Categories
current affairs

Brighton O-K or O-no?

A mockup of the Brighton O as provided by their PR agency
A mockup of the Brighton O as provided by their PR agency

One of the joys and challenges of representing Regency ward is the number of major projects proposed for the area from redevelopment of the Brighton Centre to building on the site of the old Royal Alex Children’s Hospital and what do with the site of the West Pier.

The latest proposal is a temporary observation wheel known as the “Brighton O” which unusually is a spokeless design. If built the wheel would apparently move to another city once construction of the i360 tower was to commence (another classic Regency ward project saga).

I’m getting very mixed views from residents and businesses on the Brighton O. Many think the wheel would be superb for rejuvenating a part of the seafront which is in need of attention and greater footfall. Others believe it will be excessively disruptive to an already crowded area affecting the sailing club, businesses and residents of buildings it will overshadow.

The case for the O is at www.brightono.com and the case against is at www.brightonno.org.uk

I’d very much like to hear more views on this. Do you think the project will make a positive contribution to the city with an unusual design or is it an invitation for people to look in resident’s bedroom windows? Let me know.

If you’d like to register your views with the planning committee, send your views to Chris.A.Wright@brighton-hove.gov.uk

Categories
current affairs

Back from my Halloween Horror

On the Saturday of Halloween I had an unexpected tour of the Royal Sussex County’s Accident & Emergency department. Not that there is an ideal time, but Halloween night is not a good time to be in A&E, it was busy! My Halloween horror was a nasty concussion and back injury after a garage door came down on my head at speed. It hurt. Through my blurry vision I could see zombie face-painted people in the hospital waiting room, most surreal.

Two weeks of doctor enforced rest and I’m now getting back up to speed. I’m not 100% better, but good enough to get back into the blogosphere. I’ll be relying on my osteopath to get me over the last of the symptoms.

So I’m sorry to disappoint readers like Dan Wilson that I wasn’t able to cover the CityClean strikes, but I was laid up. The strikes are suspended and we’re still awaiting full resolution of the detailed issues at hand. I know Green colleagues were working hard on supporting the unions, but I’m not up to speed on the details.

Meanwhile the selection for the new Tory candidate for Brighton Pavilion continues, with Brighton Politics Blogger stirring up an unprecedented number of Tory comments to his/her blog. Good luck to the candidates, selections are a nerve wracking process. I must flag one issue I have with this process which is still being promoted as an ‘open primary’ when in fact it is an ‘open caucus’. The difference? With a primary anyone in the constituency can register to vote resulting in a larger turnout and so greater representation. A caucus is a meeting where those attending the meeting can vote after presentations from the candidates – it’s a much smaller scale affair and so less inclusive. Regardless, I think open primaries are gimmick which don’t solve fundamental issues with politics.

Attacking other parties for not having selected their candidates in that way is pretty weak in my view. How about having a go at policy differences?!

One of the Tory hopefuls, Scott Digby, has a pop at Greens with the rather tired ‘watermelon’ joke which local Tories having been chortling about for rather too long. But Digby rather misses the point, the joke is that we’re supposed to be ‘Communists’ as Tory cabinet member Cllr Ayas Fallon-Khan likes to allege, not Labour! We couldn’t be more different than Labour, disagreeing on: ID cards, privatisation, education, taxation, wars in Iraq & Afghanistan… I could go on!

Categories
current affairs

Less alcohol than ever at Sainsbury’s, Western Road? I don’t think so

Half-price wine offer as you walk into Sainsbury's Western Road
Half-price wine offer as you walk into Sainsbury's Western Road - is this responsible?

A while ago I spoke on behalf of residents to a licensing panel considering an application from Sainsbury’s. The supermarket, a very short way from Waitrose, wanted to double its size and so needed to apply for a new license to sell alchohol.

Residents and I were concerned given that the area already has an abundance of places from which alcohol can be bought. Residents suffer from noise, anti-social behaviour, violence and more. It has got significantly worse since the new 2003 Licensing Act came into force.

