“Gambling machines with £100 stake are only allowed in UK”

It is thought the Chancellor is loath to change odds because the gambling industry contributes large sums to the Exchequer (and, coincidentally, of course, to Tory funds by their directors):

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/betting-companies-ladbrokes-corals-fixed-odds-betting-terminals-philip-davies-top-list-of-donations-a7925461.html

Britain is the only developed country to have high street betting shops that allow people to bet up to £100 every 20 seconds, according to a report.

The government should cut the maximum stake on fixed-odds betting terminals (FOBTs) from £100 to £2 because such high stakes destroy jobs, devastate communities and are “highly destructive” to family life, the Conservative think tank Respublica argues.

Phillip Blond, co-author of the report, said: “Conservatives should not support a piece of New Labour legislation that has wrought destruction throughout some of our most disadvantaged communities.”

https://www.thetimes.co.uk/edition/news/gambling-machines-with-100-stake-are-only-allowed-in-uk-mm3x3l9kw

Rural broadband: a lesson from Canada

“Former Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron has criticised the government for failing rural people on broadband.

Mr Farron, who is the MP for the South Lakes in Cumbria, said the average household speed in the area was just 10.9Mbps, compared to the national average of 17Mbps.

New figures from the consumer rights group Which? reveal that 1 in 4 people in Westmorland and Lonsdale have less than 4.0Mbps broadband connection.
Under the Government’s Universal Service Obligation, 10Mbps is the minimum speed that anyone in the UK would be entitled to request by 2020.

The Cumbrian MP has tabled two parliamentary questions to the government.
The questions seek to establish what progress is being made towards the Universal Service Obligation, and whether BT will face financial penalties if the targets are not met.

Mr Farron said: “The fact that one in four people in the South Lakes have a broadband connection of less than 4Mbps is frankly not good enough.
“Many small businesses in rural areas like ours are finding it impossible to function without adequate broadband. “The government’s Universal Service Obligation target of 10Mbps is nowhere near ambitious enough.”
Canada, which was a much larger and sparsely populated country than the UK, had a target of 50Mbps, said Mr Farron. “The government must put in place measures which penalise BT if they fail to meet the targets.”

A government representative is expected to respond to Mr Farron’s questions over the coming weeks.

Meanwhile, the National Infrastructure Commission has warned that urgent investment is needed in the UK’s broadband and mobile networks.
Increased broadband speeds could add £17bn to UK output by 2024, according to an NIC report.

The report says the UK’s digital economy is the largest of any G20 nation as a percentage of GDP.

But it warns that almost one in four rural premises lack a decent broadband service.

The UK lags behind other developed countries – such as the USA, Netherlands and Japan – for 4G and broadband speeds, it adds.”

http://www.rsnonline.org.uk/services/rural-mp-slams-government-on-broadband

What is the view of independent councillors at the Local Government Association?

“Dear colleagues,

It has been good to see so many of you this month at our Group Party conferences and at the National Conference of Children and Adult Services. We also ran the first module of the Next Generation leadership course. All this adds skills and knowledge to the many talents of our [Independent] members and enables us to discuss issues and craft better solutions. The regional meetings also start shortly in every area, so we shall soon be at a place nearer you to hear your views first hand. Thank you to those who made it to the recent information and development seminar on campaigning, either in person or online in the webinar.

English councils have taken a reduction of £16m in Government Grant funding from income tax, only partly offset by the 50 per cent retention of local business rates. 166 councils will be expected to pay the Government instead, further centralising money and power, exactly contrary to the agreed direction. The LGA is working hard on this in their Budget submission. 97 per cent of councils signed up to the four year agreement, but on the promise that 100 per cent of the business rates would be retained in local government, now a broken promise. If you are one of the 166 councils, have you passed a motion to seek a better deal? Please let us know.

It leaves us short of funds to run services and makes it hard to support more people with increased housing. We have called long and hard for powers and funds to build the houses people can afford. It is bizarre that councils can borrow to build a swimming pool or a hotel, but not for much needed housing, regardless of a sound business case.

Instead of lifting this cap, Theresa May has announced a £2bn fund for social and/or “affordable” housing. If you rely on the media it is unclear whether this is intended for affordable or social housing. For example, the Sky News headline refers to affordable housing while the Guardian headline refers to social housing. Whichever it is for, it is only available to some councils and then only through a bidding process, ratheru than just giving us the funds. Her calculation of 5,000 homes a year, is based on an £80,000 subsidy per dwelling, but in areas of greatest demand, where she says she wants to direct the funding, that will fall woefully short. In its budget submission, the Chartered Institute of Housing recommended an extra £1.5bn every year to build 28,000 homes.

