Following on from my previous post, it appears that the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development (DARD) may soon find themselves in further difficulties over the recent Farm Modernisation Scheme debacle.
DARD could soon face legal confrontation with the EU Commission over the manner in which funding was allocated under the Farm Modernisation Scheme (FMS) after the EU Agriculture Commissioner Mariann Fischer Boel waded into the row.
Commissioner Fischer Boel has said that the way DARD distributed funding for the FMS was 'unacceptable' and that the 'first come-first serve' basis for funding allocation had broke EU laws.
This revelation further compounds the widespread criticism of DARD's handling of the issue and places the beleaguered Agriculture Minister Michelle Gildernew under further pressure.
The Minister's handling of this issue has been nothing short of ignorant and disgraceful. Never mind the fact that the move breached EU law - the manner in which farmers have been treated has been despicable.
It has had a major demoralising impact on the local agricultural sector with many farmers complaining that they felt demeaned, humiliated and like beggars.
Due to the current pressures on the industry farmers hands are tied financially and as a result they were virtually forced to stand in desperately long queues to compete for a small portion of what was already a small pot of funding.
£6m does not go along way in agriculture and the Department knew from the very start that demand for these funds would be high. They can not fake surprise now at a situation that has been looming for some time.
This allocation highlights considerable incompetency within the higher echelons of DARD and these people must be held to account.
If DARD has broke EU rules then it may be forced to launch a renewed process of fundiing allocation which will cause even further pain to those farmers who were first in line.
Considering the current state of farming industry the Minister should have known better than to approve the allocation of funding in this manner. It was unethical, inequitable and now possibly illegal.
The Minister must be held to account before the Assembly and more importantly she must apologise immediately to all those farmers who have been hurt by this whole mess.
Wednesday 18 February 2009
Monday 16 February 2009
Agriculture NI: There Must Be A Better Way
Tonight hundreds of farmers from across the six counties are gathering outside Department of Agriculture and Rural Development offices in the hope of obtaining a small slice of the £6m funding made available through the DARD Farm Modernisation Scheme (FMS).
In strange scenes, farmers are taking part in overnight queues in the hope to be some of the lucky few who obtain the much needed but limited financial assistance. The support measures are being provided through the EU Commission Rural Development Programme and are made available though the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development’s FMS.
The available funding will assist some 1200 farmers modernise farming measures in order to promote better animal welfare standards and efficiency within the farming sector.
In some places the PSNI will be present just in case the situation gets tense as can tend to happen in these circumstances- this is to be completely expected. Farmers are having a tough time as it is and do not deserve this type of treatment from the Department. There has to be a better way.
This 'first come, first serve' approach to funding distribution is denying many farmers particularly the old and immobile, who simply can’t not sit outside all night in the freezing cold outside their local DARD Direct Office, their entitlements under the Rural Development Programme.
Yes there may be limited funding available and interest in the programme is considerably high but the way DARD have handled this issue is scandalous. The Department have known for some time that this situation was inevitable due to the limited funds being made available. It really is astonishing that they have done nothing at all to mitigate these circumstances. It is a total mess.
Last week I had an informal discussion with a friend who is a farming representative and he suggested that the current free-for-all setup under the FMS is simply not fair on farmers. Farmers are being pitted against each other in competition for funding and this is completely unethical. It is demeaning, discriminatory and farmers are deeply hurt by the actions and attitude of DARD.
He suggested that a lottery system would be much more appropriate in these circumstances and this would prevent the current scrabble that we are seeing with potentially ugly scenes outside DARD Direct Offices. Lessons must be learned from this fiasco.
I must agree with him, with limited funds available DARD has a responsibility to ensure that what funding is available is distributed as equitably as possible. Otherwise the funding will not reach those that really need it the most.
In strange scenes, farmers are taking part in overnight queues in the hope to be some of the lucky few who obtain the much needed but limited financial assistance. The support measures are being provided through the EU Commission Rural Development Programme and are made available though the Department of Agriculture and Rural Development’s FMS.
The available funding will assist some 1200 farmers modernise farming measures in order to promote better animal welfare standards and efficiency within the farming sector.
In some places the PSNI will be present just in case the situation gets tense as can tend to happen in these circumstances- this is to be completely expected. Farmers are having a tough time as it is and do not deserve this type of treatment from the Department. There has to be a better way.
This 'first come, first serve' approach to funding distribution is denying many farmers particularly the old and immobile, who simply can’t not sit outside all night in the freezing cold outside their local DARD Direct Office, their entitlements under the Rural Development Programme.
Yes there may be limited funding available and interest in the programme is considerably high but the way DARD have handled this issue is scandalous. The Department have known for some time that this situation was inevitable due to the limited funds being made available. It really is astonishing that they have done nothing at all to mitigate these circumstances. It is a total mess.
Last week I had an informal discussion with a friend who is a farming representative and he suggested that the current free-for-all setup under the FMS is simply not fair on farmers. Farmers are being pitted against each other in competition for funding and this is completely unethical. It is demeaning, discriminatory and farmers are deeply hurt by the actions and attitude of DARD.
He suggested that a lottery system would be much more appropriate in these circumstances and this would prevent the current scrabble that we are seeing with potentially ugly scenes outside DARD Direct Offices. Lessons must be learned from this fiasco.
