Fear of Crime

For the first time tonight my dad is worried about crime. To be precise he is afraid of being burgled. He wasn't this morning in fact it hasn't crossed his mind once in the nine years he has lived in the house that someone could lift the windows out to get in.

So what has changed well this morning he got a leaflet inviting him to meet a double glazing salesman.

The first I knew was mid afternoon when he rang me seeking some advice was £6k reduced on today only discount to £4.5k a bit much for replacing the downstairs windows. I was with him yesterday and this hadn't cropped up so why was he considering this now?

A little gentle probing revealed that the salesman had majored on how vulnerable his windows were to breaking in they could "just be lifted out" and this concern was the main reason he was now considering the purchase.

I just about kept my anger under control and pursuaded him that this was not a reason alone to purchase and if he was keen to then he needed to get several quotes. "But this was today only I got back" so I went though the whole distance selling process etc. He finally agreed that this was not a good idea and rang off to tell them he wanted more time.

Five minutes later he was back it was now the absolute rock bottom of £4k and was this now acceptable again security was the concern. I told him no if they were so keen for his business they would always find discounts and in the mean time why not get the local police to send a crime prevention officer round to look at the overall security of the house without any vested interest. He agreed.

What incenses me though is that even today companies are allowed to prey on the fear of crime to try and pressure sell products to older members of the community.

I await with interest the report from the cpo if there is no problem I will be suggesting to my father to make a formal complaint about the sales technique used but how many other people dont have a son or daughter on the other end of the phone? Without doubt it is time for a new look at doorstep selling tactics it seems that some double glazing salesmen even now havent changed since the 80's

Welsh Lib Dems back Rally GB

It gave me a fair amount of pleasure to be one to the 10 reps signing the emergency motion calling on the Nat/Lab government in Cardiff to reverse its decision to break its sponsorship of Wales Rally GB.

What am I talking about. Well for the measly sum of £2.4m that expert on rural tourism IWJ decided last week that the event which the government are contracted to support is not worth the investment. Now take away the legal costs we are likely to face but what does the event bring.
Four days of visitors in Cardiff AND rural mid Wales, four days OUT OF SEASON where the local trade gets a major boost. National and international coverage on Eurosport and local media across Scandinavia and other countries where rallying is as big as F1 is in the UK.

At a time when we as a nation are trying to grow our cultural tourism the "most excellent" leader of Plaid Cymru has shown it is not only his own party policy he is prepared to ignore but also binding legal agreements.

How can he and hence Wales expect any major business or sporting event to even consider coming here now when they know that a WAG contract is viewed as being as watertight as a chocolate teapot.

Northern Rock Bonuses give lie to shareholder compensation rules

So there we have it on the week after the main Northern Rock shareholders were in court arguing the lie of the governments compensation order that Northern Rock should have been valued as if it were in administration we learn that the repayment targets have been met and workers will get a 10% bonus.

Now I am pleased for them they stuck it out when all was bleak and clearly have done a good job since. If that was the deal then they deserve every penny they get.

However there are two glaring issues in this. Firstly the amount of debt repayment that has been made at a time when there is a dire shortage of credit, if Northern Rock had been allowed to function this could well have enables a small but significant easing of pressures on a number of other organisations. The government may let them do that now but too little too late springs to mind.

But as significant is the fact they have been able to repay this in the first place. This is not a small nibble this is a considerable chunk of the debt to the government. In fact it offers plenty of evidence that far from being a basket case all the business needed was a resolution to its cashflow and a new board of management.

But hang on a minute isn't that the mantra of the government now "we must stop sound businesses going into administration and jobs being lost due to short term problems with credit supply" . Shame they didn't apply that right at the start they might have nipped it in the bud.

But I do have one final question. Why has this emerged now after the court hearings surely this is clear evidence which supports the shareholder case and needs to be placed before the judge undertaking the review or is that too inconvenient for the government to bare?

Emperor Browns new Clothes

First the Germans said, it now the IMF have followed suit Far from being the saving of the British economy the VAT cut is looking more and more like the Emperors new clothes.

But should we be surprised, while the big retailers are happy to pass the savings on what about the rest of the economy.

The publican running a microbrewery "I cant afford to change all my menus and beer prices are actually going up, the duty change over cancels the cut in VAT and that is permanent"

The small builder (and the haulage sector) "increases in fuel duty mean we are paying more not less tax and we cant claim that back"

Hotels personal experience "none of the hotels I use on a regular basis have changed their prices so all this means is margins going up"

Sure I have saved some money as a result the vacuum cleaner we needed to buy was £3 less but I saved far more by shopping around for the Children's presents than I did from VAT changes.

So where are we left, in 373 days VAT will return to normal and if the commentators are to be believed we will still be in deep recession. Potentially worse the rise may even create a double dip scenario with firms either forced to cut margins or see a further hit to spending.

We need confidence back by that point if we are to survive.

