Does This Idea Have Legs?

It is just over a month since the Convention for Modern Liberty took place at seven centres across the UK, and it has generated a lot of debate mainly in the blogosphere, but now the initial euphoria is beginning to settle down the question to be answered is ‘what next?’

Anthony Barnett, one of the conveners of that Convention, has come up with an idea for what he calls a Great Repeal Bill and justifies it as follows:

“The idea of a repeal bill is developed (OK, stolen) from the Liberal Democrat Freedom Bill but would be different in: a) language, b) the way it is written, and c) by not being presented as a piece of all-or-nothing politics. Neither individuals nor organisations would have to endorse all of it to engage with politicians and public in a wide educational campaign that asks for discriminating responses.
The aim is to create a talking point that links the issues, deepens Conservative commitments, seeks a Labour U-turn and ensures that the positive arguments are not confined to the Lib Dems and Greens.

We should draw it up in an open way. For example, we could ask the UCL Student Human Right network to write a draft. We put this on the web and get input. You only get good participation on the web if people know what will happen to it.

One suggestion is that we create in advance a ‘jury’ combining well-known and representative figures to assess all the suggestions and decide the version that is taken to the country by June. (People can always propose their additions after that).

At the same time we see how many people round the country want to volunteer to create temporary groups or networks and how they want to engage people - through local media, the web, town meetings, pub discussions. Maybe it should also be reinforced by a celebrity battlebus!”

The full text of Barnett’s proposal and the interesting debate it has sparked can be followed on Liberal Conspiracy.

Now I am not sure whether to herald this as a new, non-party political approach to participative democracy and therefore something to be welcomed or the further disenfranchisement of those who have neither the inclination nor the means to engage with a debate such as this because it predominantly web-based. We must remember that many people, especially older people, who might have much to contribute to a debate of this sort remain steadfastly disengaged from the world of computers and the wonders of the web, and this includes a number of active politicians on local councils.

An Awayday to London

Nice to have a brief trip away from Llandrindod. I spent the morning at the Royal Academy viewing the Andrea Palladio exhibition which comprises superb wooden models of some of his most spectacular buildings, many of his original plans, manuscripts of his I Quattro Libri del’ Architettura and some examples of Canaletto’s terrific paintings of Palladio’s buildings including the wonderful San Giorgio Maggiore from the Bacino di San Marco.

This was followed by the Kuniyoshi exhibition of exquisite colour woodblock prints of Samurai warriors, beautiful Japanese women, Kabuki theatre and some satirical pictures created during the Tenpo reforms of 1841-1843. Those of you familiar with Manga comic books will recognise the debt they owe to Kuniyoshi. I suppose one of the most iconic examples of colour woodblock painting of this era is Kaysushika Hokusai’s Under the Wave of Kanagawa and my favourite picture in this exhibition is Kuniyoshi’s Asaina Saburo Yoshihide wrestles with two crocodiles at Kotsubo Beach, Kamakura.

As an unexpected bonus, I was able to take in a midday concert at St James, Piccadilly – the Callaghan Piano Trio with Rachmaninov’s Piano Trio in D minor op. 9 ‘Elegiaque’. A piece I had never heard before, but no less enjoyable for that.

Good News At Last

You may recall that I posted a blog on the 28th February exhorting people to write to their MP to press her/him to do their utmost to have Clause 152 removed from the Coroners and Justice Bill which was progressing through the House of Commons.

This was the clause which would allow data gathered by government agencies for a specific primary purpose to be transferred to other government agencies for whatever secondary purpose they had in mind. This may not sound terribly significant, but it had the potential for wholesale data sharing across government and represented a gross infringement of our civil liberties.

Well, yesterday I received a letter from Roger Williams MP which contained the following good news.

Roger writes “I am pleased to say that, due entirely to the work of Lib Dem MPs, the government has agreed to remove the offending clause from the Bill. Hurray! It may well come back for debate in future legislation, so we will have to be vigilant, but for the time being the provision will not pass in to statute.”

We all need to be aware that we currently have the right to expect our government to respect and handle properly and responsibly the personal data which they collect about us. This Labour Government is constantly seeking to gather more and more data about us for a whole range of nefarious purposes and do not seem to be sufficiently concerned about the security of this data. Indeed, by its actions in this area of its work, the present government is showing total disrespect for its citizens.