I must agree with him, with limited funds available DARD has a responsibility to ensure that what funding is available is distributed as equitably as possible. Otherwise the funding will not reach those that really need it the most.
Thursday 12 February 2009
SAMMY GOES WHAAMMY!
At the beginning of the week Environment Minister Sammy Wilson put his foot in it again by censoring a planned UK Government advertisement campaign aimed at educating people about the impacts on climate change. The Minister, whose sceptical views on the impact of humans on climate change are well known, claimed the planned TV campaign was ‘insidious propaganda’.
Never one to shy away from saying what he thinks, the Environment Minister refused back down on his decision and subsequently during the course of the week drew further criticism by weakly attempting to justify his decision.
If the public uproar over this debacle wasn't bad enough for Wilson - it seems he might now be in a considerable spot of bother with the NI Assembly - after the Environment Committee passed a 6-4 vote of ‘No Confidence’ in the Minister earlier today.
Environment Committee member and SDLP Environment Spokesperson Tommy Gallagher MLA proposed the motion of 'No Confidence' in the Minister. The SDLP’s Gallagher said ‘we need to be taking environmental issues much more seriously than the Minister appears to be taking them’.
However fellow Environment Committee member, the DUP’s Peter Weir, criticised the motion and labelled it nothing more than ‘a point scoring exercise’. With considerable pressure on the Minister will Big Sammy live to fight another day?
Wilson it must be said is not normally one to back down and it is extremely doubtful that he will pay much attention to the Committee’s ruling. But with mounting public and political pressure against a Minister that simply won't back down, or doesn't know when to shut up, the DUP may be forced to act.
Interestingly these recent comments from Wilson further add to a general theme of controversy that seems to follow the Minister wherever he goes these days. One could be forgiven for getting the impression that Wilson seems to enjoy being the centre attention and revels in his own sensationalism. Seems like nothing more than a trumped-up ego trip to me.
Last week we had Sammy lambasting local schools for closures, due to the recent snowfall, with Wilson claiming the decision was in appeasement of ‘health and safety nuts’.
The week before that Sammy sparked a backlash - after providing yet another useful insight into the DUP’s rascist mindset - when he suggested that during the economic crisis it should be a case of ‘local jobs for local people’. Although Big Sammy may not live in Royston Vasey, or shop at a ‘local shop for local people’, he certainly is in a League of His Own.
So that makes it an already extremely eventful year for the Environment Minister and it is only February! I wonder who or what will be the next target for Big Sammy...
Never one to shy away from saying what he thinks, the Environment Minister refused back down on his decision and subsequently during the course of the week drew further criticism by weakly attempting to justify his decision.
If the public uproar over this debacle wasn't bad enough for Wilson - it seems he might now be in a considerable spot of bother with the NI Assembly - after the Environment Committee passed a 6-4 vote of ‘No Confidence’ in the Minister earlier today.
Environment Committee member and SDLP Environment Spokesperson Tommy Gallagher MLA proposed the motion of 'No Confidence' in the Minister. The SDLP’s Gallagher said ‘we need to be taking environmental issues much more seriously than the Minister appears to be taking them’.
However fellow Environment Committee member, the DUP’s Peter Weir, criticised the motion and labelled it nothing more than ‘a point scoring exercise’. With considerable pressure on the Minister will Big Sammy live to fight another day?
Wilson it must be said is not normally one to back down and it is extremely doubtful that he will pay much attention to the Committee’s ruling. But with mounting public and political pressure against a Minister that simply won't back down, or doesn't know when to shut up, the DUP may be forced to act.
Interestingly these recent comments from Wilson further add to a general theme of controversy that seems to follow the Minister wherever he goes these days. One could be forgiven for getting the impression that Wilson seems to enjoy being the centre attention and revels in his own sensationalism. Seems like nothing more than a trumped-up ego trip to me.
Last week we had Sammy lambasting local schools for closures, due to the recent snowfall, with Wilson claiming the decision was in appeasement of ‘health and safety nuts’.
The week before that Sammy sparked a backlash - after providing yet another useful insight into the DUP’s rascist mindset - when he suggested that during the economic crisis it should be a case of ‘local jobs for local people’. Although Big Sammy may not live in Royston Vasey, or shop at a ‘local shop for local people’, he certainly is in a League of His Own.
So that makes it an already extremely eventful year for the Environment Minister and it is only February! I wonder who or what will be the next target for Big Sammy...
Monday 9 February 2009
Environment Minister Censors Climate Change Awareness Campaign
Once again poor old Northern Ireland is the laughing stock of the rest of the UK and Ireland....
The Environment Minister Sammy Wilson has again put his head above the parapet by withdrawing a planned UK Government advertisement campaign aimed at educating people about their individual impacts on climate change and providing information on how to reduce their carbon footprint.
The Environment Minister is again under mounting pressure for his outspoken views that humans do not contribute to climate change.
This subsequent political pressure was to be expected and is completely justified.
His controversial decision is based on his belief that climate change is not a man made problem. This is the same belief system held by (thankfully) former US President George Bush and flies in the face of a growing body of scientific evidence that frimly stipulates that climate change is a man made problem.
Leading climate scientists are in consensus that there is a considerable human impact on climate change.