Sadly, although genuine funds are always welcome, the fund announced by the PM will not tackle the problem. We cannot plug the housing gap while the “right to buy” continues to drain our resources. In many councils, these have almost doubled this year, each sale taking two thirds of the value out of the public purse and into central government and private hands. We have to start to limit these expensive donations to what we can afford.

We cannot flood the market to bring house prices down while demand is unrestricted. Anyone in the world can buy here, and they do. Like a foreign holiday home, the first sale brings money into the community, but after that sales are often passed from one absent owner to another and sometimes left empty – more a place to house funds, rather than people.

We cannot make housing affordable while rents spiral without restraint and “affordable” is not linked to income, but to 80 per cent of commercial value. Many people will obviously continue to struggle. A housing rent statement is expected to confirm the move back to a maximum of 1 per cent above the consumer price index.

Meanwhile, homelessness is rising. I visited EMMAUS which provides an en suite room, regular meals, a community and a job for 720 homeless people. But it uses Housing Benefit that is about to be swallowed up in Universal Credit, an issue colleagues and I have raised at all levels. Our Vice President, Lord Victor Adebowale, CE of Turning Point was on Twitter this week supporting the work of community enterprise.

Greg Clarke, one the most thoughtful of our Ministers, responded brilliantly to my question recently, pointing out that growth could be an empty target if it did not provide balanced communities with work and housing to match.

However, DCLG has a consultation out now about increasing the pressure on councils to give permissions for housing, regardless of local ability to provide jobs, services, infrastructure such as roads and schools, and regardless of land availability without damage to the environment. Our Group’s Deputy Chairman, Rachel Eburne, is on the LGA board for the Environment, Economy, Housing and Transport. She pointed out that the cross party board was unanimous in its objection to the centralised steamroller approach.

The LGA has sought powers to prevent land-banking that prevents houses being built, while councils are required to compensate by giving ever more permissions, making a mockery of a planning system which is prevented from planning ahead. DCLG has not chosen to put any pressure on the developers to get on with it, despite our calls to give councils the ability to step in. Also the viability studies remain obscure and enable developers to reject the much-needed contributions to affordable housing or infrastructure. We cannot just look at housing on its own. It must be linked to economics, environment, and sustainability.

Leader of the Independent Group
Vice Chair of the Local Government Association
Lincolnshire County Councillor and North Kesteven District Councillor”

How much do PFI contracts cost DCC?

“A Labour pledge to bring “wasteful” PFI contracts back in the public sector would cost a massive £671m in Devon, it has been revealed.

Shadow chancellor John McDonnell told the annual party conference last month the contracts were set to cost the taxpayer £200bn over coming decades and private companies were making “huge profits”.

The cost to the county for all the buildings, such as schools, hospitals armed forces’ accommodation, funded by private finance initiatives was estimated to be around £2.4bn just four years ago.

Newly released figures by the county council show that Exeter Schools would cost £210m to buy out with £322m for an energy for waste (EFW) plant and £139m for a Devonport EFW scheme. …

… Private companies carry out the construction work and maintenance, in exchange for regular payments from the taxpayer.

It has proved controversial with criticisms that it is overly generous to the private contractors.

Some schools, including in Exeter, have said the quality of parts of their new buildings have been poor.

Other public bodies, such as hospitals, have complained that large debt repayments, over long periods of time, make it difficult for them to balance their books.

However, defenders of PFI said it provided new infrastructure which would otherwise be unaffordable.

The biggest margin on a project in Devon came with a deal for new accommodation for services’ personnel at Devonport Naval Base in Plymouth.

Its estimated cost of £554m, which will also include service and maintenance charges, is more than 12 times the initial building price. …

… Devon County Council said it could not “accurately” estimate the cost of terminating contracts without going into negotiations.

Cabinet member for finance John Clatworthy said the schools PFI contract in 2005/6 was £348m.

He wrote: “Set against this was a grant of £248m that would be received from central government – of the balance, £75m would be met from the delegated schools budget and the remainder (£75m) would be met by the council.”

http://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/cost-labour-pledge-cancel-pfi-583063

Unemployed in Glasgow? Tory MP says “Go work on a farm and meet gorgeous EU women”

“A Conservative MP has said young people should “get on their bikes” and take farming jobs where they can work with “loads of gorgeous EU women”.

Craig Mackinlay, the MP for South Thanet, told a fringe meeting at the Conservative conference in Manchester that British youngsters needed to show the same motivation as low-skilled workers from elsewhere in Europe.

