Latest posts RSS Hide threads | Keyboard Shortcuts

• 

  Is the game up?

  Lee 9:53 am on 9 March, 2010 | 3 Permalink | Reply
  

  For all the noise coming from Local Authorities protesting that another re-organisation is the last thing they need, Councils seem to be playing into the hands of those who want a massive re-jig

  The Western Mail report this morning that:

  A MUCH-HERALDED project aimed at getting councils to work together has collapsed, throwing into jeopardy the Assembly Government’s strategy to avoid huge public sector job cuts.

  Nearly half the local authorities in the country were originally involved in discussions over the South-East Wales Shared Services Project, which was intended to save millions of pounds by getting councils to collaborate across a range of functions.

  But after years of meetings and reports the project has now folded with the participating authorities unable to agree on a way forward

  Savings of some £2 Million a year were identified by PricewaterhouseCoopers from the South-East Wales Shared Services Project.  But plans to pool human resources, payroll and training service among ten Councils collapsed with “authorities unable to agree on a way forward”.

  In July 2006 the Beecham Review gave Councils five years the work together of face reorganisation.  By my calculations they have a year left…

   
  • 

    Valleysmam 11:01 am on 9 March, 2010 Permalink
    

    Its easy – get one head honcho , cut the status of the King Pins give them shared out puts on which their pay depends and then see what occurs !

  • 

    a change of personnel 4:00 pm on 9 March, 2010 Permalink
    

    Working together would mean relinquishing control of certain areas, it something many of those those who work in Local Authority’s are adverse to and be honest what realistic chance is there of a mindset change this late in the process?

    As for WAG do they have a plan B on saving the money and protecting jobs if this all falls apart, or will the failings, job losses and service cuts be covered over by the old favourite of reorganization again.

  • 

    Jeff Jones 9:37 pm on 9 March, 2010 Permalink
    

    It was doomed from the beginning I’m afraid. Given how small the savings were for authorities such as Cardiff and Newport it wasn’t surprising that they decided not to take part. Even the savings that were expected would not come on stream until at least year 7 of the project. Given the initial capital outlay required it just wasn’t worth the effort. Collaboration and smarter procurement are great in speeches but time is rapidly running out for local government in Wales as they face a pretty grim future. The Local government structure devised by the Tories aided and abetted by Labour MPs more worried about the reaction of GMC members than good governance was never fit for purpose. It survived because of the generous amounts of money given by the Uk government to the Assembly which has provided reasonable local government settlements in the past few years. All of this is now coming to an end whoever wins in May. If as PWC believe the Treasury’s assumptions for economic growth are too optimistic it could even be worse than the scenario outlined before Christmas in the pre budget report. Facing increasing demands on their services, very few reserves and council tax capped the 22 local authorities face some really tough decisions over the next 5 years. All the rhetoric regarding collaboration, smart procurement and public sector summits will not change the economic climate. As one of my good friends in local government would put it ‘It’s time for some people to get real’. If the politicians don’t set out their priorities soon then the inevitable cuts will be made by the officers leaving councillors to face the music I’m afraid.

  Reply Click here to cancel reply.

  Name (required)

  Email (required)

  Web Site

   
• 

  Local candidates

  Lee 9:53 am on 2 March, 2010 | 3 Permalink | Reply
  

  The case of the Islwyn Four inevitably evokes the memory of the Blaenau Gwent fiasco.  But not only is it a false parallel, it masks the reality that in the Labour Party at least the premium placed on ‘local’ candidates is greater than ever before.

  Any glance at the selections to replace retiring AMs will show that local candidates have been chosen: Mike Hedges in Swansea East and David Rees in Aberavon are recent examples.  In Cardiff West and Cardiff South the constituency party has opted for people who have track records as Councillors in the area.

  In the Westminster selections too locals have been selected in target seats: Susan Elan Jones in Clwyd South, Ronnie Hughes in Aberconwy, Nick Smith in Blaenau Gwent are examples.   There are some exceptions in the Vale of Glamorgan and Carmarthen East where they’ve broken the mold and gone for someone from the constituency next door.

  There aren’t many exceptions to the ‘locals only’ rule.  It is understandable that party members in Islwyn resent the fact that the shortlist has been drawn up by the central party, but perhaps they should ask Don Touhig why he decided to make his announcement so late in the day?

  I believe that the premium placed on ‘local’ candidates is too strong.  As membership declines local activists become increasingly unrepresentative of the communities they are drawn from.  They often look to select someone in their own mould and those who don’t fit the bill are seen as a threat. 