Only by constant vigilance and the good efforts of hard working campaigners, supported by MPs and peers who are prepared to defend the privacy of our personal data, will we be begin to roll back the database state in which the government wants us to live.

Glyn Davies Uses The 'F' Word In Public Meeting

For me, the highlight of the Powys Meeting of the All Wales Convention last night was Glyn Davies using the ‘f’ word. No, not that word rather the word ’federal’. This was in answer to my question prompted by the threat of an increasingly dis-United Kingdom with its piecemeal and partial devolution in London, Northern Ireland, Scotland and Wales. I had asked where was the master plan for devolution in the UK? Sir Emyr Jones Parry conceded that there wasn’t one and that there was unlikely to be one until England embraced a notion of devolution. Glyn Davies seemingly recognised that the only way that a consistent and coherent model of devolution across the UK could be developed is by some sort of federal structure.

Apart from this exchange the “Powys” Meeting was entirely predictable. It could hardly be called the ‘Powys’ meeting given that it was held at the Monty Club in the middle of Newtown and that, apart from Sir Emyr, all the other panellists hailed from Montgomeryshire. Indeed most of the audience regarded it as the Montgomeryshire meeting. Most speakers used the opportunity for a spot of WAG-bashing. Cllr Robert Mills had a swipe at the EU, wind farms, WAG and one or two more of his pet hates in his usual incoherent way. Cllr Gary Price, giving a fair impression of Barney Rubble, explained that he was against devolution when he first voted in 1997 and was against it now. Moreover, if he could abolish WAG tomorrow then he would. Doh?

Richard Shortbridge identified the danger of “south-east syndrome” (my words rather than his), comparing the old days of being governed from the south east of England with the current situation of being governed from the south east of Wales, and suppose he has a point, to us in Mid Wales there seems very little difference between being ignored by a government in Westminster and being ignored by a government in Cardiff.

Everyone had an opportunity to have their say, Glyn Davies had an opportunity to appear statesman-like as befits an aspiring MP and we all went home content, job done. Though I remain puzzled as to what Philip Freeman and Gwynfor Thomas were doing on the panel, they can hardly be described as political heavyweights.

Oh and by the way, in spite of the predominant negativity towards WAG, there seemed to be general agreement that until there was absolute clarity as to what functions are the responsibility of the National Assembly and what remains the the responsibility of Westminster, there can be no proper accountability. This desire for clarity was what probably led me and the majority to vote in favour of transfer of powers at one go.

Vince Cable MP in Brecon

Yesterday, I joined 90 or so other Liberal Democrats in Brecon to hear Vince Cable MP talk mainly about the current economic situation. Yes, he was one of the first to see the financial crisis coming, but he draws no comfort from being able now to say “I told you so.”

What is impressive about the man is his quiet thoughtfulness and his ability to draw his listeners in as if they were being let into a secret. However, it is no secret that at the time that the Northern Rock fiasco was beginning to unfold, the Conservatives were shouting loudly for even further deregulation of the banking system. Even worse, the Conservatives are currently calling for severe restrictions on public spending at a time when what is really needed is a properly planned programme of public works, not only to provide much needed financial support for the building industry, but also to build new affordable housing and improve the energy performance of much of the existing housing stock.

As the official unemployment figure rises above 2 million and proceeds inexorably towards a predicted 3 million by the end of the year, Liberal Democrats are calling for urgent action to support hard- pressed families facing extreme difficulty in servicing their mortgage debt.

Surely it is better to provide adequate support to keep people in their current homes rather than allowing these homes to be repossessed and then sit empty waiting for the housing market to pick up, or be snapped up by property speculators and would-be landlords still intent on chasing a quick buck?

Is Devolution Failing?

Well, devolution isn’t yet failing in any absolute sense, but the writing could be on the wall. Yesterday I attended a public consultation event on the future of Wales’ Community Health Councils at Bishop’s Meadow, Brecon. Not particularly well attended but then there had been no real effort to attract the public and given, many of the comments made by local people, I’m not surprised.

The officials from WAG made a noble effort to convince us that reducing the number of CHCs in Wales from 19 down to 7 was a ‘good thing’, and that the creation of one CHC to serve the needs of the whole of Powys was both feasible and practicable. The problem was nobody in the audience bought their arguments and the lack of clarity in the consultation document was cruelly and easily exposed.

