LGA LG Spring conference 2011: Return of the Wreakers and Splitters

During the lunch break at Saturday’s LGA Labour Group spring conference I wandered over to the main entrance of LGA house to have a look at the promised SPEW (Socialist Party of England & Wales) “mass national lobby”.  I looked out of the door and saw about 30 SPEWers ranting and raving incoherently. LGA Labour Group Leader, David Sparks, had agreed to accept a “petition” from the organisers.  This turned out to be a typical hate session against the Labour Party.    Well done for David for agreeing to even meet them and putting up with their childish and crank nonsense.

One of their skinhead organisers then immediately resumed the “Scum” chants at the top of his voice and the masturbatory finger waving.   This moronic and orchestrated “scum; scum; scum” chanting did obviously embarrass some of the more vaguely normal SPEWers but they did nothing to stop it nor did they seem to mind their lobby turning into something akin to an EDL rally. 

This is just Kamikaze politics. If any English Council did not set a balanced budget then the Chief Officer’s would be legally obliged to do so regardless of any political considerations.  If they refused then Pickles would do it.  Does anyone really want Eric Pickles to set their Council budget?

I do believe that if we unite and build - we can defeat this Tory-led government over policies and it is possible we may even bring them down as a government before 2015.  Yet at the first major labour movement political test we find the tiny and unrepresentative ultra left extremists attacking not the ConDems - but Labour Councils!

Instead of working together we see them in the finest Monty Python Life of Brian traditions do their best to wreak and split.  In London Town Halls Council reception staff have been beaten up by these yob protesters and even disabled Councillors attacked.  For what?  What did they think they would gain? Despite the fact that they could not get any one of the 4500 Labour councillors to publicly support their view they went ahead with their completely divisive and sectarian campaign anyway. 

What mandate have these tiny telephone kiosk sects to dictate to anyone what they should do?

Why were they not demonstrating in Cardiff that day at the Tory Spring conference?

Is it not bad enough that opinion polls show that the majority of ordinary people actually think these cuts are necessary.  Now, thanks to the SPEWers, SWPers, LRC and the rest of the Heinz 57 trots – even more people will accept the Tory lies that Councils do not need to slash and burn if they were just a bit more efficient. Well done comrades!

How can the Broad Left now work with these idiots. Who obviously don’t give a toss about the interests of ordinary working people and who think that all you have to do to bring about their revolution is to foam at the mouth and scream abuse.  Grow up - you are just helping the Tories get off the hook.

Talk about Tory fifth columnists.  Pickles must be laughing his ample socks off at his new best mates ever.

Get your facts right about the Local Government Pension Fund says UNISON

"UNISON, the UK’s biggest union, with more than 600,000 members working in local councils, today called on consultants and government ministers to get their facts right on local government pensions.  

The call follows a claim by John Balfe, so-called “independent” pensions consultant, that the scheme’s liabilities had increased to £100 billion.  The Communities and Local Government Minister, Eric Pickles, managed to muddy the waters even more by unsubstantiated claims that  ‘town hall pensions are now costing over £300 a year to every household paying council tax."

Heather Wakefield, UNISON Head of Local Government, said:

“Another week, another attack on the local government pension scheme. These so-called independent pensions consultants and government ministers should get their facts right before they resort to crude scare-mongering.

“Eric Pickles is plain wrong. Less than 6% of council tax payments fund pensions. More than 50% is made up of employee contributions and investment returns.

“The local government pension scheme is in good shape, and is a vital way of allowing mainly low paid workers to save for their retirement. A report out this year confirmed that the scheme could cover all its liabilities for the next twenty years, without a single penny more in contributions. What’s more, the scheme invests hundreds of billions in UK stocks and shares every year – a huge boost to our economy.

“With pensions, its vital to take a long term view. It is totally misleading to take an assessment of the schemes liabilities now and make claims for the future that don’t stack-up.  All investments have taken a knock thanks to the financial crisis, but given time they will recover.”

Key facts on the local government pension scheme:

-       The average local government pension is £4,000 per year, for women this drops to just £2,600, or less than £40 per week.

 -       After intense negotiations, a new pensions agreement in local government was introduced in 2008, setting out terms that include workers paying 6.4% of their salary into the scheme.

-       Local councils get most of their revenue from business rates and from central government grants. In reality, less than 6% of council taxpayers’ rates goes towards funding the pension scheme. More than 50% of the cost is met by employee contributions and investment returns.

 -       Research in 2006 showed that if the LGPS did not exist - based only on current pensioners – it would cost the taxpayer £2bn a year in increased means tested benefits and loss of tax revenue. It would also fuel increased take up of NHS and council care services.

 -       Often overlooked is the huge investment power of the LGPS fund. In 2008 the total value of combined assets in England, Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland, were £143 billion - 60% of which was invested in equities or shares, in UK and global stock markets. In the same year, more than £1 billion was invested in each of the top four FTSE companies. If the scheme were to close, and this investment was withdrawn, it would have a huge impact on the UK economy.

