NESNO Research : An Alternative?

An Alternative
This is very long - I've chopped out almost all of the first half, it can be seen here but the most significant and memorable claim is in the second half - this, which applies equally in the South East and everywhere else in England:

"Of all the money spent by the Government, just one pound in twenty-one is actually controlled by politicians who are accountable to local voters. To put it another way, the ratio of power is about: London Treasury 95: local authorities 5."

That could very easily be changed, by returning power to the existing local authorities. But that isn't what the London-based politicians want to do - they prefer to keep control, and just set up pseudo-democratic regional management bodies, aka Regional Assemblies. So when the "Yes" campaign asks "Well, what alternative would you offer?", this is the answer. (Yes, even if it's come from the Tory-dominated NESNO!)

YES CAMPAIGN BACKS “POLITICS AS USUAL” - NESNO SHOWS WHAT REAL LOCAL POWER LOOKS LIKE

(b) shows that alternatives are available for delivering genuine local power and accountability – for example by creating elected mayors with real power over local public services such as the police, schools and hospitals, or by electing local education or health authorities. Either system would take powers away from London and give the North East people more power ..........

If you pay taxes that go to central Government and then central Government decides where the money goes and how it’s spent, you end up with what we have now – London is in charge of everything, including our money. London can also: place limits on local authorities tax-raising powers; impose obligations and controls on how the money they hand out is spent; subsidise failing Councils from the same political Party.

How things could change – how we could deliver real local power…
*********************************************
TRUE LOCAL CONTROL FOR THE NORTH EAST

WHAT WE SHOULD BE DISCUSSING INSTEAD OF THE REGIONAL ASSEMBLY.

A NORTH EAST SAYS NO RESEARCH NOTE

1. INTRODUCTION

This research note is not intended to set out detailed proposals about what exactly should replace the plans for a Regional Assembly. We are only voting on the specifics being offered at this referendum. However, we hope that this note can be a useful addition to the debate by showing how what is on offer is a million miles away from genuine local power. It looks nothing like the local power that exists in other countries. The bottom line is this: the Yes campaign is trying to sell politics as usual under a different name,

The most important thing that can shape the future of the North East is how our public services are run. We think that schools and hospitals should be run by people who make the day-to-day decisions, not by politicians in London. The Regional Assembly will not shift power over management and funding of local services from London politicians to the North East – it will just mean more politics as usual.

The North East could be much richer and better governed if the people and professionals of the North East could take power away from politicians in London and control our own affairs more than we do.

Taking power from London would mean more efficient control so that both better services and lower taxes are possible.

The proposed Regional Assembly is being sold as a way to do this but the unfortunate truth is that the Yes campaign is selling the North East “politics as usual” – a Regional Assembly that would suck power away from local communities, concentrate power in a few politicians’ hands, without actually taking real powers and financial power away from London.

We think that if people vote Yes to the Regional Assembly, that will block any real reform for years. A few well-connected people and the political parties will benefit but it will mean that control of local schools, hospitals, crime, and our economy remain in London.

If you care about more power for the North East, you should vote No to the Regional Assembly and demand real powers for the North East instead of politics as usual.

2. HOW WE’VE MOVED FURTHER AWAY FROM LOCAL CONTROL…

Since the war, control of public services has gradually been taken away from local communities and power has been concentrated in London. Britain’s public services are much more centrally controlled than in Europe or America.
Now, just a quarter of all the Government’s public spending goes through local authorities.

Worse, only a quarter of this money that local authorities spend is actually raised locally.

Of all the money spent by the Government, just one pound in twenty-one is actually controlled by politicians who are accountable to local voters.
To put it another way, the ratio of power is about:

London Treasury 95: local authorities 5.

If you pay taxes that go to central Government and then central Government decides where the money goes and how it’s spent, you end up with what we have now – London is in charge of everything, including our money. London can also:
Place limits on local authorities tax-raising powers.
Impose obligations and controls on how the money they hand out is spent.
Subsidise failing Councils from the same political Party.

We all know what happens if people are spending our money when they are not responsible for it and if we can’t change things by voting – our money is wasted and services are poor.

Disciplinary rules, exam standards, and school management are mostly controlled by London – so North East schools are controlled by politicians who don’t even know the name of our towns, never mind the names of our children.
Essentially, London raises and spends practically all the £60 billion NHS budget – local authorities and local professionals have less control of healthcare than in any other member of the EU.

Policing standards are set by politicians in London, not by people who know local conditions – so our streets get more dangerous and there is nothing we can do.

What is the result of our money and our services controlled by London?
1/5 children leave school illiterate and incapable of basic maths.
Crime has doubled in twenty years and you are now more likely to be beaten up in many British towns than in America.
Police, teachers, and medical professionals are more and more demoralised because they cannot deliver the service they want to.
The public is stopping voting.

This trend is the result of deliberate action taken by all political parties who want to see power concentrated in London. The Conservative Party’s experiment with the poll tax badly damaged local democracy, and Labour has also strengthened London against local authorities.

The outcome: we have gone from having 70% of local authority income raised locally in 1940 to about 50% in 1980, to about 25% now (Office for National Statistics).

Now, London is offering us a Regional Assembly which means no more local control and even more powers taken away from local authorities. European countries and America do not allow central government such a tight grip on services.