The International Panel on Climate Change, set up by the United Nations, is made up of climate experts from all over the planet and after the last round of UN climate talks they again reiterated the devastating impact that man is having on the planet.
Unfortunately there are many climate change sceptics and eco-deniers out there in the north and this move will resonate well with them. On the contrary to Sammy's beliefs - that 'eco-fundamentalists' are not informed- it is these people who have not read up on the issue.
Wilson is playing a dangerous game by going down this road against scientific consensus and against UK Government policy (plus EU) on this issue.
I think (hope) that sometimes deep down Sammy doesn't even believe some of the stuff he spouts and only says it to portray himself as anti-political correctness and straight talking. If this is the case then he is not the type of person who should be in an important role such as Environment Minister.
If he is actually using the climate change issue as some platform to seem radical and against fashionable thought then he is acting grossly irresponsibly.
Climate change affects us all- it is a global challenge. But it affects the global population in very varied ways and intensities. If you adhere to the 'three worlds' theory (that suggests that we need 3 planet earths to sustain our current rate of consumption) then you will be aware that climate change and environmental degradation will certainly impact negatively on the quality of lives of our children.
A wetter global climate climate has already devasted wheat crops across the world leading to global rises in the price of bread. This has lead to starvation for many thousands of people living in non-OECD countries and put many pressures on the lives of those living in poverty. This is just one impact of climate change.
It is ok for Sammy Wilson to sit in his ivory tower up at DUP HQ and talk this type of nonsense when he is ignorant to the fact that people in Africa have to live with Environmental Rascism on a daily basis. These people are the ones bearing the true brunt of climate change- with desertification and drought an all too sombre reality.
The Environment Minister may not believe in the human impact on climate change but there are many people with knowledge and experience on the issue who would beg to differ.
The Environment Minister Sammy Wilson has again put his head above the parapet by withdrawing a planned UK Government advertisement campaign aimed at educating people about their individual impacts on climate change and providing information on how to reduce their carbon footprint.
The Environment Minister is again under mounting pressure for his outspoken views that humans do not contribute to climate change.
This subsequent political pressure was to be expected and is completely justified.
His controversial decision is based on his belief that climate change is not a man made problem. This is the same belief system held by (thankfully) former US President George Bush and flies in the face of a growing body of scientific evidence that frimly stipulates that climate change is a man made problem.
Leading climate scientists are in consensus that there is a considerable human impact on climate change.
The International Panel on Climate Change, set up by the United Nations, is made up of climate experts from all over the planet and after the last round of UN climate talks they again reiterated the devastating impact that man is having on the planet.
Unfortunately there are many climate change sceptics and eco-deniers out there in the north and this move will resonate well with them. On the contrary to Sammy's beliefs - that 'eco-fundamentalists' are not informed- it is these people who have not read up on the issue.
Wilson is playing a dangerous game by going down this road against scientific consensus and against UK Government policy (plus EU) on this issue.
I think (hope) that sometimes deep down Sammy doesn't even believe some of the stuff he spouts and only says it to portray himself as anti-political correctness and straight talking. If this is the case then he is not the type of person who should be in an important role such as Environment Minister.
If he is actually using the climate change issue as some platform to seem radical and against fashionable thought then he is acting grossly irresponsibly.
Climate change affects us all- it is a global challenge. But it affects the global population in very varied ways and intensities. If you adhere to the 'three worlds' theory (that suggests that we need 3 planet earths to sustain our current rate of consumption) then you will be aware that climate change and environmental degradation will certainly impact negatively on the quality of lives of our children.
A wetter global climate climate has already devasted wheat crops across the world leading to global rises in the price of bread. This has lead to starvation for many thousands of people living in non-OECD countries and put many pressures on the lives of those living in poverty. This is just one impact of climate change.
It is ok for Sammy Wilson to sit in his ivory tower up at DUP HQ and talk this type of nonsense when he is ignorant to the fact that people in Africa have to live with Environmental Rascism on a daily basis. These people are the ones bearing the true brunt of climate change- with desertification and drought an all too sombre reality.
The Environment Minister may not believe in the human impact on climate change but there are many people with knowledge and experience on the issue who would beg to differ.
Sunday 8 February 2009
Tackling the Economic Crisis
Yesterday I took part in an interesting public debate in Dublin regarding the economic crisis and how it can be solved http://www.labour.ie/youth/. I participated in a panel discussion alongside representatives from Irish Labour Youth, Socialist Youth and Young Greens.
This post provides an outline of my position on the economic crisis and the issues that I raised during the debate...
The global economic system is always in crisis. It is nothing new. As long as there is poverty and social exclusion in the world then the economic system is failing. So what makes this current economic crisis exceptional? With the onset of globalisation this is the first real economic crisis that has affected the entire international community.
Economic pressures in the US have been massively exacerbated and exported to the rest of the world by the process of financial globalisation and the increasing integration of economic markets. What makes this crisis unprecedented is that it is truely global.
The current pressures on the economic system first presented itself with the rising price of oil and the subsequent inflation in the cost of living- with increased food prices in particular. Oil price increases have meant that farmers have to spend more on fuel for their tractors/machinery and this increase in production cost has been passed on to consumers with rising food prices a direct consequence.