“I was struggling to think why wouldn’t a youngster from Glasgow without a job come down to the south to work for a farm for the summer with loads of gorgeous EU women working there?” he said.

“What’s not to like? Get on your bike and find a job.”

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/10/02/unemployed-should-get-bikes-find-work-farm-gorgeous-european/

Companies make £44 billion profit, directors take £270m but don’t pay living wage

“Nearly half of our top 100 companies raked in a combined £44billion in profits last year while refusing to pay a proper living wage.

At the same time, the fat cat bosses of those firms pocketed nearly £270million between them, a Mirror probe found.

A third of FTSE 100 firms have now pledged to pay all staff, agency workers and contractors the “real” living wage.

The Living Wage Foundation sets this at £8.45 an hour or £9.75 in London – above the government’s National Living Wage of £7.50 for 25 and overs.

There are 33 FTSE 100 firms accredited with the LWF and the other two-thirds include a small number that pay all staff and contractors above the rates but have not signed-up to the scheme.” …

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/top-british-companies-help-themselves-11271770

EDDC’s strategy for dealing with budget deficit: bleed residents dry?

“There is a significant shortfall projected in 2020/21 (£1.412m) which is as a result of an assumed rebasing of business rate income thereby reducing our income by £1.2m. It is proposed in the Finance Plan that work is started now in bridging this gap and driving self- sufficiency of the Council. Members have indicated that the strategic theme within the Transformation Strategy “Maximise the value of our assets through commercial thinking with a focus on income generation, sustainability and developing local economies” is one they believe has significant potential. The Financial Plan considers how this might be progressed with the use of a Member Group (possibly the Budget Working Party) to consider business cases and suggests that a fund is created to unlock barriers to the Council progressing this aim. Detailed recommendations will be presented within the 2018/19 Budget approval process.”

Click to access 041017-cabinet-agenda-combined.pdf

page 60

“Free market” facts

“… May’s “greatest agent” – free-market economics – has established a system where:

eight people own as much wealth as half the planet

Such grotesque levels of inequality run through the UK, where

50% of the country owns just 8.7% of the wealth

While living standards continue to fall for most,

Britain’s richest 1,000 families are well on their way to tripling their wealth since the financial crisis. Since 2009, these families have increased their fortune by over 155%

https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2017/09/28/pm-just-called-achievement-greatest-human-history-people-beside-tweets/

Retaining 100% business rates will make make many count councils worse off

“County councils face unique challenges and retaining 100% of business rates could widen their funding gap, the County Councils Network has warned.

Analysis from the cross-party group, released yesterday, showed under full business rate retention the funding gap for county authorities could increase by £700m by 2029.

This was because business rate growth would fail to keep pace with acute demographic and service pressures for county councils, the analysis – done by local government consultancy firm Pixel Financial Management – concluded.

In contrast areas, such as London boroughs and district councils, are likely to disproportionately benefit from this policy, the CCN found.

The research comes as the Department for Communities and Local Government is encouraging bids for the second pilot scheme.

Council leaders at the CCN are calling on the government to provide more options in the pilot schemes to encourage more county authorities to participate, which would enable the risks to be fully trialled before the policy was rolled out across the country.

Pilots for 100% business rate retention have already been launched in Liverpool, Greater Manchester, West Midlands, West of England, Cornwall and Greater London in April, which will also continue into next year.

The West Midlands combined authority was part of the first pilots for the scheme, which began this April, ahead of plans to roll out the policy nationwide by 2020.

CCN finance spokesman and leader of Leicestershire County Council, Nick Rushton, said the research did not aim to dissuade countries from taking part in the pilots but to raise awareness of the issues facing the sector.

Rushton said: “The modelling we have released shows the unique challenges facing county authorities in implementing 100% business rates retention.

“CCN is supportive of moves towards greater local retention, alongside wider fiscal devolution, but we must ensure the system provides sustainable long-term funding and a platform to truly incentivise growth and self-sufficiency.”

He concluded that more options should be on the table, such as a ‘no detriment’ clause which is missing from next year’s pilots.

The CCN warn that by not providing this clause it may mean only ‘high growth’ counties coming forward to pilot, meaning that risk is not properly trialled.

Rushton added: “These findings clearly demonstrate the need for a fairer funding formula as part of wider reforms to local government finance.

“These reforms must stay on track and government should not shy away from adopting a new approach to measuring relative need; one based on real cost-drivers, not past spend.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/09/county-councils-funding-gap-could-widen-100-business-rate-retention

Bristol: all “non-essential” work stops due to austerity cuts

“Bristol City Council has placed a spending freeze on “non-essential spending” in order to account for the impact of Conservative cuts to local government services.

