Farewell Lurene – Apparently You Won’t Be Missed

lorene

No sooner had the Leeds and Partners Stakeholders AGM finished last week than its chief executive Lurene Joseph had announced her plans to move on to pastures new.

An event that was rich in content, though dull in terms of presentation and delivery, meant that Joseph went out with some good news stories to tell – but not enough to outweigh the controversies that have dogged her since her appointment to the post eighteen months ago.

Cynics suggest that even the good news stories were a case of L&P claiming the credit for the work of others, but that criticism can be levelled at almost any quasi public agency, such are the blurred lines and complimentary (or duplicated) activity that often takes place across city region based organisations.

Nevertheless, it is fair to say that few tears have been shed by many since the announcement was made, and given the allegations over bullying, expenses and even her own personal financial affairs, Joseph may be as relieved as anyone that her time in Leeds is nearly done; short, and not so sweet.

The cautionary note I would add to what has clearly been a challenging relationship between the city and the ‘outsider’ would be this.

Joseph had good credentials, and seemingly a London and international network that has proved particularly useful. She did not know who the local luminaries were, nor did she seem to care. Surely that was the point.

If Leeds is to meet the ambitions that it has set itself in recent times then the new Lurene Joseph should not be a ‘safe pair of hands’. That doesn’t mean it has to be an ‘outsider’, but unless Gary Verity can be convinced to take the role, is there anyone who is Leeds based that is an obvious candidate to be the next L&P chief?

Now Osborne Targets Labour’s Core Vote

osborne

Following a surprisingly low key Labour Party conference in Manchester last month most objective commentators quickly reached the conclusion that Ed Miliband and his team have decided that the ‘35% strategy’ is their best hope of winning the next General Election in May 2015.

This plan supposes that Labour can win a small, but workable, overall majority in the House with just a thirty odd per cent vote, such are the anomalies within our first-past-the-post electoral system, and the likelihood that the Tory vote will be split because of UKIP.

To this end we heard a lot from Labour about fairness, social justice, increasing the minimum wage, the NHS, and, lest we forget, sticking it to the ‘rich’ with a Mansion tax and the re-introduction of a 50p tax rate. We did not hear too much about the deficit, though Ed did mean to refer to it – he just forgot.

Targeting its core vote may not seem like the party is taking the principled high ground here, but as pragmatic strategies go, it seems a reasonable approach for the opposition to take.

It was more of a shock to hear Chancellor George Osborne target the same audience in his speech to the Tory faithful in Birmingham on Monday morning though – although he did so in a much less friendly manner.

Many of Labour’s natural supporters, 10 million families according to some reports, will suffer from a child benefit freeze, welfare cuts and a further period of austerity as the Conservatives try to tackle a budget deficit that has actually gone up on its watch during this parliament.

It was not the sort of pre-election give away that many have come to expect from the man who sits in number 11 Downing Street, but George is gambling that we believe the economy is still on the critical list, and must continue to be nursed back to health with another dose of hard-nosed austerity.

For the first time in many a year we appear to have some clear blue water between our two major parties, with not quite a return of ‘class war’ but certainly the threat of a skirmish.

It is oh so depressing, and gesture politics at its worse.

Labour know that a 50p tax rate will generate LESS not more revenue for HMRC. Independent research has consistently shown that at 50% people start to actively seek ways of legal tax avoidance, and I have to say, who can blame them?

The idea that the only people who earn six figure salaries are boy racer bankers and sweat shop bosses is an insult to this country’s entrepreneurs and indeed to the wider electorate.

Most of us in business, millionaires or not, work tirelessly and deserve the rewards we earn. It is absolutely right that we pay our fair share of tax, but taking half of someone’s income isn’t fair, and many of Labour’s core vote understand that. Chuka Umunna, Labour’s shadow business minister, is doing his best to balance his party’s anti-business narrative, but his task will get harder if the two Ed’s continue to cheer lead for the politics of envy.