No, all that didn’t surprise me at all. What did surprise me was the vehemence of the opposition to these proposals from WAG and, by extension the deep scepticism about WAG in general. There were very clear indications, in most of the comments from the floor, of the utter powerless felt by these people of rural Wales in the face of what they regard as an unnecessary, uncaring and unaccountable tier of government based in Cardiff Bay.

As an illustration of the sentiments that were being expressed, lest anyone think that I am exaggerating the sense of despair that permeated the meeting, the term “Cardiff-centric” was used as a term of abuse at least three times by three different speakers, and I was not one of them. Indeed the whole tenor of the meeting exuded the cynicism of those who have become consultation-weary, not so much from being over consulted, but rather from having responded genuinely to many consultations and become increasingly frustrated at their responses having been systematically ignored.

In the far distant days of the 1960s, when devolution came to be placed firmly on the Welsh Liberal agenda, I never for one moment thought that getting on for fifty years later and a form of devolution having arrived, that I would ever feel the need to say that a devolved government in Wales has become hopelessly out of touch with significant sections of the population it purports to govern. Cynicism surrounding politicians and the political process is common, but what seems to be happening in Wales today is much more serious, this cynicism regarding politicians in general is developing into a serious lack of trust in the devolved government and, more importantly, in the process of devolution.

Now Is The Wrong Time To Increase Business Rates

Now most of us get fired up by increases in Council Tax and it has become an annual sporting event to harangue our County Councillors for having the effrontery to demand more money from us in order to provide a range of services, the extent and quality of which are becoming increasingly questionable.

But this isn’t a swipe at the increase in council tax, it is a swipe at that other tax that most of us forget, the uniform business rate. It is also a swipe at Alistair Darling, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is adamant that a proposed increase in uniform business rates planned for 1 April 2009 will go ahead as normal. This move will see retailers hit by a 5% increase in the uniform business rate at a time when many of them are struggling to survive let alone tackle higher cost. The rate at which this business tax is set is linked to an official measure of inflation that is measured in September of the previous year.

So regardless of the real rate of inflation now, regardless of the financial difficulties faced by many small businesses in the aftermath of the ‘credit crunch’, the Chancellor is going ahead with an increase of 5% in the UBR. Whatever else the tax system is, it is certainly not flexible, nor is it capable of responding appropriately to rapid changes in the economic circumstances of either the citizens or the businesses of Britain.

How does the government get away with this? Regrettably, the business community seems unwilling to draw attention to itself by protesting against a completely unjustified increase in their costs. Business people will moan to each other and a few of them will moan to their MP, but they are not inclined to contemplate any form of direct action, nor, in most parts of the UK, are they inclined to join together to lobby on behalf of their common interests. Across the country, Chambers of Trade have closed down in recent years, apathy having finally got the upper hand. Llandrindod’s Chamber folded nearly three years ago.

So just when business people need to let the Chancellor know how hard the economic downturn is hitting them by writing and lobbying and even, marching in protest, they find themselves without any form of relevant representative body. Chambers of Trade may not be terribly exciting organisations but they have a crucial purpose and that is to represent a specific business community in negotiations with all forms of government, central, national and local, to ensure that the unique perspective of businesspeople is taken into account in the decision making processes.

Is the 'Special Relationship' Worth The Compromises?

Timothy Garton Ash gets to the real heart of the problem with current British foreign policy - the so-called special relationship between the UK and the US. Perhaps it ought to be called the 'poodle problem', and it surrounds the extent to which, because of the special relationship, any British Government can influence any administration in the United States to respect the indepedence and sovereignty of other countries and their citizens. In trying to get to the bottom of the who knew what and who did what with respect to Binyam Mohamed, Garton Ash writes in today's Guardian:"...

"At the heart of all this is the absolute priority that the British government gives to our "special relationship" with the US, and the way in which British leaders and officials approach it. Take, for example, the story that the Foreign Office has told me with some emphasis over the last week. It is that, soon after David Miliband arrived at the Foreign Office in summer 2007, he wrote to the US secretary of state asking that the British residents incarcerated at Guantánamo Bay be released and returned to Britain. Thereafter Miliband's officials worked to make that happen, and secured the release of three of them, but not Mohamed. When Pentagon prosecutors defiantly went ahead to prosecute Mohamed, against a raft of good advice, the issue of releasing potentially exculpatory US intelligence reports - copies of which were in the British government's possession - became acute. The officials worked hard to get those documents released from US sources to Mohamed's defence counsel in the US. All along they believed private diplomacy would be more effective than public confrontation. Finally the charges were dropped and Mohamed was released - though only after damning judgments from the British high court and a change of administration in Washington.

