Monthly Archives: August 2011

Planning ‘guarantee’ regime mooted by Clark

Posted on by • Posted in Government • Tagged , , , , • Leave a comment

Ministers have announced proposals for a planning ‘guarantee’ designed to ensure no application for planning permission in England takes longer than 12 months to be determined, including any appeal. Another nail in the coffin of genuine Localism, when it comes to planning matters?

I can see a form of the ‘black economy’ in reverse emerging in some planning departments. Why? The current system dictates that, in order to cash the cheque that comes with any planning app, it has to be validated and put in to the system, so that the determination clock starts ticking.

Therefore, in order to avoid stating that clock, the planners just need to avoid validating the application, but continue to work on it off of the books, so that they can be one step ahead when the application does eventually come back – that’s the ‘black economy’ bit. The downside of this strategy is of course the lack of a fee to support the work now being carried ‘for free’, hence the ‘in reverse’ bit.

I doubt that many councils will want to adopt this sort of subterfuge, if only because of the up-front cost. However, in those areas where developers have a reputation for exploiting the system to make a fast buck, the local planning authority may have no choice, given the latest piece of planning system vandalism being proposed by DCLG.

Quango bonfire’ extinguished as thousands join state payroll

Posted on by • Posted in Government • Tagged , , , , , , , , • Leave a comment

It would appear that the world of ‘Yes Minister’ is still alive and well in Whitehall. According to todays’ newspapers:

‘More than 4,500 bureaucrats have been recruited by government departments since the election. The recruits outnumber those made redundant by three to one. At least 40 civil servants have been hired on salaries exceeding £150,000 per year in the past twelve months.’

Whilst at the local level at he behest of the likes of Eric Pickles, we have been busy enthusiastically decimating local government, Whitehall has been continuing to keep their nest well feathered, recruiting as many to their ranks as possible. Francis Maude has been conned by civil servants, who have many years of experience in pulling the wool over the politicians’ eyes, is running around telling everybody the government has cut £3.5 billion through increased efficiencies and cutting waste. All I can say to that is, ‘show me the money!’.

Even if that number is true, other ministers are busy finding ways to spend it on the overseas aid budget, so none of us will see the benefit. It would appear that charity no longer begins at home!

Shoe box Britain

Posted on by • Posted in Everyday life • Tagged , , , • Leave a comment

Did you know that we allow our house builders to build houses with the smallest room sizes in western Europe? Well you do now! I was reminded of this horrifying fact by the Channel 4 series The Secret Life Of Buildings. Even Denmark, a smaller country than ours, managers to treat it’s people like human beings, not battery hens, by having some of the best room sizes in Europe and only slightly below those in Australia. Wait until you see what damage the NPPF does!

Eric Pickles does Localism

Posted on by • Posted in Government, public sector • Tagged , , , , • Leave a comment

I see Eric Pickles is once again demonstrating that his version of Localism – the directed one – is the only one that he actually believes in with his latest comments about town centre car parking charges.

Having shafted local government big time, by slashing its grant setlement by 28% in one year with even more to come, he now has the nerve to tell the public that town centre car parking charges will drop. Given his financial betrayal of local government, it’s not at all clear how he comes to this conclusion, but that’s about par for the course with this big mouthed minister.

The problem with car parking charges is that they are always viewed in isolation from all other areas of council business. They are either viewed as a burden on the taxpayer that must at best be kept cost neutral because they are so politically sensitive or, at the other end of the spectrum, they are seen as a source of revenue, that can legitimately be used to bolster the council’s income, despite the legislation saying that it should be run for profit. As always, where there’s a will there’s a way and many councils seems to do very nicley out of it, thank you very much.

My view is that, where approporiate, the cost of running a town centre car park should be seen as part of the council’s investment in the economic development of that town centre. If the evidence is there to show that car parking charges, or even the lack of them, is having an impact of the vitality or viabilty of a town centre, then why not include the cost of running the car park in the economic development strategy for that town?

This would then allow the council to justify to taxpayers the provision of free parking, where a town centre is found to be struggling and its shops closing down in increasing numbers, without being accused of subsidising motorists.

Good luck Ollie, you’ll need it!

Posted on by • Posted in Government, public sector • Tagged , , , , , , • Leave a comment

I see Oliver Letwin is calling for the cold wind of commercial reality to blow through the world of public service. Apparently, his radical suggestion is that, just like happens in the private sector, if somebody doesn’t do their job properly, they sholud be sacked and not just shuffled around the department until it’s time for them to retire.

Looked at from the outside, this doesn’t seem a particularly radical idea, until you look at the way the public sector, through it’s unions, has tied success governments and therefore the taxpayers in knots over the years. Public sector terms and conditions are based on the age old tradition of, work for peanuts, but get rewarded by a shorter working life and a better pension.

However, the confidence trick that has been played on the taxpayer over the past 20+ years, is that of ever increasing salaries, but without this being balanced by a reduction in their much criticised gold plated terms and conditions. Until that key point is addressed, the whole issue of dragging the public sector in to line with the private sector is going to remain a pipe dream.

By coincidence, I asked a very similar question when the district council was looking at how to reorganisation itself – how do we bring ourselves in the real world, by making our terms and conditions parallel the private sector? Like Oliver Letwin is no doubt already hearing, I was told that it wasn’t that easy. Apparently, the way public sector employment is structured in law, the council could not employ two people doing the same job, on different terms and conditions. If that is the case, then I can see little future for the public sector, as it seems the only way to level this particular playing field would be to scrap the public service sector completely and start again. Ultimately, is that what the Big Society is all about?