UK politics general discussion

[Dave]

We seem to think that inflation is a UK specific issue. There are outliers, and ours is a little higher, but our inflation rate is tracking much of Europe within 1 percent or so.

I think the big area to look at with unjustifiable profits from inflation busting prices are the utilities.

That’s not quite true, yes the UK in tracking closer to other countries at the moment but it’s had an inflationary problem for longer. (Our inflation rates started tracking higher than Germany, France and Italy back in 2021.)

So the impact is greater as we have had price inflation for longer. The rate isn’t a reflection of comparative prices between countries, just the percentage it is changing month on month. This is why in general products are still cheaper in Europe.

Our economy therefore was already in a worse position prior to the pressures caused by global influencers such as the Ukraine war.

 

[Matt N]

My apologies for diverting from the current debate topic, but I’ve got a politics-related topic I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on.

The topic I wanted to talk about is; what are people’s thoughts on the current financial situation of various councils across Britain?

For those not aware, a number of local authorities across Britain, most notably Birmingham City Council, have recently either declared bankruptcy or stated that they are close to declaring bankruptcy due to unserviceable levels of debt. This has resulted in these councils needing to receive financial support and apply austerity-style cuts to local services, as well as price rises.

For instance, my local council, Forest of Dean District Council, have recently announced that car parking charges in town centres in the Forest will be quadrupled from April (from 50p for 2 hours to £2 for 2 hours), and that council tax and green bin rates will also be notably increased. The council’s justification for this is partially due to them needing to plug a considerable budget deficit to prevent a Birmingham-style bankruptcy situation. The other justification is environmental; they argue that a hike in parking fees will disincentivise personal car use and encourage more people to use the Forest’s public transport system. I disagree that a hike in parking fees alone will necessarily have the desired effect in terms of pushing people to use public transport for multiple reasons, but that’s besides the point here.

With all these councils going bankrupt and/or experiencing financial difficulties, I do wonder; what is the solution to this problem? How can we stop all of these councils from running out of money, and what has actually caused this problem in the first place?

 

[AT86]

As I understand it the situation with Birmingham is different to many of the others. Birmingham have been hit with huge costs from cases of unequal pay stretching back years.

Others, such as Thurrock & Nottingham have borrowed to invest in private ventures (such as utility companies) that have since failed. The idea was to plug the gaps in government funding (which has been drastically reduced since the 2010 election onwards) with an income from these investments.

However borrowing money to invest in companies that have since failed means councils still owe the initial debt but aren’t receiving the income to pay it back and spend the difference on council services.

If the funding from the government hadn’t been so drastically cut, and if there was more oversight as to where the borrowed money was invested, they might not be in this mess.

 

[Thameslink Rail]

My apologies for diverting from the current debate topic, but I’ve got a politics-related topic I’d be interested to hear your thoughts on.

The topic I wanted to talk about is; what are people’s thoughts on the current financial situation of various councils across Britain?

For those not aware, a number of local authorities across Britain, most notably Birmingham City Council, have recently either declared bankruptcy or stated that they are close to declaring bankruptcy due to unserviceable levels of debt. This has resulted in these councils needing to receive financial support and apply austerity-style cuts to local services, as well as price rises.

For instance, my local council, Forest of Dean District Council, have recently announced that car parking charges in town centres in the Forest will be quadrupled from April (from 50p for 2 hours to £2 for 2 hours), and that council tax and green bin rates will also be notably increased. The council’s justification for this is partially due to them needing to plug a considerable budget deficit to prevent a Birmingham-style bankruptcy situation. The other justification is environmental; they argue that a hike in parking fees will disincentivise personal car use and encourage more people to use the Forest’s public transport system. I disagree that a hike in parking fees alone will necessarily have the desired effect in terms of pushing people to use public transport for multiple reasons, but that’s besides the point here.

With all these councils going bankrupt and/or experiencing financial difficulties, I do wonder; what is the solution to this problem? How can we stop all of these councils from running out of money, and what has actually caused this problem in the first place?

Count yourself lucky that Forest of Dean is not actually in debt. Luton Borough Council have £712M debt or £3200 per head, much of this can be attributed to the DART system which was massively over budget and late (it also happens to be the most expensive railway per mile in the UK)

 

[jon81uk]

With all these councils going bankrupt and/or experiencing financial difficulties, I do wonder; what is the solution to this problem? How can we stop all of these councils from running out of money, and what has actually caused this problem in the first place?

Central government funding to councils was cut and at the same time they have given councils more responsibilities they need to spend money on.