In short: we, the British, were the good guys, it was the Americans who were the bad guys. Or rather, some Americans, since characteristically the British government got itself mixed up in Washington's dysfunctional inter-agency process, getting caught in the crossfire between, say, the state department and the Pentagon."

The full article can be read here. Whatever happened to Labour's much-vaunted "ethical foreign policy"? and where is there a shred of evidence to support the view that the UK's special relationship has definitively moderated US actions abroad? It's time for the poodle to bite back.

Amartya Sen and Capitalism Beyond the Crisis

A recent article in the New York Review of Books by Nobel Prize winning economist Amartya Sen entitled “Capitalism Beyond the Crisis” appeared in a much-abridged version in the Guardian on Saturday last. In fact the version that appeared in the Guardian was so abridged that it failed to include the three very important questions that Sen was posing:

“Ideas about changing the organization of society in the long run are clearly needed, quite apart from strategies for dealing with an immediate crisis. I would separate out three questions from the many that can be raised. First, do we really need some kind of "new capitalism" rather than an economic system that is not monolithic, draws on a variety of institutions chosen pragmatically, and is based on social values that we can defend ethically? …The second question… How do we assess what is taught and championed among academic economists as a guide to economic policy..? More particularly, what does the present economic crisis tell us about the institutions and priorities to look for? Third, in addition to working our way toward a better assessment of what long-term changes are needed, we have to think—and think fast—about how to get out of the present crisis with as little damage as possible.”

Sen proceeds with a long overdue reassessment of the contribution of the Scottish economist Adam Smith to the development of economic theory, and points out that far from being the advocate of unfettered capitalism…

“Smith never used the term "capitalism" (at least so far as I have been able to trace), but it would also be hard to carve out from his works any theory arguing for the sufficiency of market forces, or of the need to accept the dominance of capital… While he wrote that "prudence" was "of all the virtues that which is most useful to the individual," Adam Smith went on to argue that "humanity, justice, generosity, and public spirit, are the qualities most useful to others."

Smith viewed markets and capital as doing good work within their own sphere, but first, they required support from other institutions—including public services such as schools—and values other than pure profit seeking, and second, they needed restraint and correction by still other institutions—e.g., well-devised financial regulations and state assistance to the poor—for preventing instability, inequity, and injustice. If we were to look for a new approach to the organization of economic activity that included a pragmatic choice of a variety of public services and well-considered regulations, we would be following rather than departing from the agenda of reform that Smith outlined as he both defended and criticized capitalism.”

In a telling passage Sen points to “The insufficient regulation of financial activities has implications not only for illegitimate practices, but also for a tendency toward overspeculation that, as Adam Smith argued, tends to grip many human beings in their breathless search for profits. Smith called the promoters of excessive risk in search of profits "prodigals and projectors"—which is quite a good description of issuers of subprime mortgages over the past few years. Discussing laws against usury, for example, Smith wanted state regulation to protect citizens from the "prodigals and projectors" who promoted unsound loans:

A great part of the capital of the country would thus be kept out of the hands which were most likely to make a profitable and advantageous use of it, and thrown into those which were most likely to waste and destroy it.

The implicit faith in the ability of the market economy to correct itself, which is largely responsible for the removal of established regulations in the United States, tended to ignore the activities of prodigals and projectors in a way that would have shocked Adam Smith.”

Sen concludes that: “The present economic crises do not, I would argue, call for a "new capitalism," but they do demand a new understanding of older ideas, such as those of Smith and, nearer our time, of Pigou, many of which have been sadly neglected. What is also needed is a clearheaded perception of how different institutions actually work, and of how a variety of organizations—from the market to the institutions of the state—can go beyond short-term solutions and contribute to producing a more decent economic world."

So economists, back to your textbooks and prepare for a proper understanding of classical economics!

Rowan Williams on Global Economics

Normally I would not give much credence to a prelate commenting on economics rather than matters spiritual, however in these econmically challenging times and given what a tremendous polymath he is, I am intrigued by reports of a recent lecture given by Archbishop Rowan Williams. I belive the points he makes here are worthy of wider dissemination and more detailed discussion.

