Greenwich Labour Fail To Meet Housing Targets

March 19, 2010, 10:43

If you were to believe Labour’s spin, then you would “those nasty Tories not building any affordable homes” and “wanting to ramp up rents and turf out tenants“. The fact is, however, that it is Labour councils they are actually talking about.

Housing charity Shelter have today released figures which backs up my statement. Only two London Boroughs have achieved their house building targets. Just two. Those boroughs are Bexley and Bromley, both of which are Conservative controlled councils, and who have actually exceeded their building targets.

To compare my neighbouring boroughs to my own, Greenwich, who have only achieved a paultry 43% of their house building target.

So when Labour ask you to take that second look at them, remember that you Conversative councils do work better than Labour ones.


Scare Tactic, Or Labour’s Belief?

March 15, 2010, 10:31

A lot has been made in the press recently, and on a number of blogs, that the old hard left way of campaigning by the Labour party has returned with a vengeance. The scare tactic.

Instead of even attempting to campaign on their “supposed successful thirteen years in power”, all you will see and hear from Labour activists is “those nasty Tories”. According to them it’s the Tories that want A&E’s to close; it’s only the Tories that are planning on cutting services; and the Tories want to take money from the poorest. But, if you give Labour a second look, like they asked you to, you quickly see that what Labour activists are claiming the Tories will do Labour have in fact already done.

Hidden in the scare stories though, I feel, is a belief by Labour that we should all be wary of. That of who Labour believe are “privileged”.

One Conservative policy, that has been misquoted by Labour, is that of the withdrawal of Child Trusts funds for higher earning families, whilst securing it for poorer families. In a recent letter to only his Labour supporting constituents, and in a trade union newsletter, my local MP Clive Efford stated that this cut would be to all families earning over £16,000. I view this quote in two ways. The first is that it is a desperate  attempt to misconstrue Conservative policy. The common scare tactic.

The second is the view held by Clive Efford, and Labour in general, that families earning £16,000 are “high earners”. That is Labour’s interpretation of Conservative policy, that a “high earner” earns as little as £16,000.

If, as I believe that this is Labour true belief, it explains their record. If Labour view families earning as little as £16,000 it explains why THEY scrapped the 10% tax band, doubling the tax on the lower paid to 20%. It also explains why the INCREASED National Insurance contributions on anybody earning over £20,000, taxing both the worker and employer! It explains everything.

If you earn over £16,000 Labour views you as “privileged” and a “high earner”, and as a result after the election you will be penalised for that in the tax and benefit system.


So We Are Going To Get A Budget!

March 10, 2010, 10:43

At last the champion ditherers have committed themselves to holding a budget, and hold out of for a few more weeks before having to go to the polls. This mow pretty much confirms the view I’ve had for the last two and a half years that the general election would be on 6th May 2010.

However, don’t be fooled into thinking that this budget will have any of the detail that it should with regards to cutting the country’s debt. Unfortunately, despite Alastair Darling’s apparent wishes, Gordon Brown will not allow him to be a proactive as he has hinted that he wants to be in recent interviews.

I fully expect there to be an odd cut to a program here and there, as a token gesture. There may even a tax credit increase, which in reality will be swallowed up by other stealth tax increases. But, I also expect the misrepresenting of growth statistics to make things sound better than they are, and no credible plan for tackling the debt – until after the election, of course.

That is why everyone – pollster, political anorak, campaigner, economist, and every householder – all need to observe this budget closely. If the markets don’t like it we could see the pound slump even further, or worse with the credit agencies already starting to question Britain ability to pay the debt.

This isn’t talking the economy down, it’s talking down a government that does not want to take the tough decisions before an election, but hoodwink the electorate into giving them five years in power. The markets know that, and the credit agencies know that. It’s a shame that this government will not acknowledge that.


Welcome Mr President!

March 3, 2010, 21:20

I have just been informed that South African president, Jacob Zuma, will be visiting Greenwich tomorrow morning.

He will be paying a visit to the Sainsburys on the Greenwich peninsula, to see their selection of fair trade items.

Welcome to Greenwich President Zuma.


FT Suggests That UK Gilts Have Lost Triple A Rating

March 1, 2010, 10:14

There is worrying news in the FT this morning regarding the UK’s economy. The report in the Financial Times states:

“British government debt is already trading at prices that suggest it has lost its prized top credit rating, heightening concerns that investors already view gilts as less than triple A-rated assets and demand greater rewards for holding them”

This is a concerning as is shows that the markets are not convinced with the Governments plans for tackling the defecit. At present this is just a warning, as it is not the economy as a whole that has lost the treasured credit rating. But that fact that it is costing us more to service the government’s borrowing, is clear that the markets are worried as to whether we will pay it back.

It is clear that the government do not want to take action, until after the election of course to avoid bad headlines, and that dithering will harm the economy further.