According to a release from the council, the freeze means:

All maintenance of buildings, roads and parks will stop unless there is a risk to people’s health or safety. The council will also stop recruiting any permanent or temporary roles unless they provide legally-required services, and will not agree any new or extended contracts for goods or services without approval from the Chief Executive and statutory financial and legal officers.
More may be added to the list in coming weeks.

Deficit

It was predicted earlier this year that Bristol City Council faces a budget deficit of £60m for the 2019/20 financial year. The council has been making several millions of pounds of savings throughout 2016.

The spending freeze is a final attempt to balance its annual budget. According to a report to be delivered to the council’s Cabinet on 6 December, its efforts have reduced the gap from £35.4m at the beginning of the financial year to £27.5m by the end of September. The newly announced spending freeze is predicted to reduce it further to £16m, if accepted. …”

https://www.thecanary.co/uk/2016/12/02/one-britains-biggest-cities-stop-running-basic-services-thanks-tory-austerity/

South-west doomed to low productivity because of its coastal towns

Let’s start with the good news: there are some regions of Britain where the economic productivity rate is higher than the German average. Now the bad news: there are three of them. Three out of 168.

In fact when it comes economic bang-for-buck, which is ultimately what productivity is, only the London borough of Tower Hamlets, which includes Canary Wharf, would scrape into the German top five. Nowhere in this country can compete with the output per hour generated in Munich, Ingolstadt or Wolfsburg, home to BMW, Audi, and VW.

There is nothing new in the idea that the British economy is less productive than most of its industrialised counterparts. You probably already knew that for every hour worked, the French and Americans generate about 30 per cent more income than Britons and Germans 36 per cent more. You probably know, too, that of all our inequalities, perhaps the greatest is regional. No other European country has as great a gulf between rich and poor areas.

Weak productivity equals weak wages, equals social division, equals many of the problems haunting the country today. But the odd thing is that until now no one had thought to dig deep into the data underlying these problems. That all changes today, with the release of a paper by Richard Davies, Anna Valero and Sandra Bernick from the London School of Economics.

And as it happens, those comparisons with Germany are about the most conventional of all their findings. Consider the location of Britain’s productivity engine, such as it is. You might have assumed the answer was the southeast. In fact, the strongest and most efficient economic activity is to be found on a thin corridor stretching west from the capital along the M4, through Slough and Reading to Bristol.

A glance at the way industries cluster themselves around the country yields further surprises. Far from being overly concentrated in London, it turns out the financial sector is quite widely spread, accounting for 15 hubs outside the capital. If you’re after a sector which is overly concentrated in London, look no further than the creative industry and IT, both of which are almost entirely based there and in the southeast.

In a sense this is even more alarming than the conventional wisdom. Finance is no longer the productivity growth machine it once was, whereas over the coming decades computers and IT are likely to be far more important. Why are they not more widespread?

Examine the numbers closely enough and preconceptions such as the north-south divide also start to dissolve. Yes, London dominates, but there are productivity hotspots all over: Aberdeen and its oil industry; a string of innovative chemicals firms along the banks of the Mersey; the life sciences companies in and around Hertfordshire; university hubs such as Oxford and Cambridge. If anything, Britain’s real economic disparity is not between north and south but between coastal and inland towns.

The most prosperous cities in any country are typically found on the coast. In Britain, that relationship is inverted: seaside towns tend to have more business failures than those inland. Productivity is lower, as is health quality and life expectancy. The prevalent industries are often those with weak output: food services and, more broadly, tourism.

Why? Maybe because the sea is less important to Britain than it was a century ago, when trade was physical goods rather than ideas and services. Maybe because, once trading dwindled, all that was left was fishing and tourism. Much like mining towns in the Welsh valleys, the economy moved on and no one gave much thought about what, or who, would be left behind.

We don’t have the answers because we are still only starting to work out the questions. While Britain’s policymakers do plenty of inflation and fiscal forecasts, little or no work is done into the way economic activity is spread around the country. This is no parochial point: such things matter.

After all, consider Wales, where the central region around Brecon has the unenviable distinction of being the least productive part of Britain. Only 40 or so miles south is a business which single-handedly lifts Wales’s overall productivity: the steelworks in Port Talbot. In much the same way as the Great Wall of China is visible from space, it is one of a few factories in Britain whose productivity can actually be spotted in the national accounts. In other words, those 4,000 jobs matter not just for the employees and their families, but for the balance of Britain’s productivity. Something to dwell on, given Tata Steel’s announcement this week that it is finally selling the plant.