The increasing cost of living was then compounded by the mortgage crisis that hit the US economy last year. The collapse of mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae came as a direct response to irresponsible and risky lending.
People who clearly could not afford mortgages for particular properties were given mortgages. When many of these people defaulted on their mortgage repayments or failed to afford the repayments then the whole system began to crumble.
The spectacular collapse of the mortgage system in the US rolled out into the global banking sector where many banks had bought mortgages during the good times and were now left with substantially toxic mortgage assets.
The collapse of banks such as Lehman Brothers, Northern Rock, and the Presbyterian Mutual Society here in the north, came as a direct response to banks having toxic mortgage assets. When banks struggled to sell these toxic assets from their books this impacted on their own finances and affected their abilities to lend to each other. Banks became cautious and did not want to particpate in any lending that had any element of risk attached.
With this mortgage crisis now in full flow, ordinary people are stuggling to buy and sell homes and young people in particular can not get their first step onto the property ladder- this has led to a crisis in the housing sector. With the collapse of some pension schemes people's key source of economic security was their homes and the rising values of their property.
With the bursting of the housing bubble- now they don't even have that.
With internal pressures within the banking system banks are tightening their belts and restricting loan facilities - not just between the banks themselves - but also between the banks and their customers. This has created a lending crisis for small-medium business- as many in this sector need these loans to support them during this difficult financial situtation. For individuals there is now no easy credit to make up for pressures on wages.
Here in the north the construction industry has been hit hard by the housing crisis. With a shortage in demand for new builds building firms have had to lay off staff. By October 2008 there had been 8,000 jobs lost in the norths construction industry. This figure has undoubtedly risen since then and will continue to rise with an estimated 20,000 due to be out of work by the end of 2009.
Unemployment is at 4.2% (October 200*) and this figure is rising at an alarming rate. Youth unemployment is increasing due to people living longer and retirement age increases - with older people staying in employment for longer - and nowhere near enough job creation at the other end of the spectrum.
With a shortage of new jobs being created many young people are having to do precarious work in order to get their first steps on the employment ladder. Many young graduates are having to work in non-degree related jobs in order to make ends meet. Often this work is low-paid, low-skill work with few employment rights, with many finding themselves with no other option but to work in the 'temping' sector where, under current labour market laws, they are routinely exploited.
The financial crisis must not be used as an excuse to dilute employment and therefore social standards. The increase in short-term contracts, agency work and sub-contracting has created a race to the bottom in social standards. This has denied many people, particularly young people, many employment rights and protections.
Those jobs that have been created have tended to be in the retail sector with the likes of Tesco and Lidl. Most of these jobs are low-skill, low-wage jobs and can not necessarily be described as 'new jobs'- as many of the vacances are filled by workers who have already lost jobs elsewhere - from the construction sector but mainly from elsewhere in the retail sector. There must be healthy competition on the high street to prevent this.
The increasing market dominance of large, stack-em-high-sell-em-cheap retailers is unhealthy. The collapse of retailers such as Zavvi and Woolworths and the collapse of the small to medium business sector has only added to the dominance of the likes of Tesco, giving them more of a monoply over the market (Tescopoly).
All this time, and with constant pressure on public finances, there remains a challenge to maintain existing levels of public expenditure and maintain service provision within healthcare, education and social security. The financial crisis must not be used as an excuse to cut public spending.
With existing levels of competition between states, or international regulatory competition, now being exacerbated by this globalised economic crisis- it is an increasing challenge for states to reconcile the need to increase social standards with the need to remain competitive and productive. Improving social standards will help tackle poverty and social exlusion and this will help create the necessary conditions for a competitive, knowledge-based economy firmly rooted in the Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs.
A classic example of this competition presenting itself in Ireland is the recent decision by Dell to 'pick up sticks' and move its operation in Limerick to Poland- at the cost of hundreds of jobs in Limerick. Poland offers Dell the chance to reduce their labour and corporation tax costs- which Dell would see as necessary to compete in the pressurised economic climate. This is the reality of the localised and very real impacts of this crisis.
Ireland's over-reliance on international corporations (which have no local ties or loyalty) and foreign direct investment has come home to roost. If anything the economic crisis has taught us that here we rely too much on international corporations and we do not support local business enough.
There are however some reasons to remain optomistic. The credit crunch does present us with some really positive opportunities.
We can improve North-South cooperation to tackle the financial impacts on the island. The benefits of North-South cooperation were all too apparent in the successful resolution of the recent dioxic contamination in pig meat. This was a financial issue that threatened the future of the agricultural industry here and it was also an all-ireland issue as it affected the industry both north and south. The successful resolution of this crisis showed how all-ireland approaches to financial issues can work for mutual benefit.
The falling or deflation of the UK's currency has also allowed producers and business here to benefit. The lower value of sterling has meant that it is cheaper for the Republic / Euro-zone and other economies to import our products. This has helped to support local business but this must be capitalised upon by the likes of Invest NI. Cheaper imports from NI has also helped the Republic and other Euro-zone cut their business costs.
The economic crisis also presents an opportunity for a change of culture in financial institutions and in citizens. This can mean more responsible lending, cuts in city/bank bonuses, an end to rampant and irresponsible pursuit of profit; a change of direction in how we consume and how we as citizens approach issues such as personal debt. Afterall we have become generation-debt.