  The selection rules are now heavily stacked in favour of local activists.  It used to be possible for an ‘outsider’ to be able to appeal to the wider membership by making a game changing speech at a branch meeting.  But now aspirant candidates aren’t allowed to address members directly until the final shortlisting meeting – by which point votes are often committed.  It is a process which disadvantages women in particular.

  From the little I know about Islwyn politics it seems that there are other forces at work which has led to the resignation of the four local activists.  That’s not to dismiss them.  But a narrative which presents a mighty party machines parachuting in candidates to the disadvantage of local candidates is way off the mark.

   
  • 

    Adam Higgitt 11:28 am on 2 March, 2010 Permalink
    

    “I believe that the premium placed on ‘local’ candidates is too strong. As membership declines local activists become increasingly unrepresentative of the communities they are drawn from. They often look to select someone in their own mould and those who don’t fit the bill are seen as a threat. ”

    Possibly something else also – as Labour can no longer weigh the vote, at least not quite so much, it needs the extra appeal that having a local candidate provides.

    Gone are the days – recounted by Tony Benn – when officers of the CLP might see a willingness by the candidate to live in the constituency as a disadvantage. Gone also are the days when the MP did not see the state of the local part as any of his or her business.

  • 

    marcus warner 8:59 pm on 2 March, 2010 Permalink
    

    Interesting stuff Lee.

    I personally know a fair number of those on the short list, and while I dont doubt their personable natue and obvious abilities, I fail to see your contention that local memberships are ‘increasingly unrepresentative’. Particularly, if you consider whether you believe that the non-local candidates are more representative.

    I am not saying that is your point per se, but the fact remains that Labour has essentially parachuted in verbless robots into safe seats since New Labour. This I believe greatly disables local activists to champion the local party credentials on the ground. Councillors of course can do this, but I would contend that the average Dai on the street is beginning to despair at seeing another parachuted candidate take a job for life.

    Another factor is Steffan Lewis, who in terms of locality and campaigning is exactly the type of candidate the locals want.

  • 

    Daf 2:28 pm on 3 March, 2010 Permalink
    

    Comparing MP selections with AM selections is a bit like comparing apples and pears. By its very nature the Assembly is less likely to appeal to people from outside Wales and therefore the “catchment area” is smaller as a result. Many in the Labour party still see the Assembly as “local government plus”. Labour’s selections to replace retiring MPs seem less inclined to place a premium on localism – see the shortlist in Pontypridd also, Geraint Davies in Swansea West.

    It’s probably true that you can over-emphasise local links but I don’t think you can over-emphasise the need for local activists who have to do the work to feel involved in the decision

• 

  Toothless

  Lee 9:39 pm on 24 February, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: media (10)

  In a masterfully understated sentence the Commons Culture Select Committee today concluded that the Press Complaints Commission “is widely viewed as lacking credibility and authority”.

  Its unanimous report on press standards accuses Rupert Murdoch’s senior executives of concealing the truth about the extent of illegal phone hacking by journalists on the News of the World.   The cross-party committee of MPs found that “a culture undoubtedly did exist in the newsroom of News of the World and other newspapers at the time which at best turned a blind eye to illegal activities such as phone-hacking and blagging and at worst actively condoned it”. 

  But the Press Complaints Commission had already looked into the same allegations that the committee examined and cleared the tabloid.

  The PCC had rushed out a report purporting to exonerate the News of the World that took the paper’s claims of innocence at face value. “We find the conclusions in the PCC’s November report simplistic and surprising. It has certainly not fully, or forensically, considered all the evidence” the MPs concluded.

  It goes on to describe the PCC as ‘toothless’, but fails to recommend much to really sharpen its teeth.

  There are many villains in this tale.  The need for change seems irrefutable.  There’s lots of political noise and indignation, but no will to take on the press.

   
• 

  Bullying row misses the point

  victoria 3:49 pm on 23 February, 2010 | 1 Permalink | Reply
  

  The ‘Brown bullying row’ has done nothing to encourage meaningful discussion about what can sometimes be a serious problem in the workplace – or an easy claim made by disaffected workers. 

  At a Bevan Foundation conference recently, Prof. Duncan Lewis concluded that bullying is ‘complex, messy and open to multiple interpretations’.  He emphasised that bullying – as opposed to unpleasant behaviour – is persistent, is about power, is negative and it escalates.  Shouting,  or being hauled over the coals for poor work, isn’t necessarily bullying – some of the worst instances of bullying involve the silent treatment.  It also has to be recognised that claims of bullying are also sometimes made by people who are looking for a quick jibe against their employer.  