A couple of years ago George Osborne proposed a few reforms that might have helped. Whitehall was to devolve full control over business rates to the regions; local government pension funds were to be pooled to create five or six “wealth funds” to help invest in the infrastructure that could help boost productivity. By the time of this year’s Queen’s Speech, the reforms seemed to have disappeared — casualties of Brexit legislation.

This was always the risk following the referendum. Not sudden economic oblivion but more the danger that Brexit would distract us from the important business of becoming more prosperous. It is already happening.”

Source: The Times, pay wall

Times and Tories work out that affordable housing means votes,

After YEARS of believing affordable and social homes are lived in only by Labour voters and therefore not worth building, the Conservatives suddenly seem to have woken up to the bigger issue that NO housing = NO votes for them either.

Duh. And, as the saying goes: wise words butter no parsnips – writing or making speeches is not doing.

The covenant of British politics is broken. The European referendum of 2016 was the first clue and the strange general election a year later the second. As the political assemblies gather at their conferences to contemplate their own little world, the gap between the promise of politics and popular problems has perhaps never been greater. There will be urgently missable fringe meetings in Brighton and Manchester over the next fortnight which seek to draw lessons from Syriza’s Greece, Trump’s America or Macron’s France. The problem can be located much closer to home.

Housing minister was once a cabinet position and really must be again. For an issue which has so frequently paid a political dividend it has been remarkably relegated down the order of priorities. The domestic response to the two world wars was to rebuild the housing stock. David Lloyd George pledged homes fit for war heroes and the 1924 Labour government offered a housing act as its only substantive achievement. Aneurin Bevan spent more time on housing after 1945 than he did on the NHS and the number of houses built was one of the ways the Attlee government asked to be judged. The last time the Conservative Party really connected to the urban working class was when Margaret Thatcher arranged for 100,000 of them a year to buy the homes once owned and neglected by the council.

For the most part, though, the covenant on housing policy has operated silently. There has been an implicit bargain in postwar British politics that buying your own home is an index of progress and that, with hard work, it should be possible. After Bevan, housing policy has been directed towards the vision that Neville Chamberlain once described as “the property-owning democracy”.

There is a hint of the politics of housing in that phrase. Tories have assumed that owning property makes conservatives of people while Labour, the constant voice of municipal housing, has assumed the large estates create a client group of its own voters. Council house sales were first mooted by Joe Haines, who worked for Harold Wilson, but rejected by his party for privatising the nation’s assets. Throughout the twists and turns of policy, property rights have had a unique connotation in Britain, signalling the assumption that a home of one’s own is the prize for all citizens.

It is therefore a political fact of the first order that home ownership has fallen to 63.5 per cent, its lowest level since 1987. Household growth has been strong as the population has increased and as more people live alone but the supply of houses is stagnant. With the value of land increasing, house builders are better described as landlords. Building is at its lowest level since 1923 and last year Britain built 100,000 homes fewer than the 250,000 per annum that are needed just to meet existing demand.

The facts gathered by the Resolution Foundation in its report Home Affront: housing across the generations continue the work that David Willetts, now the think tank’s executive chairman, began in his fine book The Pinch. They describe a life for the youngest generation of adults that may differ fundamentally, financially, from that of their grandparents and may be, for the first time, worse. Housing costs for the average family have tripled since 1961, from 6 per cent of income to 18 per cent. The typical age for buying property is moving from the 30s to the 40s. The generation of people below the age of 30 spend almost a quarter of their income on housing, which is three times as much as their grandparents spent at the same age. They are also having to make do with smaller places to live, further from work. It is both more expensive and considerably worse and there is never a political dividend in that combination.

Home ownership has been falling across all regions and income groups since 2003 but the youngest cohort will be hit the hardest. The option of social housing is now a rarity so a whole generation has started to rent privately. Half a century ago one in ten 30-year-olds rented a home. Now it is four in ten. A family headed by a 30-year-old today is half as likely to be a homeowner as their parents were at the age of 30.

There are manifold reasons for the decline in home ownership. People are spending longer in education, marrying and having children later, immigration has increased, the divorce rate has required more houses for the same population and people are living longer and are understandably reluctant to vacate the homes they call their own. In the wake of the crash of 2008 wages have been stagnant and access to mortgage finance has been curtailed. The low supply of new homes has produced the obvious effect of higher prices. A generation ago it took the average family 3 years to save enough for a deposit on a house. Now it would take almost 20 years.