Osborne too is being dishonest when he suggests that greater means testing and benefit freezes bring huge savings. He is as bad for helping to peddle the nonsense that everyone on benefits is a scrounger or a cheat as Labour is in trying to paint every millionaire as a wide boy. He is as likely to raise the money he claims he will accrue from his welfare budget proposals as Labour is from its planned 50p tax hike. Indeed, welfare reform, or more means testing, as introduced by the Coalition is costing us MORE not less.

The big saving in welfare spend is actually in pension provision. The problem for George and the Tories is that pensioners tend to vote – and most of them vote Conservative.

One of the criticisms I often hear of politicians and political parties is ‘they’re all the same’. Well, that can’t be said anymore. However, that other well-worn phrase ‘they’re all as bad as each other’ may be more accurate now than in many a year.

The North needs ‘Devo Met’!

Whitehall

The corridors of Westminster power have been shaken and stirred following the fallout from the Scottish devolution referendum campaign, with those in favour of independence losing the battle but, arguably, winning the war.

The ‘solemn vow’ from the three mainstream party political leaders that promised additional powers TO THE Scottish Parliament on a whole range of issues from welfare to tax will have to be delivered, and this has left Whitehall mandarins and (mostly) Tory MPs banging on about fair votes for the English and an even playing field.

The answer, they suggest, is an English Parliament. Quite frankly I can think of nothing worse. I have sleepless nights imagining the type of country my kids will grow up in with a cabinet made up of John Redwood type characters, ably supported by a rump of Nigel Farage –led UKIPers no doubt, in the unholiest of unholy alliances.

It is also incredible to me that those politicians that have happily gone through the voting lobbies to bludgeon through austerity budgets that have so clearly hit the north of England harder than the south can be whinging about ‘an even playing field’ now.

What London centric politicians, civil servants and commentators need to understand is that it is devolution beyond Westminster that is needed, not devolution within an archaic institution that is no longer fit for purpose.

If Scotland is to get Devo Max then we in the North need to demand Devo Met! The city regions of England north of the Watford gap have to be given the same powers, responsibilities and opportunities as our Scottish counterparts.

Labour is right to object to the Prime Ministers bid to rush through legislation that would create a new constitutional settlement that none of us have discussed, let alone signed up to. Nevertheless, the idea that we need a ‘constitutional convention’ to sort a new governance structure for the UK is highly uninspiring too – and unnecessary,

A whole range of senior figures, including Lord Heseltine and Lord Adonis, have written extensively on city region led decentralisation that would bring together leading decision makers with business leaders to create a genuine ‘localism’ and Authorities that can deliver on what is important to their own regions economic growth and social agendas without going cap in hand to central government.

As Sir Howard Bernstein said at the Downtown Leeds event last week, it is beyond nonsensical that he has to get permission from a pen pusher in London in order to simply close a road!

Progressive politicians and business leaders should be arguing for a timetable to deliver city region and county region governance models. We need an action plan to deliver this – not another talking shop.

Change is now inevitable, but what type of change? The North of England needs to make sure Scotland’s gain does not lead to Northern pain, with a stitch up that would still see us governed and dominated by the Westminster elite! Downtown will be campaigning for Devo Met – I hope you join us.

Devolution for the North is not guaranteed

North Devolution

I have had a particularly interesting week, speaking at an event on the future of transport for the Institute of Directors and hosting a Downtown forum in Leeds with Sir Howard Bernstein and Tom Riordan on Wednesday, whilst keeping a close eye on the fascinating debate on the Independence Referendum in Scotland, the result of which is analysed elsewhere in this bulletin by my colleague Jim Hancock.

The assumption following a significant number of concessions to the Scots by Westminster’s top table during the course of the campaign is that England’s regions will be able to negotiate a new settlement that will see significant powers and responsibilities devolved, probably to the city region level, sooner rather than later.

But, as Leeds Chief Executive Riordan pointed out, the Mandarins in Whitehall will ‘be on manoeuvers’ in a bid to ensure that any such transfer of power is as diluted as much as they can get away with.

Bernstein told the Downtown audience that in Greater Manchester this year £22 Billion of public spending had taken place. He made a compelling and straightforward case as to why we would get a better bang for our buck if local politicians, decision makers and business leaders were able to decide how that resource should be applied, rather than those decisions being taken by London based civil servants who simply know cities like Liverpool, Manchester and Leeds as places on a map. One of these faceless bureaucrats recently asked a fellow presenter of mine at City Talk radio station if Liverpool was in the North East – I kid you not.