So is it working? Just look to the high street today

The Officer Club : up to 70% off

HMV: 2008 chart albums 2 for £10

B+Q: 50% off sale starting tomorrow on bed, bath and kitchen furniture

Adams: savings on everything bar the spring 09 collection

Waterstones : large range of 3 for 2

The sales have started and it isn't even Xmas eve. Compared to this the Chancellors offering is an expensive red herring.

Then look at the queues the bigger the cuts and the cheaper the branding in any case the bigger they were, The Works, Primark, Waterstones were all busy. In short shoppers were trading down and again by far more than 2.5%.

Now the figures in January will tell their own story as no doubt will be the number of businesses in receivership but now is the time for the Chancellor to be bold.

If the stats show the VAT cut isn't working it should be reversed immediately. With the money saved he should.

Invest in insulation of all public buildings.

Underpin the housing market by purchasing vacant property across the country and use it to reduce council housing waiting lists and homelessness.

Initiate further investment in infrastructure modernisation across the UK.

If the chancellor thinks getting the public deeper in debt for consumable items is the way out he is little more than giving whiskey to the dunk on the street corner. We do need to spend but we need publicly visible signs of our investment to build confidence in the rest of the economy not just a cheaper wii to fill our days while we sign on and look for a non existent job

Environment must gain from car bailouts

This week two key factors emerged in relation to our car industry.

Firstly the EU have passed new targets that will reduce CO2 emissions by 20% in 2020 including new targets for vehicle emissions. Secondly it appears at least one UK maker will be cap in hand to the Treasury looking for a bail out to keep in in business over the coming months.

Now let me make it clear I without hesitation support the need for a financial package to the industry. Without it the same decimation of communities that followed the Tory butchery of the coal mines in the 80's will be seen in communities across the land as not just the big factories close but so do all their component suppliers.

However this must not be a blank cheque. If the government are in effect to take a large share in the car industry then it must do so with two reforms tied to the back of its money.

First the industry management processes must be streamlined and modernised. Then second the money must be tied to short, medium and long term commitments to improving the environmental friendliness of their product.

This can be simplistically be done in many ways however I suggest 4 key commitments to start the process off

1 Remove the most polluting variants from their range within six months
2 Place environmental friendliness on a par with safety in all advertising
3 Refocus new research on technology that improves fuel efficiency especially in the stationary traffic jam scenario
4 Commit to the original more ambitious targets that the EU originally proposed for this weeks legislation before the industry lobbyists got their claws in

That way not only will we have a car industry left after this crisis passes but we will have one configured towards ensuring our children have an environment left in which to own their own car in the future

The Scientific way to turn off the lights

One of the hottest potatoes in Welsh local government has been the issue of streetlighting and when to turn off.

To date councils have offered seemingly random selections done the deed and waited for the howls of protest. However there is a different and more scientific approach.

Almost every authority will have their streetlights stored within a geographic information system. In these cases it becomes possible to treat the issue in the way you would a planning application and check them against a set of consulted upon constraints.

Do they light:
steps (sourced off Ordnance Survey mapping);
CCTV cameras (source Crime and disorder partnership);
road junctions (sourced off Ordnance Survey mapping);
safe routes to schools (source education department);
access to care homes;

The list that can be developed is easy to imagine. The question then is a case of rating each light in turn and switching off those that fail to meet a certain criteria or weighted score.

While the outcome itself may be painful at least we would provide a transparent consultative approach to the problem with which the electorate can be engaged

Unlocking the housing market log jam

As it becomes increasingly apparent that the changes announced earlier this year are having no impact what so ever on the housing market is it now time to consider more radical measures?

Given the increasing number of repossessions announced today and assuming the trend continues are we confident there will be enough capacity in the local authority sector to rehouse these individuals?

If you have answered yes then no to these questions perhaps there is some merit in developing these ideas?

Given that premise how about this for starters

Many house sales will no doubt be trapped in chains at the moment. Could the government therefore consider purchasing the highest property in the chain allowing every transaction under it to be completed?

Costs: unknown but if you start at the longest chains and work down.

Benefits :
Increase in stamp duty revenue from house sales lower down the chain
Increase in workloads in house move related industries, (estate agents, removals, land registry)
Increase in tax and reduction in redundancies in the sector
Availability of new social housing stock within the community as opposed to "social housing estates"
increase in mobility for people moving with the labour market


Obviously this is uncosted and unproven but unusual times such as these call for innovative and different solutions

If Gordon can multiply why can't Darling

An old colleague once told me the key to winning EU bids is not to show how much grant money you will spend in an area but how that money will multiply within the local economy.

While its seems that our PM has learnt this lesson the chancellor most definitely has not.

What do I mean by this curious statement well take their two big announcements. When the chancellor decided to give home buyers free loan to spend on new build he created a single transaction in short he allowed the payment to the builder. No knock on no multiple just one payment and one transaction.