  Good employers - which surely includes the civil service - have in place anti-bullying policies as well as grievance procedures that staff who feel they are being bullied can invoke.  The test of whether bullying has taken place is scrutiny through the proper processes.  No doubt we will never know whether working conditions in No. 10 constituted ‘bullying’ or were just robust as you would expect them to be. 

  Whatever, Andrew Rawnsley has certainly had better publicity for his book than he dared dream of, while those who do suffer bullying are left no clearer about what is acceptable and what they should do about it.

   
  • 

    angela elniff-larsen 6:37 pm on 23 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    Its becaome a fashionable phrase rather than a serious condition
    The number of bullying investigations in process is amazing , its a wonder that people stayed so long in jobs being bullied before they speak out
    May be the processes and policies being put in place are not fit for purpose.Certainly the ones I have come accross are not user friendly and having to sit in a room face to face with a bully who you have complained about is not pleasant by any means
    It need training to go along side these tools.
    Andrew Rawnsley is a disaffected new labourite looking to earn money.that to me does not form the basis of robust evidence

• 

  Gerry puts out the candles

  Lee 10:40 pm on 20 February, 2010 | 5 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: deprivation (4), Economy (16), One Wales (16)

  Gerald Holtham has a forensic mind.  The former IPPR head who came close to heading the WDA in the early days of the Labour Government has established his effectiveness in distilling a complex argument in his Commission’s first report on funding.  Today he used the same skill to gently, but brutally, unpick some of the loose thinking around the replacing the Barnett formula.

  At a meeting in Plaid Cymru’s conference in Cardiff Holtham disarmingly pulled apart many of the assumptions of his hosts.  Every time Helen Mary Jones or Dafydd Wigley lit a flame of hope, Holtham gently placed his fingers on the wick and extinguished it.

  A fair share for Wales?  You’ll be lucky.  Though Wales is £300m under-funded by his calculations the Treasury say that’s within the margin of error and would quickly disappear with a different set of assumptions.  But the real problem is that using the same calulation Scotland gets £4.2bn-a-year more than it would if every part of the UK was treated the same as an English region.  With the SNP running strong the Treasury won’t consider change: ”If you think they’re going to change that, forget it” (quotes courtesy of Tom Bodden).

  A fairer income tax regime in Wales?  Not on your nelly. The high earners would flee across the border: ”You would get virtually no revenue from the upper rate of income tax and if you raise it too far you would probably lose it…If you want to maximise revenue you would cut the upper rate of income tax, [and] put a penny on basic rate…How you explain that to the Welsh electorate I don’t know.”

  How about a tax on natural resources then?  Small change.  Even if you could overcome the barriers a tax on water exported from Wales would only raise about £30 Million a year – and the Treasury would probably deduct it from the Welsh block in any event.   Not worth the grief.

  But Helen Mary Jones refused to be sidetracked, this simply confirms that Wales needs to flex our muscles more she said.  The Scots have shown that extra support for the SNP gives the country greater leverage (though Plaid’s affection for the SNP may not last long if there’s a hung Parliament.  Dafydd Wigley said they’d be working at cross purposes and should hold separate negotiations with the Tories).

  Helen Mary went on to say that the Conservatives might not mind “annoying the voters of Scotland” because they have so few votes there.  But I don’t buy that.  My reading of the Conservatives is that they see the generous Barnett settlement for Scotland as a price worth paying for keeping the Union together.

  But Gerald Holtham did give leave his audience with some cause for hope. The Calman Commission in Scotland suggested extending the tax-raising powers on the grounds of accountability.  Without a stake in revenue raising the Executive will have too easy an excuse to blame London for not providing sufficient funds.  The UK Treasury have accepted his argument.  “That’s boxed me in” Holtham explained.  ‘How can I not recommend tax raising powers now’ he mused…

   
  • 

    Jeff Jones 9:28 am on 21 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    What’s new Lee? Gerry Holtham only spelt out what some of us have been saying for years. It will be interesting to see what ‘horse trading’ you get when the SNP will be arguing that any minority government should not touch Barnett. Just imagine the effect on voters in the key marginals of the sight of a minority Labour or Tory adminstration dancing to the nationalist tune. Both Brown and Cameron will just tell the nationalists to do what they like and take the consequences of voting down the government. If today’s papers are to believed Brown’s comments will be accompanied by a fair bit of Anglo Saxon. Gerry Holtham has well and truly shot the Plaid fox. In fact he should be reported to the League against Cruel Sports. This is not a rerun of the 1970s I’m afraid. Plaid might as well get use to the fact that if their figures are right then the Assembly has to start to plan to reduce its budget by £2.8 billion by 2014.