"…I shall suggest five elements, in descending order of significance, that might provide the bare bones of an economic culture capable of delivering something like an ethically defensible global policy.

(i) Most fundamentally: we need to move away from a model of economics which simply assumes that it is essentially about the mechanics of generating money, and try to restore an acknowledgement of the role of trust as something which needs time to develop; and so also to move away from an idea of wealth or profit which imagines that they can be achieved without risk, and to return to the primitive capitalist idea, as sketched above, of risk-sharing as an essential element in the equitable securing of wealth for all.

(ii) As many writers, from Partha Dasgupta to Jonathon Porritt have argued, environmental cost has to be factored into economic calculations as a genuine cost in opportunity, resource and durability – and thus a cost in terms of doing justice to future generations. There needs to be a robust rebuttal of any idea that environmental concerns are somehow a side issue or even a luxury in a time of economic pressure; the questions are inseparably connected.

(iii) We need to think harder about the role – actual and potential – of democratically accountable governments in the monitoring and regulation of currency exchange and capital flow. This could involve some international conventions about wages and working conditions, and cooperation between states to try and prevent the indefinite growth of what we might call – on the analogy of tax havens – cheap labour havens. Likewise, it might mean considering the kind of capital controls that prevent a situation where it is advantageous to allow indefinitely large sums of capital out of a country.

(iv) The existing international instruments – the IMF and World Bank, the WTO and the G8 and G20 countries – need to be reconceived as both monitors of the global flow of capital and agencies to stimulate local enterprise and provide some safety nets as long as the global playing field is so far from being level. They need to provide some protective sanctions for the disadvantaged – not aimed at undermining market mechanisms but at letting them work as they should, working to allow countries to trade their way out of destitution.

(v) Necessary short-term policies to kickstart an economy in crisis – such as we have seen in the UK in recent months – should be balanced by long-term consideration of the levels of material and service production that will provide an anchor of stability against the possible storms of speculative financial practice. This is not simply about "baling out" firms under pressure but about a comprehensive look at national economies with a view to understanding what sort of production levels would act as ballast in times of crisis, and investing accordingly."

Food for thought?

Red Nose Scandal in Llandrindod

Phantom knitters today attacked statues in Llandrindod Wells today. Well 'attacked' is probably not the right word, more 'accessorized'.



Rustle the dog claims that he was a victim of this outrage and commented "I think it was the Doddies, but I kept lying doggo and they went away. My nose isn't quite as cold as usual but I think I'm OK"



The Doddie castle has been decorated by unknown knitters and looks serene in its red bunting.

It is reported that Haydn who lives in the Lakeside Wood has a new red hat band and Thomas Jones, the famous artist, has a new pair of leg warmers. Many other statues in the town are sporting new red accessories. The Chief Grog at the lakeside has been given a very fetching bonnet, perched at a rakish angle and the Big Doddie near the Lakeside Restaurant has been given a handy bookmark for his ever-open book.

Griswallt ap Llechitwyt was not available to comment on the fate which befell his friends today. It is hoped to contact him as soon as possible.

Why, Oh Why, Can't I Hold A Camera Steady?

This was supposed to be a coherent press release but as always, I make a mess of the photograph. Apologies to all concerned.
MP endorses Llandrindod’s ‘Buy Local’ Campaign



Roger Williams MP with Valerie Lymer, Vice-Chair of Llandrindod Wells Spa Town Trust and Trust Manager, Michiel Blees

Llandrindod Wells Spa Town Trust have launched Llandrindod’s ‘Buy Local’ campaign to make local people aware of the importance of buying their goods and services from local suppliers and thereby giving a much-needed boost to the local economy.

On Friday, Roger Williams MP came to the Rock Park Centre to endorse the campaign. “We must do everything we can to support local businesses, especially in these difficult economic times” said Roger Williams. “I fully support the Llandrindod Wells Spa Town Trust in their efforts to persuade people to support their local businesses and wish them well with this campaign.”

Michiel Blees, the Trust Manager added that the Spa Town Trust has long supported the local community of Llandrindod Wells and is keen to do whatever it can to support local businesses.
Never mind, the road to hell is said to be paved with good intentions and it is Friday after all.