It means that a different life beckons from the implied bargain of British politics. Coming to home ownership later, if at all, means that people will carry mortgages later in life, perhaps even beyond working age. That, in turn, will affect the capacity of that generation to save for retirement. The whole journey of life shifts back and that is for those who manage to embark at all. There is a set of people who are seriously thinking they might be stuck renting indefinitely. There are now 11 million people in rented accommodation in the private market.

The minister in charge, Sajid Javid, has an opportunity if he is bold enough to seize it. In a speech on Tuesday he made some encouraging noises about a review of social housing policy after the disaster of Grenfell Tower. He really needs, though, to do something about the quantity of social housing too. The proportion of families in this sector has halved, under government neglect, since 1981 and there is no quick solution which does not involve the government doing some building. The problems here are fundamental. Low and stagnant wages, money flowing into British property from offshore, restrictive planning and no infrastructure guidance from the centre.

“Unless we deal with the housing deficit, we will see house prices keep on rising. The divide between those who inherit wealth and those who don’t will become more pronounced. And more and more of the country’s money will go into expensive housing instead of more productive investments that generate more economic growth”. Wise words. Theresa May’s words, at the launch of her campaign to succeed David Cameron. She needs to say them again in the knowledge that, if her party retains its fabled survival instinct, it will grant her enough authority to act.”

Source: The Times, pay wall

“Coastal communities among worst off in UK, report finds”

“The UK’s coastal communities are among the country’s worst off for earnings, employment, health and education, a report for the BBC has found.
The Social Market Foundation said the economic gap between coastal and non-coastal places has grown.

Average wages are £3,600 a year lower in these “pockets of deprivation”, according to the think tank.

Meanwhile, the minister for coastal communities has announced £40m in funding to help coastal areas.

The report, produced for BBC Breakfast, found that five of the 10 local authorities in the UK with the highest unemployment rate for the three months to March 2017 were coastal. These were Hartlepool, North Ayrshire, Torridge, Hastings, South Tyneside and Sunderland. It also found those in employment in coastal areas were likely to be paid less. Of the 98 local authorities on the coast, 85% had pay levels below the UK’s average in 2016.

… The report found the economic gap between coastal and non-coastal areas has widened from 23% to 26% from 1997 to 2015.”

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-41141647

“Government spends four times more subsidising private housing than building affordable homes” – Study shows 79 per cent of total housing budget is spent on higher-cost homes for sale

“The CIH report reveals that the number of affordable homes being built with Government money has fallen by 50 per cent since 2010, from 56,000 to 28,000.

Instead, money has been diverted to help middle- and high-income households get on the housing ladder. For example, around £5bn of loans have been given to buyers via the Help to Buy Scheme established by George Osborne in 2013.

“The CIH called for a shift in spending to help people on lower incomes afford homes.

Its chief executive, Terrie Alafat, said: “People on lower incomes are finding it increasingly difficult to make ends meet as they experience the impact of stagnant wages, rising inflation and welfare reform cuts. These factors and the shift towards ‘affordable rent’ all mean that housing is becoming increasingly unaffordable in many parts of the country.

“We know we need to build more homes to get to grips with our national housing crisis – our UK Housing Review briefing highlights that annual supply remains at least 30,000 homes short of household growth. But it’s not just about building more homes; it’s about building more affordable homes for people on lower incomes. The Government needs to take an urgent look at rebalancing the housing budget and investing more in genuinely affordable homes for rent.

“The November Budget gives the Government a golden opportunity to rebalance investment away from the private sector towards affordable housing without having to increase its overall commitment to housing.”

Critics say that, because affordable homes can cost up to 80 per cent of market value, they are not affordable for millions of people on low incomes.

However, Conservative ministers have prioritised building affordable homes over social homes.

As a result, since 2010 the number of new social homes has plummeted by 97 per cent, from almost 37,000 in 2010 to just over 1,100 last year.

The CIH called for more investment to maintain existing social homes – a need it said had been exposed by the Grenfell disaster. It said the Decent Homes Standard, which is used to measure whether a property is of an acceptable quality, has not been updated for ten years and that funding for helping landlords to maintain their properties has been scrapped.

“Essentially, investment in the existing social stock has been left for landlords to finance from rents, while government has been cutting their rental income and will continue to do so for another two years”, the report said. …”

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/affordable-housing-spending-private-tory-government-a7945616.html

How those low unemployment figures are calculated … and it’s not nice

The only reason Theresa May was able to say unemployment was at its lowest since the mid-1970s, as she did in Prime Minister’s Questions today (September 13) is this:

The Department for Work and Pensions has been forcing jobseekers to take work on zero-hours contracts, meaning they may be employed for only three hours a week but would still be off the benefit books.