3. IDEAS FOR HOW TO GIVE THE PEOPLE AND PROFESSIONALS OF THE NORTH EAST REAL POWER

All we can do is lay out some ideas to give a flavour of how different we think the debate over the future of the North East should be. Since we can only vote on the Regional Assembly – which would do none of the important things the North East needs - there is no point going into details of all the different ways of reforming things, but we think that NESNO has a duty to tell the electorate some of the things that should and could be up for discussion.

The heart of the matter is this:
If policing, schools, and hospitals are run by people who know you, and they are responsible to people that we can vote out, then standards will rise.
The Yes campaign talk as though we would have power over these things but that is unfortunately just spin. No objective observer can look at the Yes campaign’s claims and say they are true.

There are many different ways of organising how services are delivered but the key thing is whether London controls management and funding or whether management and funding are controlled by people who can be voted out by people on a local level.

Some think that local education authorities, health authorities, and police authorities should all be elected, in part or in whole.
Others think that we should create locally elected mayors who have personal responsibility for the key areas.

The key thing is whether the key officials and budgets are controlled locally. Both systems could produce this.

As an example of how things could be done differently, imagine a North East in which the different counties elect a Mayor who has control over education, health, and crime (and other things). The Mayor would have power over the local budget and the key officials. People could vote the Mayor in or out depending on their performance.

This is what happens in much of Europe, America and Japan.

What could change…

Education

When politicians are in charge, they usually manage things badly and then they try to cheat the figures to hide their failure. In education, the Government claims that standards are shooting upwards but the truth is the opposite. 1/5 kids leave school without basic reading and writing skills they need for a decent job.
Between 1997 – 2001, schools received over one thousand publications and sets of regulations. Teachers are swamped by endless bureaucracy and their head teachers can do nothing about it. Teachers increasingly have to manage London bureaucracy rather than get on with teaching. It is no wonder that so many are leaving their profession.

Schools in the North East should be run by people who know your children – not by politicians in London. With an elected Mayor who you could vote out, we have more chance of improving school standards.

Policing

Policing in Britain used to be run by people from local communities who understood the area and were responsible to local people. A Century ago, Britain was famous across the world for having such little violent crime.

But politicians have gradually taken more and more control away from local communities and centralised control of policing in London. Politicians damaged local policing in the 1980s. Now, politicians are creating endless rules for how policemen all over the country have to behave, without regard for different circumstances.

When New Yorkers got sick of violent crime in the 1990s, Rudolph Giuliani was elected, changed the police methods, got police out of their cars and back on the streets, and introduced zero tolerance. Crime fell by over 60% - bigger than any reduction in Britain.

We need to change our priorities. The police must be got out of their cars and back on the street so they can stop violent crime – their most important job. If local policing is run by people who have to answer to us, then the police would have to listen to our concerns.

The people of the North East could get our streets back under control if we demand directly elected local mayors with the power to control the police and sack senior police officers who fail to perform.

Health

Health spending has risen by billions but we aren’t getting value for money. While healthcare in Europe and America takes advantage of new technology, in Britain we are rationed. Healthcare professionals, like teachers, are swamped with bureaucracy from London and aren’t allowed to get on with their jobs.
In France and most of Europe, there are practically no waiting lists but in Britain we have a million people waiting. Surely we can do better.

The NHS worked when it was introduced after the war but in the 21st Century, we need to change how the system is managed.

If politicians in London keep kicking the NHS round like a political football, then it will never keep pace with new science and treatments however much money is thrown at it.

Instead of a Regional Assembly with no powers over health, we could demand that an elected Mayor is put in charge of how local hospitals are run and how the budget is spent. If waiting lists don’t fall, then we would know who to blame and we could vote them out.

The economy

All major questions about tax and expenditure are taken in London. The North East is told what to do and has little influence on policy.

The North East will not be able to thrive until it can control the crucial conditions of tax, spending, and the way businesses are regulated for ourselves – until we can drive up educational standards and fund higher education properly.
In parts of America, Universities and entrepreneurs have created areas like Silicon Valley which create high quality jobs and huge advances in living standards.

Can the North East do the same? Not now and not with the Regional Assembly. The Draft Regional Assemblies Bill makes it clear that the economic development plans of a Regional Assembly could be vetoed by London if they conflicted with national priorities or if they looked like they were going to affect the fortunes of regions outside the North East.

The Council Tax system punishes those on low incomes – particularly pensioners. It was introduced in a rush to deal with the Poll Tax fiasco and it needs thorough reform.

We could also consider innovations such as:
scrapping VAT and introducing a local sales tax, as in America, which can be raised or lowered according to what the public wants;
new property taxes which are harder to fiddle;
putting local authorities back in charge of business rates, so that businesses pay their fair share and efforts can be made to attract new business to the region.

We also need a new auditing system that is transparent. The lack of democratic accountability has helped the spread of corruption in the region and real local democracy would help stop those on the take.

4. Conclusion

There is no magic solution to the problems of the North East. A huge amount could be done but it will stay impossible if the crucial decisions are always taken in London by politicians who aren’t even sure where towns are on the map.
The first step towards getting real powers for the North East is saying NO to the Regional Assembly. This is just more spin from vested interests that would only have the power to wreck local authorities – it wouldn’t get real power back from London.

ENDS