Value for money from politicans can present a positive symbolic signal to citizens. The recent moves by the Irish Parliament to cut representatives wages is something that must be positively acknowledged.
So how can we solve this crisis? Can we can truely solve a perpetually anarchic and volatile system that has proven itself time and time again to fall into crisis and then relauch itself?
I believe that traditionally recessions tend to last for years and realistically we can only hope to alleviate some of the impacts of this current crisis on the lives of people. The crisis cannot be solved overnight.
Here are a few positive steps that I believe can help soften the impact of the financial crisis:
Let's introduce the Euro in the UK; support the banks when needed in return for more democratic control over them; promote all-ireland infrastructure projects and other public work programmes that help get construction workers back to work; support small to medium enterprises and reduce our reliance on foreign direct investment; support moves to increase financial regulatory powers of international institutions- we live in a globalised world and can not stand alone during this crisis; invest in the green economy; resist privatisation and support employment by building strong social partnership- stronger unions means stronger employment rights that tackle poverty and maginalisation; finance social support measures and give redundant and unemployed workers a strong safety net- there can be no flexicurity/flexibility in labour markets (use of agencies, etc) without proper social security; develop progressive taxation measures; and develop the skills base in our workforce- let's give our workers a chance and make them more competitive within the internationalised labour market.
This post provides an outline of my position on the economic crisis and the issues that I raised during the debate...
The global economic system is always in crisis. It is nothing new. As long as there is poverty and social exclusion in the world then the economic system is failing. So what makes this current economic crisis exceptional? With the onset of globalisation this is the first real economic crisis that has affected the entire international community.
Economic pressures in the US have been massively exacerbated and exported to the rest of the world by the process of financial globalisation and the increasing integration of economic markets. What makes this crisis unprecedented is that it is truely global.
The current pressures on the economic system first presented itself with the rising price of oil and the subsequent inflation in the cost of living- with increased food prices in particular. Oil price increases have meant that farmers have to spend more on fuel for their tractors/machinery and this increase in production cost has been passed on to consumers with rising food prices a direct consequence.
The increasing cost of living was then compounded by the mortgage crisis that hit the US economy last year. The collapse of mortgage giants Freddie Mac and Fanny Mae came as a direct response to irresponsible and risky lending.
People who clearly could not afford mortgages for particular properties were given mortgages. When many of these people defaulted on their mortgage repayments or failed to afford the repayments then the whole system began to crumble.
The spectacular collapse of the mortgage system in the US rolled out into the global banking sector where many banks had bought mortgages during the good times and were now left with substantially toxic mortgage assets.
The collapse of banks such as Lehman Brothers, Northern Rock, and the Presbyterian Mutual Society here in the north, came as a direct response to banks having toxic mortgage assets. When banks struggled to sell these toxic assets from their books this impacted on their own finances and affected their abilities to lend to each other. Banks became cautious and did not want to particpate in any lending that had any element of risk attached.
With this mortgage crisis now in full flow, ordinary people are stuggling to buy and sell homes and young people in particular can not get their first step onto the property ladder- this has led to a crisis in the housing sector. With the collapse of some pension schemes people's key source of economic security was their homes and the rising values of their property.
With the bursting of the housing bubble- now they don't even have that.
With internal pressures within the banking system banks are tightening their belts and restricting loan facilities - not just between the banks themselves - but also between the banks and their customers. This has created a lending crisis for small-medium business- as many in this sector need these loans to support them during this difficult financial situtation. For individuals there is now no easy credit to make up for pressures on wages.
Here in the north the construction industry has been hit hard by the housing crisis. With a shortage in demand for new builds building firms have had to lay off staff. By October 2008 there had been 8,000 jobs lost in the norths construction industry. This figure has undoubtedly risen since then and will continue to rise with an estimated 20,000 due to be out of work by the end of 2009.
Unemployment is at 4.2% (October 200*) and this figure is rising at an alarming rate. Youth unemployment is increasing due to people living longer and retirement age increases - with older people staying in employment for longer - and nowhere near enough job creation at the other end of the spectrum.
With a shortage of new jobs being created many young people are having to do precarious work in order to get their first steps on the employment ladder. Many young graduates are having to work in non-degree related jobs in order to make ends meet. Often this work is low-paid, low-skill work with few employment rights, with many finding themselves with no other option but to work in the 'temping' sector where, under current labour market laws, they are routinely exploited.
The financial crisis must not be used as an excuse to dilute employment and therefore social standards. The increase in short-term contracts, agency work and sub-contracting has created a race to the bottom in social standards. This has denied many people, particularly young people, many employment rights and protections.
Those jobs that have been created have tended to be in the retail sector with the likes of Tesco and Lidl. Most of these jobs are low-skill, low-wage jobs and can not necessarily be described as 'new jobs'- as many of the vacances are filled by workers who have already lost jobs elsewhere - from the construction sector but mainly from elsewhere in the retail sector. There must be healthy competition on the high street to prevent this.
The increasing market dominance of large, stack-em-high-sell-em-cheap retailers is unhealthy. The collapse of retailers such as Zavvi and Woolworths and the collapse of the small to medium business sector has only added to the dominance of the likes of Tesco, giving them more of a monoply over the market (Tescopoly).