This means the government is pushing vulnerable people into debt, with the attendant problems of stress and ill-health that come with them – storing up problems for the future, in fact.

It is small-minded and short-sighted. One can only assume that Mrs May thinks a Labour government will have to handle these problems when the public finally loses any and all patience with her party’s absolute and utter inability to run a country properly.

The Department for Work and Pensions (DWP) has admitted that it is using the controversial benefits sanctions regime to force unemployed and low-paid workers into insure and exploitative zero-hours jobs.

Zero hours contracts notoriously offer no guarantee of hours and lack many of the employment rights enjoyed by people in full-time and part-time employment.

The shocking revelation was exposed following a written parliamentary question at Westminster, to which the DWP Minister for Employment Damian Hinds MP admitted: “If there is no good reason that a Universal Credit claimant cannot take a zero-hours contract job they may be sanctioned for not doing so.”

Universal Credit is replacing a number of existing social security benefits and tax credits with one single monthly payment, and has faced strong criticism from opposition parties and charities alike.

The flagship new benefit is gradually being rolled out across the UK, despite growing concerns that deep-rooted flaws in the system may push low income families into debt and closer to eviction. …”

Yesterday, the charity Citizens Advice warned that plans to accelerate the roll-out of Universal Credit are “a disaster waiting to happen“, explaining that is likely to push low income households into a financial crisis.”

http://voxpoliticalonline.com/2017/09/13/this-is-theresa-mays-excuse-for-saying-unemployment-is-at-an-all-time-low/

Funding opportunities for coastal communities

Unfortunately, in terms of regeneration £40m doesn’t go very far.

“£40m for new coastal funding round

Ministers have confirmed that £40m will be available through the next round of a fund to support coastal communities. The government has already provided £170m for 278 projects around the country since the Coastal Communities Fund was launched in 2012. Coastal communities minister Jake Berry said: “This year is already looking like another record year for staycations and our latest round of funding will help attract even more visitors to the great British coast so that our coastal communities can thrive.”

http://www.room151.co.uk/151-news/news-roundup-pwlb-borrowing-on-the-rise-basildon-slams-javid-lga-attempts-to-kick-start-devolution/

“Charity shops: bringing in the cash, but bringing down the high street?”

The article praises the work that charities and their volunteers do, but also addresses the perception that they influence feelings of the decline of towns as they proliferate in High Streets:

Most members of the public associate charity shops with high street decline, and 50% think a “healthy” high street should contain fewer charity shops.

These stark findings come from a report by thinktank Demos, updating its 2013 report on charity shops, both commissioned by the Charity Retail Association. Four years on, Demos says charity shops continue to be a lifeline for struggling town centres.

“Charity shops continue to perform a vital function in filling otherwise vacant properties in ailing high streets, with two-thirds of managers saying that their shop fills a space that would otherwise be left empty,” says the report.

But it notes that public opinion about the presence of charity shops on the high street is mixed, with the sector still facing an image problem in being associated with the decline of local high streets. Those surveyed overwhelmingly support charity shops receiving business rate relief, but more than half associate charity shops with high street decline. …

https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2017/sep/11/charity-shops-vital-volunteers-sign-high-street-decline

Some families – mostly working – to be £50/week worse off by 2020

Over two million poor families will be more than £50 a week worse off by the end of the decade, according to an alarming analysis of welfare cuts, crippling rent rises and looming inflation.

In a bleak assessment of the plight of the poorest families in Britain, the study commissioned by the Local Government Association found that more than 84% of those set to lose £50 a week or more are households with children, either lone parents or couples. Almost two-thirds of them are working households, despite claims from ministers that they wish to create a welfare system that encourages work.

The analysis, by the Policy in Practice consultancy, also undermines claims from ministers that moves to cut taxes and increase the wages of the poorest are compensating them for years of austerity and the rising cost of living.

While some of the seven million low-income households in Britain will be better off by 2020, the group as a whole faces an average loss of £40.62 a week by 2020 compared with the end of last year, once benefit and tax changes, wages, housing costs and inflation are all taken into account.

The report’s publication comes as Philip Hammond, the chancellor, faces intense pressure to ease years of austerity following an election result that signalled voters had reached the end of their patience with spending cuts. Nurses took to the streets in protest last week over claims they have suffered a 14% real-terms cut in their wages over the past seven years. Hammond is also under pressure to curb rising levels of student debt in the forthcoming budget.

The study finds that the introduction of the government’s flagship policy of universal credit, which combines a series of benefits into a single payment, will lead to an average income loss of £11.18 per week. It coincides with new warnings from Citizens Advice that the rollout of the system should be halted, amid claims that some of those already receiving it have found themselves in serious debt.