-       The LGPS is in better shape than a most other schemes. Even in the depths of the recession, investments provided nearly £3bn for the LGPS in England, accounting for nearly one third (27%) of the scheme’s overall income. Year on year, the scheme takes billions more in contributions and investments returns than it pays out in benefits. Last year, income from member contributions to the scheme in England alone increased by 15% - outstripping expenditure by £6 billion.

-       An Audit Commission report in 2010 stated that the LGPS could pay out all pensions due for the next 20 years without any further contributions.

More information from UNISON Press Office on 0207 551 1555".

(Hat tip UNISON press release)

London Councils Summit: The Evil One is amongst us

The Right Honourable Eric Pickles MP, Secretary for State for Communities and Local Government (left - aka "the evil one") was the keynote speaker at the Summit.  He promised no jokes about bonfire night, about blowing up Parliament or about a Bonfire of Quango’s.  

Being Eric, he happily attacked the Chair Jules Pipe's previous remarks as “Booker Prize” fiction and claimed that the local government settlement had not yet been decided.  He did not recognise the figures about the cuts mentioned by Jules.  He had a dig at Jules and Hackney Council over a supposed expenditure of £38m on temporary staff which resulted in a contractor making £6.5m in profit. 

He promised it will be tough.  But Councils will have powers, influences, choices and more freedom than they have had in decades (probably 25 years).  Even if the coffers were overflowing, we would still pass power down to local councils and communities.  It was Big Government and Big spending that got us into this mess.  If you want local services - don’t control on high.  Give councils control of purse wings, stop tying them up in red tape and let them get on with it.  It's about power and influence as well as raw figures.  We’ve had 3 decades of central control and look where it got us?  Give it a try.  Look at Camden and Islington sharing CEO.  Hammersmith, Westminster and Kensington, demonstrate the future of public services.  All of us should rise to the challenge, innovate and give residents better deals.  The Shackles are removed.  We could save £60 million if all London Local Government Pension Schemes were merged. 

There is a load of rubbish about mergers and super councils.  No one is saying this. Local identity is paramount.  Residents should not notice a difference except better services.  Localism is the only show in town.  Being a prisoner for decades - now is your time to bask in the sun.  Quakers.  Orwellian double speak councils suffocated by government.  We want to let you get on with it.  You don’t want me darkening your doorstep.  It will be the voters.  Instead of saying to me “What should I do Secretary of State?” Do it yourself.

Be genuinely open and transparent. If you are confident you have done no wrong, then there is no reason not to be.  15 councils have put all their spending on line?  Why don’t the others? There is a new balance of power.  Based on fairness (laughter from audience) - is it fair that people on £40k per year get Child benefits? is it fair people in your ward can only live there because they are on benefits?  Time to live in the real world (some clapping but some booing).  I know this for a fact - but had Labour won they would have done the same thing as us (more heckling).  Housing Benefit up £5 billion” this is unfair and unaffordable.  The disgraceful talk about “social cleansing” (I helpfully mentioned "Kosovo") The myths and hysteria - not facts.  

London is a great capital.  London once again is at forefront of local governance and innovation in this country.

There was more “knock about” politics in the Q&A with Eric playing the biggest and baddest Tory Tyke ever and Jules trying to keep order and remain polite and reasonable.  Eric claimed that for 80% of private sector housing benefit claimants the total change will be less than £10 per week so people should “grow up” about this.  There was lots of clapping and heckling which seemed to upset the "Sir Bufton Tufton" Tory Councillors present. 

Since Eric justified the reason why new “public housing” rents will be 80% of market rents by claiming that Housing associations had asked the Tories to do this - I asked a question to Eric about last weeks Inside Housing magazine which predicted that the rent of such new Council and Housing association housing would increase by an average of £130 per week (I repeat a £130 per week) for an average 3 bed property.  But alas he ignored the question. 

UPDATE: Check out another Labour view of Eric's performance.
UPDATE: a good summary by LGC journo Allister Hayman

London Councils Summit: Setting the Agenda – Chair’s Intro and "City" View

On Saturday I went to a “Summit” organised by London Councils in Westminster.  The Chair of London Councils, Hackney Executive Mayor, Jules Pipe (picture) gave an introductory speech to the 200 odd (some very) Councillors from all over London.  Jules' job as Chair is pretty difficult.  On the one hand he is obviously a Labour Party Politician (and is only Chair since the Labour Party controls a majority of Councils in London) but he must also appear to be above politics as Chair.  A difficult balancing act.

He recognised that not everything will be sweetness and light over “money”.  Especially £1.6 billion in cuts.  His message to the Guest Speaker, the Secretary of State, RH Eric Pickles (aka “the evil one”) was that London is a net contributor to rest of the economy.   There should be further consideration of the level of front loading.  Better over 4 years as previously announced.  London is different to the rest of the country due to the cost of housing which is disproportionately high in London.  People will have to move if cuts take place.  Receiving authorities will have problems.  Councillors are not technocrats sent to simply deliver cuts by backroom deals.  People voted for Councillors to act as advocates.  We may fall out but we want  a vigorous debate by the 3 political parties about London’s future.  One side stresses “localism” - the other side the cuts that they think will be devastating to London.  The forum for debate is politics. 

