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

Powys Leisure centres under threat ?

So having turned out the lights and forced the elderly off our streets (good crime reduction idea.. I think not) Powys are turning their attention to the entire community especially those who wish to keep in shape or learn to swim.

It would appear that leisure facilities are under "review" It seems that 16 leisure centres for 125k people is too many.

Of course looked at another way since 16 centres are all that is needed to cover 25% of the land area of Wales we only need another 48 to give everyone the same geographic access as Powys residents. Somehow such a suggestion would be laughable, after all that would mean only 1 or perhaps 2 centres for the whole of Cardiff and there is the core of the problem. Close any of the existing centres and you force residents on a 30+ mile round trip to the nearest alternative. Put another way it would be like expecting all Cardiff residents to use leisure centres in Newport.

The subtext is more interesting though. "areas under scrutiny would be opening hours, leisure centre activities, usage and pricing policy" in short we won't close them but you are going to pay though the nose to use them.

Lighting may have been a thorny question for many but the loss of one of these facilities would be a major hit for any of the towns concerned and send a clear message to the town concerned that they are no longer important.

Looking wider than the obvious it does raise serious issues about how government funds are apportioned to Welsh authorities. No settlement can be completely equitable due to the conflicting demands but there are clearly identified costs of delivering services in rural areas over an above urban ones.

Perhaps what we are seeing now is real impact of this lack of central understanding, or perhaps we are seeing the reality that the all party cabinet and lots of independent councillors just don't work in holding the officers to account and services suffer as a result.

Is an i_pod the new dead sheep?

It is not for me to criticize Nick Bourne for buying an electronic device to enable his learning of the Welsh language. If it helps him communicate with his electorate a significant proportion of whom speak Welsh as their first language then his actions are to be applauded. However his choice of player leaves a lot to be desired and his justification opens up significant questions of his approach to government.

Take his defence in todays Western Mail as an example

“I’ve made it absolutely clear it’s primarily for learning Welsh. There is no music on it.”

WHAT A WASTE!

If that is all you needed what was wrong with the £20 generic player from any high street store. My own Sansa only set me back £80 and I can listen to Radio Wales and keep up with the news on it.

If this is indicative of the opposition approach to value for money then what confidence can we have in a future Tory administration led by a man who claims of the public

They want a Wales that doesn’t draw this hard and fast distinction between the public and private sectors – people just want decent healthcare that is paid for

How will he be able to determine what is best when he is incapable of identifying when a generic product is as good for the job as the more expensive brand. After all isn't that just the problem clinicians face every day?

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

Kirsty victory a big step forward

Its no secret here in Wales that I have supported Kirsty for a long time as a potential Welsh Lib Dem leader. So todays result is a great one for me personally. However I also think it is a great day for politics in Wales too and marks the first step in the changing of the guard, as well as being the first female leader she is also the first leader who was too young to vote in the 1979 referendum and marks the change over to the devolution generation of politicians.

But why is it good for Wales? because Kirsty will bring a passion to the heart of welsh politics that has been lacking for a long time. Yes we have had politicians of great political conviction (Mike German and Richard Livsey are great examples from within our own party) but both were good solid figures when it came to speaking to an audience. There is also a long tradition of inspirational speakers too but it is a long time since we in Wales had a leader who is both.

And that is what the opposition must now fear, all their leaders are worthy individuals but they lack the spark to ignite a fire in the belly.

Kirsty is capable of that.

When she talks about reigniting the flame of liberalism she means just that. The last 6 months have not been the best for us in Wales as sting of by-elections defeats in held seats have taken the gloss off the progress we made in May. But we now have a chance to step back over the Christmas period and take stock as we prepare to focus our resources towards progress in next years European elections and beyond.

Because let us make it clear with a new leader and one capable of inspiring new supporters and members Wales has a new fresh vision to consider and our politics can only be enriched by that prospect.

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