Please Support David Heath's Fuel Poverty Bill

Can you do anything to help David Heath MP get his Fuel Poverty Bill on to the Statute Book? Here is David's message to all of us who are demanding an end to fuel poverty:

It is a tragedy that 20,000 people needlessly die from the cold each year, and many more become ill. It is a cruel society when hard-pressed families have to make the choice between feeding their children and keeping their home warm. And yet that is what we face in Britain today, with fuel prices more than doubled over five years and so many homes poorly insulated so that energy is wasted.

We need to:

Require the Government to introduce a strategy to get every home in fuel poverty up to standard by 2016

Introduce social tariffs to cut fuel bills for the poorest families

What will that do? It will make a direct difference to millions of people, both in cities and rural areas, who struggle to heat their homes. It will mean fewer people face illness or death from cold and damp. It means we will help to reduce the wastage of energy which contributes to climate change. And it will produce work for thousands of builders and insulators at a time when they desperately need it.

My Bill has the support of a wide range of organisations, those working for the elderly, for the disabled, for the environment and against poverty. It is picking up support from local councils and groups across the country.

Please do anything you can to campaign on what I think is a crucial issue, and one which we must get right.

I don't want a single extra person to die of cold in their homes in years to come in a supposedly affluent country like Britain. I hope you feel that way too.

All the best,

David Heath
Member of Parliament for Somerton & Frome

Will you write to your MP and ask her/him to support David Heath's Fuel Poverty Bill? Come on, it's only the price of a stamp and five minutes effort.

Are We Ready to Save The World?

Anthony Giddens, one of the prime movers behind the ill-fated Third Way – the ideology behind New Labour, has an interesting column in today’s Guardian and a new book “The Politics of Climate Change” due to be published shortly. I have long regarded Anthony Giddens as a heavyweight academic with real insights into the art of setting political agendas.

Giddens starts from the premise that we are on the brink of a major revolution – the demise of the fossil fuel economy, and he ponders the effect this will have on jobs. Clearly, as economies move from fossil fuel dependence towards green energy solutions old jobs will be lost and new jobs gained but he points out that “Most forms of technological innovation reduce the need for labour power.” He goes on to argue that: “Jobs will be created not so much through renewable technologies themselves, but through the lifestyle changes that coping with climate change and energy security will bring about. The emerging economy will be even more radically post-industrial than the one we have now. And it will be up to entrepreneurs to spot the economic opportunities that will come about as it expands - much in the same way as ways were found to revitalise dockland areas when the shipping industry evaporated.”

However more significantly, Giddens asserts that: “The period of Thatcherite deregulation is over. The state is back. Both economic institutions and climate change and energy policy will need active planning, though the mistakes made by previous generations of planners have to be avoided.”

The real challenge, Giddens argues, is “…to find a new role for market-based mechanisms... Complex financial instruments are out of fashion, blamed for the economic collapse. Yet we will have need of them again because, properly regulated, they are often the key to long-term investment, rather than a force against it.”

So, are we up for this challenge? Can we rely on our politicians to set aside their traditional short-term planning horizons long enough to work co-operatively to plan effectively to really ‘save the world’. Someone needs to tell Gordon Brown that the job isn’t quite finished.

The Nettle Must Be Grasped

The fury of the Powys Secondary Head Teachers is understandable. For many years they have fought hard to protect and expand their sixth forms against a steady decline in the numbers of school age children and the requirements of a more diverse curriculum. They have struggled to persuade as many children as possible to stay on after sixteen and have done wonders in attempting to broaden the range of their offer. They have also managed to continue to achieve very high educational standards vis-à-vis the rest of Wales in the face of budgets which have steadily declined in real terms.

However, after a thoroughgoing review of secondary education in Powys carried out by Powys County Council – I remember the eighteen months or so of almost fortnightly meetings – and at least two consultants’ reports, Powys Local Education Authority seems to be no further ahead in its attempts to modernise the secondary education system. They have expended an enormous amount of officer, councillor and consultant time, and presumably money in order, it would appear, not to make a decision.

Now the Head Teachers are rightly protesting and they will be supported by their Governing Bodies. No matter what spin the so-called ‘One Wales’ government puts on the situation, you can’t continually maintain educational standards and broaden the curriculum with a declining budget. Most of these schools have already made the most of potential efficiency savings in recent years and it is difficult to see how school budgets can be wrung any further without damaging Powys’ highly prized educational standards.

Assuming that the education officials at WAG are not fools, they realise that the schools have been squeezed almost dry. So what is their agenda?