All this time, and with constant pressure on public finances, there remains a challenge to maintain existing levels of public expenditure and maintain service provision within healthcare, education and social security. The financial crisis must not be used as an excuse to cut public spending.
With existing levels of competition between states, or international regulatory competition, now being exacerbated by this globalised economic crisis- it is an increasing challenge for states to reconcile the need to increase social standards with the need to remain competitive and productive. Improving social standards will help tackle poverty and social exlusion and this will help create the necessary conditions for a competitive, knowledge-based economy firmly rooted in the Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs.
A classic example of this competition presenting itself in Ireland is the recent decision by Dell to 'pick up sticks' and move its operation in Limerick to Poland- at the cost of hundreds of jobs in Limerick. Poland offers Dell the chance to reduce their labour and corporation tax costs- which Dell would see as necessary to compete in the pressurised economic climate. This is the reality of the localised and very real impacts of this crisis.
Ireland's over-reliance on international corporations (which have no local ties or loyalty) and foreign direct investment has come home to roost. If anything the economic crisis has taught us that here we rely too much on international corporations and we do not support local business enough.
There are however some reasons to remain optomistic. The credit crunch does present us with some really positive opportunities.
We can improve North-South cooperation to tackle the financial impacts on the island. The benefits of North-South cooperation were all too apparent in the successful resolution of the recent dioxic contamination in pig meat. This was a financial issue that threatened the future of the agricultural industry here and it was also an all-ireland issue as it affected the industry both north and south. The successful resolution of this crisis showed how all-ireland approaches to financial issues can work for mutual benefit.
The falling or deflation of the UK's currency has also allowed producers and business here to benefit. The lower value of sterling has meant that it is cheaper for the Republic / Euro-zone and other economies to import our products. This has helped to support local business but this must be capitalised upon by the likes of Invest NI. Cheaper imports from NI has also helped the Republic and other Euro-zone cut their business costs.
The economic crisis also presents an opportunity for a change of culture in financial institutions and in citizens. This can mean more responsible lending, cuts in city/bank bonuses, an end to rampant and irresponsible pursuit of profit; a change of direction in how we consume and how we as citizens approach issues such as personal debt. Afterall we have become generation-debt.
Value for money from politicans can present a positive symbolic signal to citizens. The recent moves by the Irish Parliament to cut representatives wages is something that must be positively acknowledged.
So how can we solve this crisis? Can we can truely solve a perpetually anarchic and volatile system that has proven itself time and time again to fall into crisis and then relauch itself?
I believe that traditionally recessions tend to last for years and realistically we can only hope to alleviate some of the impacts of this current crisis on the lives of people. The crisis cannot be solved overnight.
Here are a few positive steps that I believe can help soften the impact of the financial crisis:
Let's introduce the Euro in the UK; support the banks when needed in return for more democratic control over them; promote all-ireland infrastructure projects and other public work programmes that help get construction workers back to work; support small to medium enterprises and reduce our reliance on foreign direct investment; support moves to increase financial regulatory powers of international institutions- we live in a globalised world and can not stand alone during this crisis; invest in the green economy; resist privatisation and support employment by building strong social partnership- stronger unions means stronger employment rights that tackle poverty and maginalisation; finance social support measures and give redundant and unemployed workers a strong safety net- there can be no flexicurity/flexibility in labour markets (use of agencies, etc) without proper social security; develop progressive taxation measures; and develop the skills base in our workforce- let's give our workers a chance and make them more competitive within the internationalised labour market.
Thursday 5 February 2009
Education NI: From Wreck to Ruane
Last week we heard the Education Minister Ms Ruane provide some 'clarity' to the post-primary education debate. The only thing the Minister made clear was that she is not clear about what will happen to the education system under her proposals.
For months now, if not years, teachers, parents, students and anyone else involved in the education sector have been kept in the dark about Ruane's plans for post-primary transfer arrangements in light of her decision to remove the 11+.
The pressure on the Minister to provide clarity has been mounting steadily over this time.
People hanging onto the hope for clarity on the issue must be extremely disapponted by the Ruane's display last week in the Assembly. Her constant foot-dragging and politicisation of the education debate has been tough to swallow for many.
I for one agree with the Minsters intentions. The 11+ is a failed system. It fails so many young people. It simply does not offer a progressive management of the futures life chances of our children.
Yes the current education system, underpinned by the 11+ transfer test, has had many victories in its time. Children in the north have consistently topped UK league tables for performance in all key levels of the curriculum.
However, whilst the north has dominated the top tiers of educational performance for so long, there remains an untold and untrumpeted underbelly of underperformance.
Whilst it is true that young people in the north may achieve the highest levels of educational attainment in the UK with the highest proportion of students achieving A grades and above- we also have the very dirty prize of being home to the lowest educational attainers in the UK.
In the north more people as a percentage leave the education system with little or no GCSEs, much lower than the government standard of 5. This portrays an education system of extreme disparity. The variance between the top achievers and the lowest is simply not acceptable.
But really can the removal of the 11+ improve this situation? I believe it can but only if its removal is backed up by investment in children and their respective socio-economic circumstances at home. That perhaps is a debate for another day. But any movement towards a comprehensive style system like in England may not necessarily address the fundamental issue of gross disparities in educational attainment. Ruane's assumption that it will is extremely hap-hazzard.