With charities and councils warning of rising homelessness, increasing housing costs are identified as a main cause of falling income. More than 2 million low-paid private renters face an average real-terms loss of £38.49 a week by 2020. …

For low-income private renters with three or more children, the average income loss that they face by 2020 in real terms is £67.21 a week. This compares with £30.67 for private renters without children.

The authors also say rents are rising faster in some areas than others, with housing benefit not rising to match it. The study found rents are set to rise by 20.7% in the south-west by 2020, but by just 3.5% in the north-east. The report warns that there is now a looming “affordability crisis” because cuts to housing benefit, known as local housing allowance (LHA) for private renters, mean it is no longer linked to real rents, pushing people into poverty or even homelessness. … .”

“Staircase tax” – could mean a 5,000% backdated increase in business rates

“Conservative MP Nicky Morgan is pushing the UK’s property tax agency to detail the impact of the so-called “staircase tax”, amid fears that firms could be forced to stomach a 5,000% hike in bills.

The Treasury Select Committee chairwoman has written to Valuation Office Agency (VOA) chief executive Melissa Tatton for details on how businesses may be hit by the contentious levy.

“At first sight, it seems unfair to tax businesses different depending solely on whether the staircases between their rooms are communal or private,” Morgan said in her letter.

… “It also seems particularly harsh for the increase in rates to be backdated, and I would be interested to know the VOA’s reason for backdating it.”

The staircase tax is the result of a Supreme Court ruling on the definition of a single business space.

It means offices covering multiple floors in a building will be billed separately if their corridors or staircases are communal, rather than private to the business.

And for businesses that have expanded, the decision to take on offices in the same building as existing premises, connected by communal space, could now prove more costly than they first realised or planned for.

Morgan has asked the VOA’s Tatton to explain the decision to backdate the tax to 2015 in England and 2010 in Wales, and to provide details on how many businesses will face a higher rates bill as a result.

She has also requested information on the average bill increase that businesses will face and whether any transitional relief will be made available.

The tax has faced cross-party criticism, not only from Morgan, but from Labour’s shadow business minister Chi Onwurah and Liberal Democrat leader Sir Vince Cable.

It comes amid a backlash from industry groups including the The Federation of Small Business (FSB), which has warned many small firms could be set for a substantial hike in their bills, the Press Association reported.

“This significant escalation of cross-party scrutiny of the staircase tax will be hugely welcomed by the thousands of firms set to be stung by this ridiculous levy,” FSB Chairman Mike Cherry, said.

“No small business should receive a sudden tax hike of 5,000% simply because a workspace has been separated, for years, by a communal area, stairway or lift.

“Some small business owners are discussing whether to knock holes in their walls or stick a staircase on the outside of their premises.”

It is the latest tax debacle to hit British business this year, having been left reeling after the Government’s contentious business rates review this year.

The revaluation, which came into force in March, updated rateable values to take into account property price changes over the last seven years.

Business rent and rates specialists CVS said UK companies are already facing a £4.5 billion increase in business rates over the next 5 years, even before the staircase tax is introduced.

Cherry has called on the Government to repeal the new levy.

“This is no way to run a tax system in the 20th century, let alone the 21st. Ministers have the power to provide relief, and they should do this urgently – to correct this defect in the UK tax system.”

It comes as Chancellor Philip Hammond prepares the first full Autumn Budget, expected to be presented to Parliament between late November to early December.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/nicky-morgan-staircase-tax_uk_59b3dfa0e4b0b5e531067ab3

Growth gets sucked up into profits as south west wages now more than 30% behind south east

It’s what we all suspected – money goes into profits not wages – yet who are the people in charge of our LEP? Those who suck up those profits! That’s the market economy.

“The UK is the most geographically unbalanced economy in Europe and needs radical reform, an IPPR think-tank report has concluded.

The study highlighted that 40% of the countries output is produced in London and the South East and average incomes in the North West, South West, West Midlands and Wales are now more than 30% lower than in London. …

It stated gains from growth have gone largely into profits rather than earnings, and the UK economy is now in the longest period of pay stagnation for 150 years.

IPPR noted that though GDP per head has risen by 12% since 2010, average earnings per employee have fallen by 6%.

Since the 1970s the share of national income which has gone to wages has gradually declined, from 80% to 73%, while the share going to profits has increased.

The wage share is now the lowest it has been since the second world war, said the report.”

http://www.publicfinance.co.uk/news/2017/09/uk-most-geographically-unbalanced-economy-europe