The credit agencies themselves have admitted that they too are waiting to make their decision on our formal credit rating before an election. But let us be quite sure that is because they will be weighing up each parties manifesto, and if the party that doesn’t want to make decisions, act swiftly, or have a credible plan (which is the current government policy), then they will act and act hard.


Rent Increases and Electioneering

February 25, 2010, 08:25

Yesterday evening I went to view Greenwich Council’s meeting, and as usual it has left me compelled to write this post. In what was a comparatively short meeting, there were three issues that I have previously written about that cropped up in one form or another.

The first was the issue of council rent increases. As I posted on 18th February, the Labour group endorsed the Labour Cabinet Committee’s report to increase council tenant’s rents by above the rate of inflation. During the debate, prior to the vote, Conservative group leader Cllr Drury argued that “in these troubled economic times that the council should at least freeze rents, or even cut them to assist its tenants”. This was ignored by the Labour group, and they voted en masse to increase the rents.

The next issue was regarding a petition for a one-way system in Red Lion Lane, Shooters Hill ward. After a member of the public was allowed to address the council, this was followed by a short speech by Cllr Thorpe, to which I overheard another Cllr say that it was the first time he had heard him speak in a debate for two years. Cllr Thorpe used this opportunity to wave a copy of my action team’s latest newsletter, and had a go at us for “trying to claim credit” for his work, and called us “out of touch”. as I posted in December, Cllr Thorpe presented a petition to the council regarding the one way system at the December meeting. However, as I said in the post the Conservatives had previously campaign for the one way system but had it turned down. In fact, the Conservatives actually began campaigning for it back as far as  December 2007! I’m not surprised that Cllr Thorpe was unaware of this as he did disappear to Australia for a quarter of his elected term, so I’m more than happy to set the record straight on here that the Conservatives HAVE been campaigning for this for over two years, and Cllr Thorpe only stated a couple of months ago, presumably because there is an election around the corner.

Speaking of elections, that brings me on to my third and final issue from last night’s meeting.

During a debate on recycling rubbish Cllr Hyland, who at present is a Shooters Hill ward councillor,  used to opportunity to say that she was looking forward to (and I quote) “whoop our ass” in Shooters Hill. This is not exactly the tone of language that I expected to see from an elected representative, but it made we question how she intends to do that considering that she is leaving Shooters Hill to stand in a safer seat on May 6?


Out Of Money, And Out Of Ideas

February 22, 2010, 06:02

If there is one thing that the Labour party is good at, it’s stirring up election speculation before Gordon Brown bottles out of it. In fact it’s all that Gordon Brown ever seems to do. This weekend has been another one of those weekends where that has been the case.

Because of the slight narrowing in the polls, speculation has mounting that an election will finally be called. This has mainly been fuelled by the usual cloak and dagger “briefing” from the government, and not a formal announcement, that has also become common place from this government. The motive is the thought that by having an slightly earlier election will stop the Conservatives gaining a working majority.

I personally still don’t believe that there will be an earlier election, and that May 6th will still be the date. That is based on the very practical, and real, financial situation that Labour finds itself in. The Labour party has run its finances just like the economy, and is seriously in debt. The debt is reported to be in the region of 25 to £30million, and the cost of a general election will add another £18million on top of that! Basically, they cannot afford to run two campaigns, as they’ve run out of money. The other potential nightmare for Labour is that a Hung Parliament would also be financially devasting to them.

If a hung parliament is the result, a second general election after only a few months will most likely occur, and if Labour can’t fund two seperate election campaigns now, a third will surely bankrupt them.

But it is not only money that Labour have run out of, it’s ideas as well.

At the weekend they launched their “new” campaign slogan. The only thing is, it isn’t new. When it was revealed, initially on Friday night before the official launch, a lot of bloggers and commentators thought that it seemed a little familiar. It was familiar. As reported in this morning’s Sun it was Labour’s conference slogan in 2003! Further proof that this government has truely run out of ideas.

This is a party that wants us to take a second look at it, and believe that it has the new ideas to get our economy back on track, and protect jobs. Well I did  take a second look a found that Labour cannot even sort it own party’s finances out, and the only jobs they seem to want to protect are their own.

Update: It looks as though that I was abit closer to the mark than I had thought with this blogpost as Ed Miliband has asked for “your ideas” for what should be included in Labour’s manifesto on twitter. They really have not got any policies have they?


A Future Fair For All? – With Their Record

February 20, 2010, 09:30

Last night Labour finally revealed their campaign slogan for the forthcoming election, “A Future Fair For All”. For me, and a large proportion of the blogsphere this was a “spit you tea out laughing” moment. That is because the slogan itself is an admission of failure.

How? I can already hear some Labour supporters thinking. Well, why is there no mention of their record over the last 13 years? Besides the statistics don’t exactly match the claim of being “fair for all”, as inequality, the rich/poor divide, and NHS postcode lotteries, have all RISEN under Labour. How would that be fair in the future?