  • 

    Lee 10:38 am on 21 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    Yes Jeff but Holtham has said it with authority. You seem to have missed his final piece of his analysis, the Treasury have conceeded a key principle with the Calman Commission. On the grounds of accountability there is an unanswarable case for a body that spends money to be resonsible for raising some of it too. I wouldn’t say the fox is dead…

  • 

    Jeff Jones 4:18 pm on 21 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    If you read some of my comments on a number of blogs you will see that I’ve been arging for months that any democratic institution has to have tax raising powers. To turn the American 18th century slogan on its head ” No representation without taxation”

    Although misinterpreted at the time this is exactly the point that Blair was arguing when defending the Scottish parliament’s power to vary taxation. He pointed out that even the smallest community council has the power to tax. It is absurd that I pay taxes to the UK government, the local unitary authority , the local community council and even the local police authority but not to a body that wants to create legally binding laws. It’s one of the reason why I believe that any referendum that merely moves Part 3 of the 2006 Act to Part 4 is not the solution. Both the 1998 and 2006 legislation are seriously flawed in my opinion in a number of ways including the way in which one third of the those given the power to legislate are not directly accountable to the electorate. I want the power to directly remove legislators if I disagree with any of the laws that they propose to control the way in which I Iead my life.

    What we need is a real debate about the future of governance in the UK in the 21st century. I an ideal world we would be electing in May not the next government but a Constituent Assembly to draw up a constitution fit for the present day. The way in which traditional British liberties have been attacked over the past 13 years shows as Lord Bingham argues in one of the most important books written in the last few years that we can no longer rely on the consequences of political events from the 17th century

  • 

    Lee 8:19 pm on 21 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    I agree, except for the PR bit. I would personally prefer a referendum on a Scottish Parliamentary model. But we find ourselves boxed into a settlement devised by Peter Hain and now a keystone of the coalition. Untidy and unsatisfactory as it is, its what we’ve got.

  • 

    simon 3:20 am on 27 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    Re. a fairer income tax regime in wales..
    I am not politically educated but this simplistic approach to taxation is deeply frustrating.. those on higher incomes must pay more! If the richest in our society are unwilling to pay their ‘fair share’ let them leave, welsh society would be better off without these selfish individuals.

• 

  The Establishment

  Lee 10:49 am on 19 February, 2010 | 7 Permalink | Reply
  

  As Rachel Banner digs out her Leo Abse press cuttings and evokes the horror of the Welsh Establishment pushing for greater devolution to feather their own nest, it got me thinking: what do you have to do to join this illustrious group?

  Apart from the obligatory house in Pontcanna (though the boundaries are edging wider these days), and the second home in Pembrokeshire, what else is on the checklist for joining the crachach?

  Here’s a start, feel free to add your own:

  1. A Kyffin Williams original, naturally
  2. A copy of the Welsh Encyclopedia
  3. A Melyn Tregwynt blanket
  4. A fondness for skiing (can’t beat a slippery slope)

  Anything else?

   
  • 

    Giraldus 7:47 pm on 19 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    A career in the media in Wales…oh no, wait.

  • 

    Adam Higgitt 9:46 pm on 19 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    You have to be able to speak Welsh.

  • 

    valleys mam 9:47 pm on 19 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    season ticket to the eisteddfods : Welsh Speaker : Welsh designer jewellery for the women : double barrel Welsh name: cawl and Penderyn nights: have at least a one media celeb as a mate

  • 

    Duncan Higgitt 10:00 am on 23 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    Children who own only wooden toys, a house that smells of terrible vegetarian cooking, governor control of your offspring’s school, a tendency to instruct the rest of humanity according to your values, tastes identical to the English middle class

  • 

    Len Gibbs 1:06 pm on 23 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    A framed copy of Daran Hill’s “Big Lies” hung on the kitchen wall

  • 

    Lee 6:03 pm on 23 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    I’ve got a couple more to collect but I’m in with a shout…how exciting

  • 

    haydn hughes 8:55 pm on 23 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    Being able to speak English… paranoia about Welsh speakers…

• 

  A Professor writes...