Stuart Fraser, the influential Chair of Policy and Resources Committee, City of London spoke next. 

He thought that there had been changes in politics.  “Localism” and “Big Society”?  How will this come about? Is it about scrutiny, facilitation or funding?  What will be happening to the business rate?  Will control return to Councils?  The City of London business rate funding is 18%.  If they were to get all the money back then they really could line the streets with Gold.  £50 per resident - but he is not holding his breath.  The problem is simple - Money. Other parts of the UK economy are more dependent on public services than London.  We have had good infrastructure settlements.  We need to fight our corner very hard.  London is resilient.  Problem of patchwork London.  Communities that experience severe deprivation alongside others which are quite wealthy.  London is the home of innovation in our country.  Must be positive and move ahead.  London UK economy is worth £20 billion.  The private sector is not just financials.  All industry need good facilities.   He has worked in the city for 45 years and on Council for 20 years.  Newly elected Cllrs may be thinking by now with all these meetings and committees “what have I let myself into”.  What this is - is that you are there to serve a fantastic city. (more posts on rest of day next)

"The devil is in the detail...and I am the detail"

So said the new Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, Eric Jack Pickles, at yesterday evenings GLA/London Council’s bash at the 9th floor of City Hall for all newly elected London Councillors.

I suppose many of us present would in fact agree with Mr Pickles self assessment of himself! He actually gave quite an emollient and even a suspiciously constructive speech about the importance of having elected Councillors (who can be “chucked out” by their electors if they are no good) and came close to promising that the Greater London Authority and Local authorities will receive much greater powers and responsibilities from central government and deleted quango’s. Watch this space I suppose.

London Mayor, Boris Johnson was unable to attend since he had to go to a School play. Fair enough although this did not stop cynical souls amongst us reflect that it was more likely because when he planned this event he did not expect so many Labour Councillors to be elected in London.

We did not escape - since he had specially recorded a vintage bumbling Boris performance on a DVD for us to watch (and endure).

Hackney elected Labour Mayor and new leader of “London Councils” (which represents all 33 local authorities in London) Jules Pipe, gave an upbeat and positive speech about us all working together for the benefit of London and the great services that London Councils provide. He didn’t notice Eric licking his lips at the knowledge of more things that he can demand to be privatised.

I had to leave early in order to go and make a report to my ward meeting but as I left I did reflect upon Boris as London mayor and the first time I had been to the 9th floor City Hall - and I hope to return sometime after May 2012 to a reception run by a Labour Mayor of London.

(Eric is bottom left; Jules is next to him and top left is UNISON and GLA Labour Assembly member Joanne McCartney with Newham Councillors)

UNISON NDC 2010: Defending the Local Government Pension Scheme

On Wednesday morning there was a debate on Defending the LGPS.  I posted about this excellent UNISON Labour Link leaflet on the threat to our pensions just before the General Election.

I hope those who claim there was "no difference" between Labour and the Tories are pleased with themselves.

Anyway, below is my speech on motion 18.  I tried to speak on amendment 18.4 which for some reason deleted the call for there to be a single LGPS pension fund in England, Scotland and Wales.  I got "bumped off" by a "point of order... for the question to be put" (went to an immediate vote without hearing all speakers) .

Here is my speech anyway.

 "John Gray, Tower Hamlets LGPS Representative, With Voting Rights!!

I speak from inside the pension machine – I’ve been a UNISON LGPS rep for 14 Years...I’ve watched fund managers come and go – at great expense to our fund....believe me on this

Conference there is going to be a Public Sector Pension Commission. It will look at the future costs of all public pension schemes.

The union needs a specific response to the Commission that deals with the funded element of the LGPS.

Just like the situation in Holland in 1996 when public sector pensions were under threat – what did the unions, employers and government do then? They created a new pension system for public sector workers.
1 fund, 12 sets of benefits, governed by 5 trade union reps and 5 employer reps,

Consultation committees for scheme members, pensioners and employers

That body then created its own fund manager, in-house, low costs, responsible investor, it’s now the 3rd largest pension fund in the world with one objective to pay the members pensions and not fill their own pockets and drive away in the latest Porsche

And conference in 2008 a study looking at reform of pension’s management for state workers in Ontario Canada said “lower investment fees are but one of the many advantages enjoyed by large plans over smaller ones and over individual savers.

Conference its clear, everyone who has tackle this question of costs looks to consolidate funds

In London there are 34 pension funds, all competing with each other, all with at least 8 fund management contracts each, pouring money into the pockets of the City traders.

Why 34 funds? They are an accident of History, a system well past its sell by date.

What counts is the economic power and efficiency when it comes to our funds.....anything less than 1 in each country will cost us money in lost fees and no economic power

Why not 5, why not 10 why not 20?

Because they cost us more to run, wasted money that we cannot afford to throw away now or for future generations

So I ask you to reject 18.04

Let us offer the coming generations a chance to thank us in the future..thank us for having the nous to help save decent pension provision for them

Give us the policy to move forward with a coherent and calculated set of demands...let us tell Pickles in a time of austerity we know how to save money