Then there are the election themes that Labour are concentrating on. When you look at the subtext of these they all sound as though they are coming from an opposition party fighting a poor government’s record.

“Securing the recovery” – In others words the government is going to “do nothing” (remember that phrase?) to deal with the deficit, even though it is larger than Greece’s.

“Protecting Frontline Services” – More spend, spend, spend, from Labour, which will mean more tax, tax, tax, for you and me.

“Standing up for the many” – A return to the class war politics that everyone hates. But this also suggests that the government hasn’t stood up for the many over the last 13 years,  which would explain the increases in inequality.

“Protecting future jobs and new industries” – How can Labour even think about this after it simply allowed Corus (and our steel industry with it) to collapse with many left out of work. Plus let us not forget that the hike in National Insurance announced in the pre-budget report, and due later this year is a tax on new jobs. So what this is, is an admission that they can’t protect current jobs, or current industries!

Labour are in denial if they think that their record in their 13 years in power will not be used to hold them to account. They have increased our tax burden putting more people into poverty. They have increased the rich/poor divide. They want to tax you when you die. They have run the economy into the ground, with the worst deficit in the G20 and longest recession in modern times. The have failed to protect or help industries. They have a generation of people who are unemployed, and a higher level of unemployment than when they took office. They have made your chances of getting treatment on the NHS a lottery depending on where you live.

That’s Labour’s record! It’s not fair, and it’s not right.


Greenwich Labour Plan Inflation Busting Rent Increases For Council Tenants

February 18, 2010, 19:28

Here is a press release I have just received from Greenwich Conservatives.

CONSERVATIVES today accused the Greenwich Labour Party of hypocrisy following their decision to raise rents for Council tenants by above the rate of inflation.

The decision, which was taken at the monthly Cabinet meeting, means that rents will rise by 1.6%.  If Labour had stuck to the rate of inflation, then rents would have fallen this year.  At the same time as this policy of inflation busting rent hikes, Labour’s literature claims that it is infact, Conservatives, who will raise rents and end secure tenancies.

Part of the increase is because of the Labour Government’s policy of raising rents for Council tenants to the same as those for Registered Social Landlords by 2012/13.  Last year in Greenwich, Labour voted through a rise of nearly 6% but following protests, and a Conservative campaign, Labour eventually reduced it to only around 3%.

Conservative Councillor and Parliamentary Candidate for Greenwich and Woolwich Spencer Drury has written to many residents to reassure them that it is completely untrue and that it is NOT Conservative policy in Greenwich to raise their rents.

Spencer said “Labour is resorting to scaring residents to get votes and many are truly worried by the false descriptions of our policies. One of my residents had sleepless nights over this scaremongering.  I can assure them that Greenwich Conservatives have no plans to increase rents to market levels and as someone whose family lived for many years in Council accommodation in Eltham, I can assure them that while I am leader, I would not support an end to secure tenancies in our borough.

“I hope residents will punish Labour at the ballot box for their hypocritical tactics.  Not only have they got a policy of raising rents above inflation, the Labour government is going to end all subsidy for Council housing.  Despite this they are muddying the issue by claiming it is the Conservatives’ policy.  This is simply treating people like idiots.

“Democracy is supposed to be about parties competing to provide the best way of serving the people, but Labour seems to think it is just about winning and that this justifies them misleading and scaring the voters.  I am shocked and disgusted at their tactics.

“In Greenwich, Labour’s policy of raising rents above the rate of inflation, the fact that nationally they built less social houses than the previous Conservative government and that housing waiting lists have risen by 75% suggests that their policies on housing, as in other areas, are a failure.  I urge voters to use the election to remove them from power.”

Now the thing that I find personally shocking regarding this latest rise in council rents is that recently, 25th January to be precise, Greenwich Council itself announced that it was targetting tenants with rent arrears. So what we have is a situation where during the longest recession in modern times, and unemployment higher than when Labour took office in 1997, a Labour council is raising it’s rents at an above inflation rate, when many workers a having their pay cut, and then threatening them with eviction if can’t meet the payments.

Actually, I’ll correct myself. Labour are using the scare tactic of  telling people on the doorstep, that it is the tories that will be doing the evicting.


GMB Using Automatic Phone Dialling To “Help Members To Vote”

February 17, 2010, 11:13

Last week Labour were found guilty of breaking its own legislation, by using and automatic dialler to cold call voters during an election. Well, last night it was the turn of one of Labour’s paymasters, the GMB union, to use this method.

Yesterday evening, one GMB member and Tory voter, received the automatic call with a recorded message advising its members to ensure that they were on the electoral register, and that it could help them do that by following its instructions. Needless to say that the particular did not “press 1″ and hung up.

I was also told that this isn’t the first time that the GMB had done this. During the Euro election last June they used their automatic dialler to urge members to vote Labour.

I am sensing a complaint to OfCom is being written at the use of the automatic dialler.

It should be noted that the GMB receive taxpayers money, and then funds the Labour party in return.