However despite residents’ objections and my strenuous arguments that the license should be strictly curtailed if approved at all, it was granted. The Sainsbury’s lies right on the border of the ‘Cumulative Impact Area’ for licensing but that made no difference. Sainsbury’s barrister successfully prevented me from debating the low prices at which the supermarket sells alcohol. He also claimed that overall the new twice as big shop would have less space devoted to alcohol sales than previously.

Sadly the shop was boarded up and under expansion then so I couldn’t do ‘before and after’ shots. But I went in recently to take a look and there seemed to me to be a very significant space devoted to alcohol – see all the pictures on Flickr. The first shelf to greet you on entering the store was promoting half price bottles of wine.

In August this year, while I was on holiday, Sainsbury’s put in to extend the hours of alcohol sales to almost 24 hours. Unfortunately nobody objected to this other than the Council’s Trading Standards*. This is not surprising because beyond a small piece of paper in the window, there is NO requirement to notify people living near premises applying for a license or wishing to vary an existing one. Trading Standards’ concern related to underage drinking, but once a “Challenge 21” scheme was agreed to by Sainsbury’s (a fairly standard condition) the objection was withdrawn and the licensing panel meeting was cancelled.

However the online licensing register still shows the extended license as not having been granted because checks are outstanding. I’m trying to find out what that means but it seems likely that very soon we are going to have a virtually 24hr off-license selling at supermarket prices. The licensing law is completely failing residents and this city – we seem unable to stop the spread of cheap booze nor the harm it is causing people directly or indirectly. When will our MPs step up to push the change my constituents are crying out for?

Find out more:
Sadly I can’t link directly to licenses, but at least there is now a web-based register. Enter the reference codes below into the search at http://www.brighton-hove.gov.uk/index.cfm?request=c1204374

Application to open bigger store: 1445/3/2009/00059/LAPREN (minutes of that panel)
Application to extend hours: 1445/3/2009/01692/LAPREV (papers for cancelled panel)

* As a councillor I can only object to an application if either I personally live or have a business close to the premises in question, or a constituent close by asks me to speak on their behalf. Otherwise I am unable to participate or speak to a licensing panel meeting. This is extremely frustrating.

UPDATE: I have now received confirmation from council officers that the license indeed has been granted to allow sale of alcohol from 6am until midnight and late night refreshment (i.e. hot food) from 23 until midnight. I also clarified the text above to make it clear it won’t be open a full 24hrs a day as the license currently stands. (13/11/09)

Categories
current affairs

Wrong-headed Tory CEO-Mayor policy

I was astounded and appalled by Monday’s announcement from the Conservatives that they planned to merge council chief executives with directly elected Mayors.
The Guardian:
Twelve cities across the country would hold referendums to get rid of their council chief executives and hand over the powers to an “executive mayor”, who would take over the role of hiring and firing staff, determining council operations, and directing spending, as well as offering political leadership.
Conflating the two posts would help address public concern about the pay of local authority bosses, said Caroline Spelman, the shadow communities secretary.
Firstly, I agree that many chief executives (in local authorities and private companies) are vastly overpaid compared to their hard working staff. But cutting up to 12 CEO salaries and replacing them with new elections for mayors is hardly going to be saving money. It’s a populist measure because most people won’t think of the cost of the elections when hearing the proposal — they’ll just keep in mind losing another expensive bureaucrat.
But what worries much more is that this announcement shows that the Conservatives are ready to abuse the position of the civil service as much as Labour have. Peter Oborne and others have been scathing of how a trend to politicise and misuse the civil service in the political trenches has gone from occasional in the Thatcher years to out of control in the Blair years.
No matter who is in charge politically, a paid head of the civil service is needed to manage the permanent staff of government who remain whatever changes elections bring. YES local government desperately needs serious reform… but going back on hundreds of years of political evolution by merging officer and politician is wrong-headed, fixes nothing and is just cheap populism.
This is a bad policy and I’m disappointed that a major political party could actually announce something so wrongheaded. It doesn’t bode well for the level of political debate ahead…

I was astounded and appalled by Monday’s announcement from the Conservatives that they planned to merge council chief executives with directly elected Mayors.