For instance, my local council, Forest of Dean District Council, have recently announced that car parking charges in town centres in the Forest will be quadrupled from April (from 50p for 2 hours to £2 for 2 hours), and that council tax and green bin rates will also be notably increased. The council’s justification for this is partially due to them needing to plug a considerable budget deficit to prevent a Birmingham-style bankruptcy situation. The other justification is environmental; they argue that a hike in parking fees will disincentivise personal car use and encourage more people to use the Forest’s public transport system. I disagree that a hike in parking fees alone will necessarily have the desired effect in terms of pushing people to use public transport for multiple reasons, but that’s besides the point h

£2 for two hours is still quite cheap. As much as I hate paying for parking when we do drive, I do think that the parking charge should be at least as much as the bus travel would be, all those little things might add up to encourage more walking or bus use.

 

[Matt N]

£2 for two hours is still quite cheap. As much as I hate paying for parking when we do drive, I do think that the parking charge should be at least as much as the bus travel would be, all those little things might add up to encourage more walking or bus use.

As much as I don’t disagree that encouraging more walking or bus use would not be a bad thing, I’d argue that it should come in tandem with increased investment into public transport. Perhaps even through investing the profits gained from such levies and price increases into better public transport.

In urban areas, where you have public transport that is reliable and frequent, I can understand the logic a little more, but here in the Forest of Dean, buses are either not reliable, not frequent or both. My village only sees one bus pass through it every 2-3 hours or so in each direction, and the service is sometimes not the most reliable either.

For people living in this region, public transport often isn’t a very practical or desirable option. If I, for instance, wanted to go to Lydney to do a spot of shopping in Tesco, I would have to take a bus at, say, 9:30am, arrive in Lydney about 5 minutes later, do my shopping, and then somehow kill another couple of hours because the next bus in the other direction to go home doesn’t arrive until 12:30pm. If I wanted to go further up the Forest to, say, Coleford, my bus journey could take the best part of 2 hours if I coordinate the bus times badly, compared to around 15-20 minutes and less than 10 miles if you drive. It would also cost more in bus fees than the equivalent amount of petrol would cost; even with bus singles currently capped at £2, it would still cost at least £4 each way (due to having to change bus), compared with maybe £1 each way at most in petrol.

So my point is; if public transport doesn’t improve, then I’d argue that this parking fee quadruple could have a different effect to that intended. People could try and park for free in lay-bys and/or on residential streets, which would annoy residents and cause problems in terms of parking overcrowding on those streets. Or alternatively, it could make people visit the town centres less often or even deter them from visiting at all. As my mum pointed out to me earlier, £2 for 2 hours is a big increase from 50p for 2 hours, and if you visit one of the Forest towns a lot, then that increase will add up massively over a period of time, which could cause people to review their visitation of the Forest towns. I’d imagine that that isn’t what Forest of Dean District Council wants.

 

[GaryH]

Funny isn’t it. Years ago all the main cities had electric trams and then we spent a lot of money ripping up the lines. If only we had the foresight to leave them and modernise them. Wouldn’t have half the traffic we have now in some city centres!

 

[rob666]

Funny isn’t it. Years ago all the main cities had electric trams and then we spent a lot of money ripping up the lines. If only we had the foresight to leave them and modernise them. Wouldn’t have half the traffic we have now in some city centres!

Good old Blackpool eh.

 

[Squiggs]

Good old Blackpool eh.

You mean Pleasure Beach Resort, surely?

 

[BarryZola]

Excellent point to raise Matt. I'm sure I'll have more to add on your wider question. However, the particular Birmingham Council problem has always annoyed me. These equal pay claims are ridiculous. It's outrageous to apply for a job at a specified rate and do that quite happily and then sue your employer many years later as someone else was doing a different job and getting paid more for it. Clown world.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

Excellent point to raise Matt. I'm sure I'll have more to add on your wider question. However, the particular Birmingham Council problem has always annoyed me. These equal pay claims are ridiculous. It's outrageous to apply for a job at a specified rate and do that quite happily and then sue your employer many years later as someone else was doing a different job and getting paid more for it. Clown world.

It's outrageous to be paid less because of your gender, in fact it's illegal, which is why Birmingham Council have to pay out. Clown world.

 

[rob666]

You mean Pleasure Beach Resort, surely?

Wasn't aware that the Beach had trams.

 

[BarryZola]

It's outrageous to be paid less because of your gender, in fact it's illegal, which is why Birmingham Council have to pay out. Clown world.

Different job roles. Different socio-economic times.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

Different job roles. Different socio-economic times.

Slavery. Different job roles. Different socio-economic times. The government did a pay out then too, just to the wrong people. Incidentally we only finished paying back the loan to fund this payout in 2015.

The majority of the pay claims, for Birmingham Council, date to the 2000s, when our economy was booming and generally, from the male perspective, we thought that equality and parity between the sexes had been solved. They were ordered in 2012 to pay out roughly £1 billion. The £760 million this year is a further separate issue. The highest court in our land has ruled on this issue and has said that the pay gap was an illegal practice. They took into account the different job roles and still found that pay rises between people on the same pay band, of different gender, still had massive gaps.