Simply put- lumping all children into the same school will not in itself create an automatic level playing field for attainment.
Ruane's discision to remove the 11+ however receives my endorsement. But how the Minister has gone about the business of replacing the transfer test has left alot to be desired.
Her constant foot-dragging, politicisation and confrontation on the issue has done much damage to these noble intentions. By not achieving any sort of political consensus on her proposals she can not legislate for an end to the selection issue.
If she can not legislate then we are staring down the barrel of an unregulated and anarchic system. A system that could do more damage than good. Guidelines are not worth the paper they are written on and do not legally enforce compliance from schools. They are not sufficient for a sector that is so vitally important and therefore require the strictest form of regulation.
Applying the soft law option will not bring all schools onto the same page and could create an even worse monster than the 11+. It is simply impossible to predict the outcome of the proposed system as there are so many unanswered questions and potential variables. This creates so much uncertainty for those involved.
This uncertainty will no doubt led to considerable legal challenge - not just to the Minister's decision - but to the unregulated and unstandardised transfer tests that most schools will adopt. This could also prove to be an expensive legal minefield.
In life I have learnt the hard way that you can not convince those who have diametrically opposed views from you by shouting at them and squaring up to them at every opportunity. Politics is about the art of persuasion and in this test I give the Minister a F-.
She is the Education Minister so it is up to her to build consensus around her proposals, build political and sectoral support and get the required people on board in support of her plans.
Ruane's failure afterall is a failure for our young people.
She clearly wanted rid of the 11+ from the moment she became Education Minister without even thinking of alternative arrangements. By running to the media to announce that she was ridding us of the 11+, but she would tell us of her alternative plans at a later date, the Minister bought herself time but at the considerable expense of placing enormous uncertainty and pressure into the lives of parents, pupils and teachers.
I would not care if this time was spent divising concrete proposals and then building consensus around them but she failed to do that.
The lack of clarity over her plans for post-primary transfer has been the major issue for parents, pupils and teachers trying to plan ahead for the future. They have been let down.
The lack of consensus around her plans has been a major issue for politicians. Ruane has tried to rail road her plans through the Assembly without any consultation- simply listening to other parties is not good enough. But she didnt even listen. Proper consultation means listening to other views and incorporating conflict into final proposals through compromise.
Yes there are other parties, such as the DUP, who wished to scupper the Ministers plans from the get go regardless. If Ruane said black they would say white. Her constant evasiveness and confrontational style did not help this and only served to give the DUP clear reason to object.
The Minister needed to build compromise proposals in order to provide a way forward out of this gridlock by placing the onus on other parties to move towards her position. She needed to bring the SDLP on board first and foremost- and then address unionist concerns but she failed to do that. Even though the SDLP have the same position on academic selection Ruane was intent on going it alone and side-lined them.
Last week the Minister failed to compromise and clearly showed that she was prepared to confine the next batch of primary school children to an uncertain future simply in order to show that she means business and will not back down to intransigent unionism.
This is playing politics with childrens lives and for that reason Catriona Ruane fails every test in my book.
For months now, if not years, teachers, parents, students and anyone else involved in the education sector have been kept in the dark about Ruane's plans for post-primary transfer arrangements in light of her decision to remove the 11+.
The pressure on the Minister to provide clarity has been mounting steadily over this time.
People hanging onto the hope for clarity on the issue must be extremely disapponted by the Ruane's display last week in the Assembly. Her constant foot-dragging and politicisation of the education debate has been tough to swallow for many.
I for one agree with the Minsters intentions. The 11+ is a failed system. It fails so many young people. It simply does not offer a progressive management of the futures life chances of our children.
Yes the current education system, underpinned by the 11+ transfer test, has had many victories in its time. Children in the north have consistently topped UK league tables for performance in all key levels of the curriculum.
However, whilst the north has dominated the top tiers of educational performance for so long, there remains an untold and untrumpeted underbelly of underperformance.
Whilst it is true that young people in the north may achieve the highest levels of educational attainment in the UK with the highest proportion of students achieving A grades and above- we also have the very dirty prize of being home to the lowest educational attainers in the UK.
In the north more people as a percentage leave the education system with little or no GCSEs, much lower than the government standard of 5. This portrays an education system of extreme disparity. The variance between the top achievers and the lowest is simply not acceptable.
But really can the removal of the 11+ improve this situation? I believe it can but only if its removal is backed up by investment in children and their respective socio-economic circumstances at home. That perhaps is a debate for another day. But any movement towards a comprehensive style system like in England may not necessarily address the fundamental issue of gross disparities in educational attainment. Ruane's assumption that it will is extremely hap-hazzard.
Simply put- lumping all children into the same school will not in itself create an automatic level playing field for attainment.
Ruane's discision to remove the 11+ however receives my endorsement. But how the Minister has gone about the business of replacing the transfer test has left alot to be desired.
Her constant foot-dragging, politicisation and confrontation on the issue has done much damage to these noble intentions. By not achieving any sort of political consensus on her proposals she can not legislate for an end to the selection issue.