The Guardian:

Twelve cities across the country would hold referendums to get rid of their council chief executives and hand over the powers to an “executive mayor”, who would take over the role of hiring and firing staff, determining council operations, and directing spending, as well as offering political leadership.

Conflating the two posts would help address public concern about the pay of local authority bosses, said Caroline Spelman, the shadow communities secretary.

(Also see reports in LGCPlus and Planning Resource)

Firstly, I agree that many chief executives (in local authorities and private companies) are vastly overpaid compared to their hard working staff. But cutting up to 12 CEO salaries and replacing them with new elections for mayors is hardly going to be saving money. It’s a populist measure because most people won’t think of the cost of the elections when hearing the proposal — they’ll just keep in mind losing another expensive bureaucrat.

But what worries much more is that this announcement shows that the Conservatives are ready to abuse the position of the civil service as much as Labour have. Peter Oborne and others have been scathing of how a trend to politicise and misuse the civil service in the political trenches has gone from occasional in the Thatcher years to out of control in the Blair years.

No matter who is in charge politically, a paid head of the civil service is needed to manage the permanent staff of government who remain whatever changes elections bring. YES local government desperately needs serious reform… but going back on hundreds of years of political evolution by merging officer and politician is wrong-headed, fixes nothing and is just cheap populism.

This is a bad policy and I’m disappointed that a major political party could actually announce something so wrongheaded. It doesn’t bode well for the level of political debate ahead…

Categories
current affairs

More evidence that private treatment centres are expensive

Further to my earlier mega-post on health privatisation which focussed primarily on the local Sussex Orthopaedic Treatment Centre, some more news has emerged about the true cost of these privately run NHS centres:

  • The Times reports on a study of hip operations sent to a treatment centre in Weston-super-Mare where two-thirds of operations showed poor surgical technique and 3 years since operation a whopping 18% had undergone or were waiting for a revision operation. The NHS-wide rate for such follow-up procedures is 0.9%. These revision operations are expensive, so on top of the treatment centres being more expensive per procedure, they are also costing taxpayers more due to the remedial work needed.
  • The Times also has a comment piece by Michael Bell, President of the British Orthopaedic Association, which is critical on the lack of data to monitor quality and the disjointed nature of treatment centre operations.

Using the private sector to provide frontline NHS services not only runs contrary to the principle of public service, but again and again is shown to provide worse value and worse quality. Neither Tories nor Labour seem able to see beyond their false sacred cow of private = efficient.

Of course private companies do provide value and quality, look at the Apple iPod, but it’s a completely different market and set of pressures to providing public services. Perhaps if we stopped this trend of calling citizens ‘customers’ we could reset the mindset which seems to want to turn everything into a business.

Categories
current affairs

Huge consultant fees encourage seafront rent hikes

Just published this press release, you can read more of the backstory in my earlier post.

SHOCK AT HUGE FEES EARNED BY COUNCIL’S SEAFRONT RENT RISE CONSULTANT

A Freedom of Information request submitted by Green City Cllr Jason Kitcat has revealed details of Brighton & Hove City Council’s contract with a firm of chartered surveyors hired to negotiate seafront rent rates.

The documents released show that aside from charging a monthly retainer, expenses and a ‘per unit’ fee, HLL Humberts Leisure receives a commission of 30 per cent of any rent increase they negotiate.*

The news comes after months of protests by seafront traders about rent increases of up to 300 per cent. **

Jason, who represents Regency Ward which includes the seafront from the Peace Statue to the Palace Pier, said:

“It’s no wonder the Council is pressuring seafront traders into massive rent increases when the consultant leading the process is going to be earning 30 per cent of the rises plus expenses.

“This is exactly the wrong approach to be taking with our unique, independent seafront businesses – and undermines Tory claims to support small business.

“Bad weather over the last few summers and the ongoing recession means life is already hard for many of the city’s seafront traders, but rather than bolster them through difficult times, the Tories seem determined to squeeze out every last drop.

“If we have empty arches along the seafront next year the Tory administration will be to blame.