Clearly there has to be a thorough overhaul of the structure of secondary, and particularly, post-16 education in the vast, sparsely populated area that is Powys. Everyone who understands post –16 education realises that. They also realise that the post-16 sector has to be modernised in its entirety, this includes the thirteen secondary schools together with Coleg Powys. What no-one can seem to agree on is precisely how this is to be achieved, and what I think the Head Teachers fear is that WAG will put even more pressure on Powys County Council to move towards the creation of a tertiary institution and, as a result, the high schools will lose their prized sixth forms.

What annoys me and I guess many others is the procrastination on the part of both WAG and Powys County Council on this issue – they are fiddling while Rome burns. The longer it takes our regional and local government institutions to grasp the problem in a serious and meaningful way, the more damage is being done to schools and the pupils in them by forcing the staff of those schools to try to provide more and more with fewer and fewer resources.

With declining rolls and a more diverse curriculum requirement, a restructuring is now very urgent. So my plea is for WAG and Powys County Council is to get on with it, grasp the nettle, make the difficult and unpalatable decisions and build for the future. You simply cannot put off making the decisions for ever.

Perhaps the recently departed Chief Executive was right when he remarked that: “Local members tend to have less respect for policy than for local sensibilities.” This sentiment seems not to be confined to policy about wind energy, it applies across a whole range of policies. There are far too many members of Powys County Council who are more concerned with courting populism than making decisions that might prove unpopular with their electors. It seems to me that what is really lacking with regard to the issue of the future of post-16 education in Powys is moral courage on the part of the council’s members.

I Sometimes Wonder...

I sometimes wonder whether the bureaucrats in Cardiff Bay actually have any real idea of the physical geography of Powys. Perhaps they are aware that the area of Powys is quite a bit bigger than the area of Cardiff, but are they aware of the sheer difficulty of getting about within Powys?

Now if I were intent on organising a public meeting on behalf of the All Wales Convention for the residents of Powys, I would try to find somewhere central so that those living towards the boundaries of Powys are not unduly disadvantaged in terms of the distances they have to travel to contribute to a democratic debate on further powers for the National Assembly. There is an obvious central location for such an important meeting and that is Llandrindod Wells. It is the location of the County Council offices for that very reason, it is central.

So what does the All Wales Convention do? They decide to hold their meeting in Newtown. For the residents of Ystradgynlais, this represents a round trip of 160 miles, for the residents of Crickhowell it is a round trip of 122 miles.

There is planned an additional ‘evidence gathering’ session on the following day. So where do you think this is scheduled to take place? Somewhere nice and central? No, it is to be located in Machynlleth. For the residents of both Ystradgynlais and Crickhowell this represents a round trip of 170 miles.

Perhaps the All Wales convention could adopt a reasonable attitude to the residents of Brecon & Radnorshire and arrange a meeting for them, say at the Royal Welsh Showground, Llanelwedd so that people need travel only a reasonable distance to respond to this important consultation?

The Penalty of a Simple Indiscretion

I was both shocked and disappointed to hear that Mark Kerr, Chief Executive of Powys County Council resigned yesterday. In my experience he was well respected and had a superb grasp of the many and varied issues that beset local authorities in the modern world. True, he could be blunt, but you always knew precisely where he stood on whatever issue was under discussion.

It’s a cliché to say it, but he really didn’t suffer fools gladly and he had more than his fair share of fools to suffer, particularly in the Council Chamber. Mark Kerr is an honourable man which is lot more than can be said for those Powys County Councillors and possibly others who have been baying for his blood over the past week.

Mark Kerr made a huge contribution to the essential modernisation of the Council and improved both its efficiency and its effectiveness considerably. I wish him luck in the future.

So, Where Were You, Labour?

Further reflections on yesterday’s Convention on Modern Liberty: in Cardiff much was made, both from the podium and from the floor, of the total absence of any speakers from Welsh Labour although the organisers did assure us more than once that all Welsh parties had been invited. Their absence signals a worrying disregard on their part for the gradual erosion of individual freedoms over recent years and confirms what many of us have suspected concerning Welsh Labour – that their long dominance of politics in Wales has resulted in an arrogant complacency with regard to their electoral position.

So where was Labour? No doubt some were still in Paris drowning their sorrows, but surely they could have made some sort of effort. Are Labour really so spineless that they can put up not a single spokesperson to defend the freedom-sapping actions of their government over the last eleven years? Shame on you, Labour

You can read about the main event here