If she can not legislate then we are staring down the barrel of an unregulated and anarchic system. A system that could do more damage than good. Guidelines are not worth the paper they are written on and do not legally enforce compliance from schools. They are not sufficient for a sector that is so vitally important and therefore require the strictest form of regulation.
Applying the soft law option will not bring all schools onto the same page and could create an even worse monster than the 11+. It is simply impossible to predict the outcome of the proposed system as there are so many unanswered questions and potential variables. This creates so much uncertainty for those involved.
This uncertainty will no doubt led to considerable legal challenge - not just to the Minister's decision - but to the unregulated and unstandardised transfer tests that most schools will adopt. This could also prove to be an expensive legal minefield.
In life I have learnt the hard way that you can not convince those who have diametrically opposed views from you by shouting at them and squaring up to them at every opportunity. Politics is about the art of persuasion and in this test I give the Minister a F-.
She is the Education Minister so it is up to her to build consensus around her proposals, build political and sectoral support and get the required people on board in support of her plans.
Ruane's failure afterall is a failure for our young people.
She clearly wanted rid of the 11+ from the moment she became Education Minister without even thinking of alternative arrangements. By running to the media to announce that she was ridding us of the 11+, but she would tell us of her alternative plans at a later date, the Minister bought herself time but at the considerable expense of placing enormous uncertainty and pressure into the lives of parents, pupils and teachers.
I would not care if this time was spent divising concrete proposals and then building consensus around them but she failed to do that.
The lack of clarity over her plans for post-primary transfer has been the major issue for parents, pupils and teachers trying to plan ahead for the future. They have been let down.
The lack of consensus around her plans has been a major issue for politicians. Ruane has tried to rail road her plans through the Assembly without any consultation- simply listening to other parties is not good enough. But she didnt even listen. Proper consultation means listening to other views and incorporating conflict into final proposals through compromise.
Yes there are other parties, such as the DUP, who wished to scupper the Ministers plans from the get go regardless. If Ruane said black they would say white. Her constant evasiveness and confrontational style did not help this and only served to give the DUP clear reason to object.
The Minister needed to build compromise proposals in order to provide a way forward out of this gridlock by placing the onus on other parties to move towards her position. She needed to bring the SDLP on board first and foremost- and then address unionist concerns but she failed to do that. Even though the SDLP have the same position on academic selection Ruane was intent on going it alone and side-lined them.
Last week the Minister failed to compromise and clearly showed that she was prepared to confine the next batch of primary school children to an uncertain future simply in order to show that she means business and will not back down to intransigent unionism.
This is playing politics with childrens lives and for that reason Catriona Ruane fails every test in my book.
Wednesday 4 February 2009
Greetings from Lecale
Hi everyone!
Thank you for visiting my blog.
I have always been a keen participant in blog discussion but have never really been interested in setting up my own blog until now.
I envisage this blog as providing a progressive left-of-centre outlook at modern political developments and current affairs- both here in the North and elsewhere.
There is a real absence of dialogue and cohesion between the democratic left in the North- particularly with reference to its influence and participation in the political process here.
The left has become very much sidelined from the socio-political process and has become politically irrelevant to most people. We ARE relevant- we just need to make ourselves relevant to people!
Whilst some of this has been due to overarching factors out of our control - such as the very nature of the green/blue politics here - I also feel that the left has contributed significantly towards its own maliase.
In previous years the left here has been dominated by infighting and has fractured considerably.
This is very much evident in the number of small political parties active in NI (that are little more than pressure groups) that all claim to be left orientated.
These division has meant that the left continues to be marginalised and experience fragmented inputs into the political system. We need unity.
I hope that this blog can engineer some cohesion amongst those like minded people out there in the North that identify with progressive left politics.
Issues such as water charging, union participation in the political process here and the increasing marginalisation of workers are some of the issues that I hope to address in the near future through this blog.
And I very much hope that this blog will provide a platform for debate and further discussion around some of these issues.
So please stay tuned and I very much look forward to discussing some of these issues with you soon.
Barry
Thank you for visiting my blog.
I have always been a keen participant in blog discussion but have never really been interested in setting up my own blog until now.
I envisage this blog as providing a progressive left-of-centre outlook at modern political developments and current affairs- both here in the North and elsewhere.
There is a real absence of dialogue and cohesion between the democratic left in the North- particularly with reference to its influence and participation in the political process here.
The left has become very much sidelined from the socio-political process and has become politically irrelevant to most people. We ARE relevant- we just need to make ourselves relevant to people!
Whilst some of this has been due to overarching factors out of our control - such as the very nature of the green/blue politics here - I also feel that the left has contributed significantly towards its own maliase.
In previous years the left here has been dominated by infighting and has fractured considerably.
This is very much evident in the number of small political parties active in NI (that are little more than pressure groups) that all claim to be left orientated.
These division has meant that the left continues to be marginalised and experience fragmented inputs into the political system. We need unity.
I hope that this blog can engineer some cohesion amongst those like minded people out there in the North that identify with progressive left politics.
Issues such as water charging, union participation in the political process here and the increasing marginalisation of workers are some of the issues that I hope to address in the near future through this blog.
And I very much hope that this blog will provide a platform for debate and further discussion around some of these issues.
So please stay tuned and I very much look forward to discussing some of these issues with you soon.
Barry
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)