“The fee structure the Council has agreed to with the consultant concerned means he wins, while local small businesses and taxpayers lose out. This would not be the Green approach at all. We accept the need for the Council to make a fair return from its properties, but not at the expense of our local businesses and tourist trade.”

ENDS

Notes for Editors:

* The documents released show that the consultant of HLL Humberts Leisure is charging the council £1,500 + VAT as a monthly retainer, receives 30 per cent of rent increases, expenses and disbursements as well as £150/hour for adjudications. Furthermore a minimum fee of £1,500 or more plus VAT is being set for each unit’s review regardless of the final increase agreed.

** Cllr Kitcat presented a petition on behalf of the Seafront Traders Association calling for a rethink on the council’s approach to seafront business rents on the 9th July 2009. More info at: http://www.brightonandhovegreenparty.org.uk/h/n/NEWS/press_releases/ALL/656/

Categories
current affairs

Norwegian Greens: Excluded from public TV

From Jarle Fagerheim:

Dear Green friends,

We’re having a general election in Norway on September 14, and the Green
party is doing better than ever. Our membership has more than tripled
since last time (2005), the number of visitors to our website is
skyrocketing, and a marvellous team of 8 people are now working
round-the-clock at the Oslo office (last year at this time, it was me
alone!)

The last major hurdle to a Green breakthrough is getting coverage on
national television. The National Broadcasting Corporation has decided
to exclude us completely, there is no such thing as “party political
broadcasts”, paid TV adverts are prohibited by law. Our Minister of
Church and Culture Affairs, Trond Giske, earlier this year promised that
even the non-parliamentary parties were to be given a minimum of
coverage on public television during the campaign. Well, the campaign is
now in its final stages, and nothing is happening.

So I kindly ask you to visit www.democracyinnorway.net and send a
message to Minister Giske urging him to take action. If we can
demonstrate a substantial amount of support from fellow Greens all over
the world, we might be able to get some very good media coverage during
these last three weeks of campaigning.

Please forward this as widely as possible!

Jarle Fagerheim
head of office
Green Party of Norway
www.mdg.no

Categories
current affairs

The Learning & Skills Council fiasco

You may have been aware of the grand plans a good number of colleges in Brighton & Hove had been preparing over the last two years. These plans involved new facilities, amazing new buildings, incredible resources and flights of architectural imagination. Certainly I didn’t agree with all the detailed plans but I welcomed the additional resources scheduled to be ploughed into education in our local colleges.

But the resources weren’t in fact there. In an astonishing, jaw-dropping tale of mismanagement it subsequently emerged that the Learning & Skills Council, a government quango, had massively overpromised. They had told hundreds of colleges to proceed with their plans, take out loans and hire consultants, architects etc to flesh out their plans. However finally the LSC had to admit they couldn’t afford to pay for all the schemes they had initially suggested should proceed.

How so many colleges could be led up the garden path by a government body beggars belief, it’s an epic cock-up whereby hundreds of colleges will be left out of pocket due to government failings – taxpayers are paying for these problems.

A committee of MPs have come to similar conclusions. More from the excellent Westminster blog I Spy Strangers (who I feel report on Parliamentary business in an old fashioned way – which is a good thing in this context):

A committee of MPs has castigated the “financial fiasco of the capital programme in further education colleges” and blamed the “heinously complicated” management structure at the Learning and Skills Council.

“But, as we set out in this report, no-one was keeping an eye on the total amount of money which was being committed and the value of applications coming forward.
“In December 2008 it suddenly dawned on the senior management of DIUS and the LSC that the total potential cost of projects which had received ‘Approval in Principle’ exceeded the capital budget and many more applications were in the pipeline.
“Far from trying to damp down increasing demand in 2008 the LSC had been encouraging it.”

I hope Brighton & Hove’s colleges pull through this, I know we’ll support them 100% in trying to recoup their losses from the government.

Categories
current affairs

Rebutting Care UK’s spin

Care UK's Managing Director Mark Hunt is highly misleading when quoted in a recent article in The Argus “Health centre 'reservations'” which covers the panel report on the GP-led clinic . Mr Hunt claims that “93% of our NHS walk-in centres are rated as excellent or good”. However Care UK's website reports only 4 such clinics, add in the fifth just opened in Brighton and you still can't make 93% into a whole figure.

