08 January 2011 £277.50 recharged (security overtime)
19 October 2012 £4,897.16 recharged (£1,580.97 security overtime, £2,500.00
South Wales Police costs)
Given the publicity and benefits that Dr. Who brings to Wales it seems that this policy of doing all we can to assist filming is paying off.
As we have just celebrated the 50th anniversary of Dr. Who I particularly focused on the question as to how much the Welsh tax payer received as a result of renting out the Senedd for filming Dr Who episodes? The answer it seems is not a great deal.
The response is that the Assembly is keen for the Senedd to be used as widely as possible in ways that might benefit Wales and the Assembly. It therefore does not request fees from broadcasters for filming carried out on the estate, unless the filming would result in additional costs being incurred by the Assembly.
They add that the Assembly’s view in this respect has been that it is beneficial to encourage TV coverage: Accordingly we did not receive a fee or income for the filming of Dr Who.
We do recharge any additional operating costs incurred as a result of any filming and recharged the following costs to the BBC as follows:
08 January 2011 £277.50 recharged (security overtime)
19 October 2012 £4,897.16 recharged (£1,580.97 security overtime, £2,500.00
South Wales Police costs)
Saturday, November 30, 2013
UK Government's bovine TB policy in disarray again
The UK Government's already disastrous policy of tackling bovine TB by randomly shooting badgers has become farcical after Natural England pulled the plug in Gloucestershire three weeks before schedule after it became clear even a reduced kill target would not be met.
The Telegraph says that the pilot scheme was extended by eight weeks after marksmen exterminated only around 30% of the local badger population, well short of their 70% target. Natural England gave up the ghost after it became clear that the cull was set to miss even the revised level of 58%. An extension to a trial cull in Somerset also failed to meet its target.
Despite this and the fact that they have no way of knowing whether the badgers that have been killed carried the disease or not the Government wants to press ahead with the policy. Talk about shoot first and ask questions later. This is a spaghetti western approach to disease-control.
The paper quotes Brian May, who quite rightly has asked for a re-think: “Now that the failure of this whole shameful badger cull shambles can be seen so clearly seen, in spite of many moves of the goalposts, it must be time to abandon the concept, and get on with the only strategy which can ultimately succeed in eradication of bovine TB - vaccination of badgers and other wildlife, and prioritisation of work to license the vaccine for cattle. The whole country will get behind this. David Cameron only needs to press the button.”
Surely, this is an occasion when the Deputy Prime Minister's should intervene so as to bring a stop to this madness.
The Telegraph says that the pilot scheme was extended by eight weeks after marksmen exterminated only around 30% of the local badger population, well short of their 70% target. Natural England gave up the ghost after it became clear that the cull was set to miss even the revised level of 58%. An extension to a trial cull in Somerset also failed to meet its target.
Despite this and the fact that they have no way of knowing whether the badgers that have been killed carried the disease or not the Government wants to press ahead with the policy. Talk about shoot first and ask questions later. This is a spaghetti western approach to disease-control.
The paper quotes Brian May, who quite rightly has asked for a re-think: “Now that the failure of this whole shameful badger cull shambles can be seen so clearly seen, in spite of many moves of the goalposts, it must be time to abandon the concept, and get on with the only strategy which can ultimately succeed in eradication of bovine TB - vaccination of badgers and other wildlife, and prioritisation of work to license the vaccine for cattle. The whole country will get behind this. David Cameron only needs to press the button.”
Surely, this is an occasion when the Deputy Prime Minister's should intervene so as to bring a stop to this madness.