In contrast GB resisted the siren calls of a rob peter to pay paul windfall tax which would just circulate money around the system and hit lower middle income earners with big price increases. Instead he offers up a means of saving money year on year and the opportunity for builders to take on new work to see them through the current slump in their trade creating new tax revenue two three or more steps away from his original investment.

So now think about the housing market if the Darling proposal was also open to old houses how many links in a chain could be completed with all associated agent and legal fees and at the high end of the chain additional tax for him to reinvest further.

So I say again if Gordon knows about multiplication perhaps he need to teach his (new?) Chancellor about the trick

Between the Rock and a hard place

Yes its back to our old friend the Northern Rock and the complete dogs breakfast our government have made of the whole sordid business. I've said before that the government has many unanswered questions.

But the latest steps in this affair have left me decidedly underwhelmed. While I have never favoured nationalisation which puts me at odds with the party as a whole I do find myself agreeing with much of what Jonathon Wallace had to say earlier this week.

However what alarms me has been the wholesale demonisation of the shareholders during this affair. Sure some of the hedge funds are latecomers to the party and many have upped stakes as the price hit the trough it is now in and will have made a tidy profit this week however there are many of us who have held shares since demutualisation and we may yet get our revenge.

You see what people have tended to forget is that the three motions that failed at the recent EGM only did so because they needed a 75% vote all three motions secured over 65% of the vote showing a clear level of discomfort at what was planned.

So where are we now. Well despite all the Labour spin of the weekend Branson is not the only game in town , both Olivant and the new board are putting together packages and the shareholders will have the final say and with the Government finance on the table who is to say others wont appear.

And that is the rub the original Virgin offer was an insult to the intelligence of the existing shareholders. We were in effect told to double up or risk with no guarantee of returns for the foreseeable future or lose everything.

Since then the incompetent handling of the affair by our Chancellor has seen shares fall still further and the balance sheet get bleaker. So when we now see Gord and Dickie smiling at one an other in China there comes a temptation to to say sod you when it comes to a vote.

However there are more questions that now need to be aired.

Given the sensitive nature of his comments weren't Northern Rock shares suspended first thing on Monday morning until after the Chancellor had spoken in the Commons (or at the very least while he was speaking) ?

What exposure does the government have in the event of a failure and what exposure do shareholders have in the same circumstance?

And what are the government plans if the only solution they approve is Richard Branson and his plans are rejected by shareholders?

While a private sector solution looks possible nothing can be rules either in or out at this moment in time.

Many questions for Northern Rock

First let me declare an interest, I am a demutualisation shareholder in Northern Rock. I had planned to sell my shares in June to finance a house move but the move fell though. Not long after the company issued a profit warning but the market advice was stay put.

"Analysts at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods said that Wednesday's announcement reflected "a period-specific strain in 2007 and does not indicate the business model is not working." Profits outlook hits Northern Rock

I left for holiday off the back of stable but not stunning results and a nice dividend announced and waiting for me in the autumn. In late Aug I though about selling again but with no threats on the table and no pressing need for the money I thought I would wait until the announced dividend was paid and take stock again.

The rest is history. On paper I am about £5000 poorer than I was 12 months ago.

So as we move into the end phase there are a few questions that still need to be answered and most of them relate to the governments handling and culpability in the affair.

-------------------
Why was no stock exchange announcement made by the company about its financial position between the 14th August and the 14th September 2007 when clearly the company had already anticipated the financial crisis and had been in discussions with the Bank of England?

14th August : Bank of England governor Mervyn King is alerted to the potential impact of the global credit squeeze on Northern Rock's business in a phone call with officials at the Financial Services Authority (FSA) and the Treasury." Timeline:Northern Rock banking crisis

------------------

Why were declared shareholder dividends suspended when staff pay rises were still paid in full, and secret bonuses for 173 staff totalling up to £17m allowed to proceed?

"SENIOR staff at Northern Rock are receiving secret bonuses of up to £100,000 a year as part of an incentive scheme" Key Northern Rock staff receive secret bonuses

------------------
Why does the Chancellor continue to blame the bank for risky trading practices when those same trading practices were approved as sound by the oversight regulator?

"we recommend investors look through the near-term interest rate strain and at a business model that can clearly deliver superior returns at lower risk," they continued." Analysts at Keefe, Bruyette & Woods Profits outlook hits Northern Rock (July 2007)

------------------
Why did the Bank of England and the Chancellor fail to use the time from the 14th Aug when knowledge that a government approved method of funding a bank was under pressure to the 13th Sept when it failed to put in place policy that would have protected savers the majority of savers and hence preempted the run on Northern Rock in the first place.

"Our system for dealing with the insolvency of banks and deposit insurance is markedly inferior to other countries." Professor Mervyn King.

------------------

Nationalisation now seems to be the only answer my remaining shares will quite likely become worthless and as a taxpayer I will have an hefty increase in national debt.

However even as late as the middle of August action could have been taken by Government and the Bank of England to reduce the severity of this crisis.

As a taxpayer I want my pound of flesh as shareholder in a highly regulated industry I want a pound of bones too.