‘It’s going to cost billions’: UK councils face huge bills over equal pay claims

GMB union is supporting 3,000 claims in Birmingham – and is gathering evidence from 20 other councils

www.theguardian.com

"It was a different time" may be a poor surface explanation, but it's not a valid excuse and nor is it morally right.

 

[BarryZola]

I always trust the courts to get things right. All the judges have to do is what their little books tell them to do. I bet the sub-postmasters/mistresses cried themselves to sleep happily with that knowledge every night in prison after the Post Office screwed them over. I wonder if you also think that the supermarket workers equal pay claim that's currently going through the courts is justified too?

 

[rob666]

Recently, the courts have been told to lock up nobody apart from serious sex and violence offenders, because the prisons are full.
Lots of serious fraud and tax offenders have been getting off with fines and suspended sentences, instead of being in the cell they deserve.
And working in social services for many years is another reason I have little faith in the courts.
Money making scheme for the lawyers and masons, containment of the underclass comes second, justice comes third if you are lucky.

 

[Dave]

Excellent point to raise Matt. I'm sure I'll have more to add on your wider question. However, the particular Birmingham Council problem has always annoyed me. These equal pay claims are ridiculous. It's outrageous to apply for a job at a specified rate and do that quite happily and then sue your employer many years later as someone else was doing a different job and getting paid more for it. Clown world.

That isn’t what happened, jobs of the same skill level were offered different pay because of gender bias. The women didn’t know at the time of applying.

I always trust the courts to get things right. All the judges have to do is what their little books tell them to do. I bet the sub-postmasters/mistresses cried themselves to sleep happily with that knowledge every night in prison after the Post Office screwed them over. I wonder if you also think that the supermarket workers equal pay claim that's currently going through the courts is justified too?

Two different judicial systems. In the post office cases this was criminal law so the court was presented with (false) evidence and a Jury decided (or the victims where pressured into plea deals but that wasn’t the court that was the post office). In these cases the judge has two jobs. 1) Manage the court proceeding, 2) Decide the sentence. They don’t decide the case.

The equal pay claims are civil claims and in those cases it is the judge who decides the merits of the case and offers the remedy.

In both cases judges have to follow the law, but civil and criminal proceedings are very different, as are appellate courts. Its like comparing apples with oranges.

 

[GaryH]

Anyone see the boss of Centrica on BBC this morning being interviewed. Said he is paid £4.5 million and then went on to say he couldn’t justify this amount or his pension pot but that his salary is out of his hands and set by others.

Was quite refreshing to see a boss be honest on tv.

Makes me think of the councils and their top heavy management structures sucking up all the money.

 

[GooseOnTheLoose]

I always trust the courts to get things right. All the judges have to do is what their little books tell them to do. I bet the sub-postmasters/mistresses cried themselves to sleep happily with that knowledge every night in prison after the Post Office screwed them over.

The courts can only go on the information presented to them. If they're being presented with experts who are lying, or false information, as in the case of the Post Office scandal where auditors presented false accounts and experts insisted there wasn't a technical problem, that is not the fault of the court.

I wonder if you also think that the supermarket workers equal pay claim that's currently going through the courts is justified too?

I'm unprepared to comment on a case I know nothing about.

Recently, the courts have been told to lock up nobody apart from serious sex and violence offenders, because the prisons are full.
Lots of serious fraud and tax offenders have been getting off with fines and suspended sentences, instead of being in the cell they deserve.

The sentencing guidelines are set by parliament and the MoJ. The lack of spaces is primarily down to locking too many people up and not having properly funded rehabilitation programmes, along with other socio-economic tragedies. Prison doesn't work, is the short of it.

Money making scheme for the lawyers and masons, containment of the underclass comes second, justice comes third if you are lucky.

There's lots of money in civil cases, none in criminal hence the strikes over legal aid. You've got to have a lot of money already to be able to be a barrister, that's a primary issue.

My faith in the lower courts is pretty shaky at best, don't get me started on Magistrates. Generally though the Supreme Court tends to get things pretty spot on.

 

[Rob]

I work for a local authority, and we are at the bottom of the government funding pot. At the same time, more is expected from us by both residents and Councillors. We're lucky in that we have managed our financial situation well over the past few years, however our reserves are now close to running out and we will not be able to set a balanced budget for 2025/26.

Each year more and more is having to be spent on social care services, which means there is less to be spent on all of the other services we provided. Many of these services are already barely coping, operating skeleton teams that are a shadow of what they once were.

What is the answer? There is no easy answer. You can put up Council Tax, but that is not going to cover the deficit. There is some slight hope that a likely change in government later this year may result in more chance of a bailout for some authorities, but that it clutching at straws and there is absolutely not assurance of this.

The one thing that is certain is that you can expect the public services in your local communities to decline. Cities will be dirtier, parks will be a mess, libraries will close, planning decisions will take longer. The list goes on.

This government do not care about local authorities one bit.