  Lee 11:35 pm on 16 February, 2010 | 3 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: Assembly (21), local democracy (9), One Wales (16), public sector (9)

  His may not be a name widely known outside the Cardiff Bay bubble, but Mark Drakeford has been a key figure in Welsh Government over the last decade.  On Saturday he’s likely to be selected as the Labour candidate for Cardiff West at the next Assembly elections – succeeding the man he’s been advising. 

  A very thoughtful man, he was the one who effectivley made Rhodri Morgan’s Governments hang together  – ideologically and organisationally.  The Professor of social policy at Cardiff University gave a short lecture to the Labour Grassroots ginger group at the end of January which I have just come across on the web

  It is an interesting read on a number of levels but the point that struck me particularly was his fear that without strong political leadership over how to deal with spending cuts the civil service will lead the way in crudely slashing schemes they were never keen on in the first place.  Or as Prof Drakeford put it “unless we are prepared with our own democratically driven way of dealing with reduced budgets, the machine will take it over”.  

  He warns there will be:

   -       An assault on the entitlement agenda: much despised as low populism, rather than the production of strong social capital which we know it to be;

  -       An assault on jobs: a firm belief that the public sector is bloated here in Wales, with lots of easy opportunities to slim back and make room for the private entrepreneurial spirits which we have held back for so long;

  -       An assault on  public services: those creators of dependency and sullen apathy which save people from the consequences of their own behaviour and teach them that, no matter what havoc they wreak in their own lives, and those of others, the state will always be along to bale them out.

  In particular he foresees a temptation to engage in displacement activity by going after local authorities: “there are voices, at the Assembly, who believe that the solution will be found in an attack on local government in Wales”, he warned.  I half agree with his advocacy of PR for Local Government allied with a new settlement centred on “binding agreement around a small number of key outcomes”.  But can’t help observe that this has been done in Scotland without much effect on the culture of Local Government.  Anyway, that’s an aside.

  Here is a man who intimately knows the way the Assembly Government works, at both a political and official level.  His warning about the ‘machine’ taking over is a sober one.  There are undeniable failings of delivery right across the Government in Wales.  Ministers need to deal with that and not let their officials get away with sloppy work.  But capacity problems pose challenges and there is clearly a fear that when the spending cuts bite and the fog of war descends, the civil service will have the perfect cover to cut the big schemes they never wanted (free bus passes, free prescriptions) rather than deal with the inefficiencies and inadequacies throughout the system.

  So we must rely on “our own democratically driven way” to ensure the response to the cuts is driven by political priorities and not administrative prejudices.  But Mark Drakeford doesn’t seem confident that this will happen…

   
  • 

    angela elniff-laresn 10:45 am on 17 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    An assault on jobs: a firm belief that the public sector is bloated here in Wales, with lots of easy opportunities to slim back and make room for the private entrepreneurial spirits which we have held back for so long;
    If thats what he thinks then may be its a good thing that some enterprise creeps in , the other way hasnt been good for us .Equality and Social Justice havent blossomed during th RM years have they
    Surely it is up to the ministers and AMs to stamp their authority a bit more.
    SPADS are unelected too -where is the democracy there ?
    Not all civil servants are right wing , lots I know are very socially minded
    Wales needs its economy back on track , people need real jobs the rest will follow if we can get some hope and vibe back

  • 

    Jackson 1:23 pm on 17 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    It is certainly welcome that Mark Drakeford is thinking about what it is our public sector organisations should be focussed on delivering. I fear that one of the lost opportunities of the years of relative financial glut has been a loss of clear thinking at times by political leaders on what local government and health services should be spending our money on delivering. I regret that it seems we all expect far too much, that our policy directions have been driven more by a sense of want than a sense of need. And now, as the money dries up I think Professor Drakeford is probably correct in his analysis. The drive for financial balance will deliver us into thoughtless slash and burn without leadership and tough decisions by political leaders on what it is we need public services to deliver to make Wales a better place. But as Prof Drakeford suggests, it may already be too late.

  • 

    Lee 11:48 pm on 17 February, 2010 Permalink
    

    Angela, I’m not sure the suggestion here is that the civil service is ‘right-wing’, though it is certainly conservative and in the absence of a strong political lead will pursue an agenda of its own.

    The fear is that it will be easier for ‘big ticket’ savings to be put up as sacrifical lambs by officials who were not keen on them in the first place, rather than addressing the failures and inefficiencies in policy delivery which they are responsible for.