Mr Hunt seems to be quoting his firm's interim financial report for 2009 which claims a “93% 'Excellent' or 'Good' overall patient experience in Care UK's Primary Care services”. So this figure covers more than just the walk-in centres which are a small part of Care UK's business. Mr Hunt also failed to state that it was a patient experience rating which, while important, does not cover the clinical issues only qualified inspectors could check.

Mr Hunt also claimed Care UK has “an outstanding reputation for high quality services across the country” but nobody would believe that if they had seen the BBC Panorama documentary detailing his firm's failings in providing care for the elderly. Care UK were sacked by Hertfordshire County Council less than a year into a contract, the NHS also terminated a diagnostic services contract with them in the West Midlands. Care UK have had critical reports from inspectors of the Commission for Social Care Inspection and the Healthcare Commission. The problems experienced at Care UK's Sussex Orthopaedic Treatment Centre in Haywards Heath have already been previously discussed on this blog.

Mr Hunt is not being straightforward with The Argus' readers. I sincerely hope the new health centre in Brighton provides excellent quality care, but I'm deeply concerned by Care UK's appointment and that NHS contract procedures did not allow its previous problematic history to be properly taken into account.

Categories
current affairs

Body in the bin: What the tragic death of Scott Williams tells us about modern British government

Waste container being emptied into truck

I'm sorry to say I wasn't all too surprised when I heard the sad news that a body had been found in Newhaven, thought to be from a Brighton waste collection. As the details emerged it's been confirmed that as far as we know Scott Williams was alive and well when he went into a bin for respite from the weather.

From what we know at the moment, I believe Mr Williams was in a commercial waste bin, not one of the city council's communal bins. My understanding from previous dealings with commercial waste problems is that businesses should keep their bins locked at all times — so someone failed in that duty. We also know that rough sleepers on at least one occassion have narrowly missed a similar fate after sleeping in one of the council-provided bins. This issue is a risk for all waste collectors.

The enormous pressure for efficiencies on all services has inevitably led to fewer staff, more automation and daily pressure for rounds to be done as quicjly as possible. We all want value for money and taxes to be kept as low as reasonably possible – hence the disgust at MPs' abuse of taxpayer funds to their own personal benefit.

With bins we see so few staff on rounds that they don't have time or capacity to check bins for rough sleepers before emptying them. Brighton & Hove has a high level of rough sleeping and homelessness issues, we should be checking these bins more carefully.

I feel this story points to the bigger issues in so many ways:

  • Drinking is all too often the common factor across so many tragic stories in the news. A recent scrutiny report by councillors highlighted that Brighton & Hove's teenagers are above the national average for drinking. How do we turn-around the culture which leads to drink fuelled accidents, violence and health problems?

  • We need to be producing so much less waste, which would mean fewer large bins for people to use as a refuge.

  • There are potentially some good economies of scale and interesting possibilities if local councils were to collect commercial waste from shops and restaurants. This could replace the four or five private firms all sending trucks to different premises on the same streets in addition to council collections for residents.

  • The pressures for efficiencies and cost cutting never diminish. The fight over the political middle ground by Labour, Tories and LibDems leads to incrementalist policies which do little or nothing to reform the fundamental systems and processes on which our government is based.

So called 'big debates' are fought over tax credits, 10p tax rates and so on. Yes this do hit people in the pocket – but we're arguing over tweaks really. We Greens want to scrap the complex raft of means-tested, forms-based credits, rebates and top-ups in favour of a simple to administer Citizens Income. We would also eliminate the unfair system of council tax which exacerbates local government's financial woes. Instead we would have a land value tax which not only would be fairer but would discourage properties being left empty, firms running huge speculative 'land banks' and would encourage people living in houses of a suitable scale.

Scott Williams' death was all to preventable. But we won't be able to create a people-centred system of government services without more fundamental reform than the fiddling round the edges the other parties are fighting over.