• 

  What a difference a cwtch makes

  jonathan 12:46 am on 16 February, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: children, deprivation (4), health inequalities

  The Marmot report was published on 11th February. The list of contributors reads like the Who’s Who of researchers and opinion leaders in the field of research into the links between deprivation and health over the last two decades. It is a report for the Department of Health in England. I hope that the newly rebranded Public Health Wales and the Assembly will read, learn and act. The authors’ biggest priority is the improvement of the lives of the youngest living in poverty:”giving every child the best start in life”.

  The Report talks about ‘positive attachment between a young child and the care giver’:

  “Early, secure attachments contribute to the growth of a broad range of competencies, including the self esteem, self-efficacy and positive social skills that are associated with better educational, social and labour market outcomes in later life.”

  In his BBC News interview Professor Marmot was more direct about what this actually meant:

  Every child needs to be nurtured at an early stage.
  “In one study, mothers were asked whether it was important to cuddle and talk to a child.
  “I would have thought every mother would have said yes to that – but not all of them did.
  “That made my hair stand on end.
  “And it follows the social gradient – women from less well-off families are less likely to see this as important.
  “But then by the age of three, these children had more behavioural problems and worse cognitive skills.
  “Then they have less readiness to learn, and the problems continue.”

  We know from research on Romanian orphans that by the age of three neglected children have irreversible brain damage on MRI scans. This fits with my experience as a Valleys general practitioner although the picture is much more complex: whilst it is common to find infants and toddlers strapped in pushchairs and baby seats on a home visit at some addresses, it is rare to find emotionally cold, show home-tidy and socially isolated homes in those streets.

  Over the years I have got very angry with commentators who have told me that the answer to Merthyr’s problems is to make everyone middle class with middle class values. I have also been rebuked by Health Visitors and Social Workers when I have used sitting with an infant and reading as a measure of good parenting. How do those of us concerned with addressing these complex challenges bring about change sensitively and effectively and break the generational cycle of inadequately cwtched infants?

   
• 

  Why pay less?

  victoria 6:09 pm on 8 February, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: social exclusion (8), unemployment (6)

  I am a sucker for catalogues and the one that dropped through my letter box today took my breath away. If I buy a new washing machine from Buy-as-You-View, whose catalogue it was, I can pay a total of £1,081.08 for a Hotpoint washing machine with service cover (the WMF740K if you really want to know) when the same machine – with 3 years service cover – costs a mere £462.49 from online retailer Laskys, with similar prices at Dixons, Currys etc.  That’s more than double – £618.59 to be exact – for the privilege of paying weekly.  Oh yes, and delivery is extra for BAYV’s machine.

  Buy-As-You-View likes to stress its respectable credentials, sponsoring the Inspire Wales awards, promoting ‘green’ working and most astonishing of all talking up its ‘corporate social responsibility’.  There is another spin, of course – blatant profiteering from low income households.  Inspire Wales? More like rip off Wales.

   
• 

  Is no news good news?

  Lee 12:17 pm on 4 February, 2010 | 0 Permalink | Reply
  Tags: local democracy (9), media (10)

  As the panel considering the future of ITV news packed up and headed out of town last night, the word on the street was ‘citizen journalism’.

  All three bidders for the £6 Million pilot to provide Welsh news for the third channel promised to democratise news provision by opening up news gathering to the masses.  Who needs professionals when you can have amateurs? 

  Of course it could all go pear shaped as the Tories have promised to unpick any contract signed if they win the General Election.

  But regardless of the outcome an important principle has been recognised.  Wales needs more than the BBC to provide a ‘plurality’ of news coverage, and if the market can’t provide it then the State has a role.

  But clearly it is not just broadcasting that presents a problem.  Less than 1% of the population now read the Western Mail.  The business model of the regional press is imploding across the world.   As the Guardian’s Alan Rusbridger noted in his very interesting Cudlipp lecture “the old models are breaking faster than the new models can be put into place”.

  On Monday Sir Martin Sorrell, one of the biggest buyers of advertising in the world, suggested that governments might have to consider subsidising newspapers such as the Guardian to maintain a diversity of editorial viewpoints if their losses reached a point that would force them to close.

  After all if banks are too important to fail why not newspapers?

  I have little doubt that ‘hyper-local’ news will flourish in the digital age – as Rob Williams discussed in an excellent posting over on Wales Home.  My worry is the all-Wales level.  How can we sustain a democratic tier in the face of a profound information deficit?

  As I’ve argued here before there’s a case for looking at a Welsh equivalent of the Scott Trust – the not for profit foundation that owns the Guardian Media Group. A public interest company underwritten by the taxpayer that could safeguard Welsh news.