Scotland’s ‘indy’ campaign means that the genie is out of the bottle as far as how resources are currently distributed, and where the power really lies in deciding how that cash should be spent; and clearly the North has started to get its political act together with a coordinated approach to transport infrastructure spend through the publication of the One North document. There is also a genuine lobbying effort taking place to wrest as much devolution from Westminster to the region’s as is possible from the core cities group.

Nonetheless, Riordan’s warning about Whitehall Mandarins needs to be heeded, as my visit to London last week starkly reminded me. The media, business leaders and most MP’s down there still believe that the North should be content to get the crumbs off ‘their’ table.

A third runway, Cross Rail, more investment in the London road network, an average spend per head of population that is around £15 more than is spent on the rest of us are benefits that will not be relinquished without a fight. The business community needs to join our political leaders in that fight.

Many of the challenges we face, not least skills shortages, connecting quickly and effectively with a wider customer base in our own region, and the business support and economic development agenda, would all be better tackled at the city region level. If the private sector doesn’t get behind those messages, the Mandarins who believe we still wear cloth caps and clogs will deny us the opportunity. Join the conversation, get involved. Downtown is providing you with the platform to do so with a series of conferences throughout the autumn, so there is no excuse!

For details of Downtown’s business conference’s please CLICK HERE.

Where did it all go wrong?

UDI

When Westminster politicians and mandarins met their Scottish counterparts back in 2012 to negotiate the terms of the referendum for independence, they believed that they had delivered a crucial blow to the devolution bandwagon by refusing to allow the Nationalists the opportunity to have an additional option on the polling slip that, basically, offered voters extra devolved powers within the union.

The thinking was that a majority of Scots would jump at the chance of more power for a Scottish Parliament that was still within the structure of UK governance arrangements, but they would run a mile from the notion of abandoning a 300 year union that, let’s face it, has been the principle reason for Scotland not becoming some sort of third world banana republic!

As if those north of the border would be daft enough to go for full blown separation given the enormous economic damage it would cause to their nation; why give them an easy third option that would offer Alex Salmond & co everything they wanted with the continued safety net of the United Kingdom?

Of course it is easy in hindsight to suggest that this was an arrogance too far, and that the third option, which is ironically now being offered in the form of ‘Devo Max’ as Westminster politicians scramble to recover lost ground in the final days of the referendum campaign, should have been accepted and put on the ballot paper. But in actual fact at the time the negotiation team was applauded for its strength and tactical genius in putting the Nationalists in their box. Few, if any, political commentators believed that the people of Scotland would vote for a divorce from the UK.

Of course what nobody could factor in back than was the absolutely shambolic nature of the ‘better together’ campaign that was to follow.

Putting the super bright but charisma- lite Alistair Darling in charge of the ‘No’ campaign was a stroke of lunacy that must have had Nationalists rubbing their hands with glee. Darling, in fairness, has had poor material to work with. The negativity of the messages from Better Together has turned people off massively; at best being seen as ‘same old politics’ at worse bullying.

By comparison the ‘Yes’ campaign have been consistent in simple messaging, time for a change, get the government you vote for, you can’t trust Westminster; and this has been articulated by a charismatic leader.

This has led to an incredible turnaround in opinion and latest polls show that the race is now too close to call. The Sunday Times poll last week gave ‘Yes’ a 2 point lead that has sent shockwaves through the corridors of political, establishment and financial powerhouses across the UK.

Salmond has secured the ‘big mo’ just at the right time, and the Nationalists can smell an unlikely victory.

Belatedly ‘No’ have woken up to the fact that it is in a genuine contest that it may lose. The big gun that is Gordon Brown, still a popular figure in Scotland, has been rolled out with the alternative proposals that, had they been included in the referendum poll in the first place, would have enabled us to avoid all this drama.

Despite the mistakes, the poor leadership, the lack of clarity and vision, I still think that the Union will prevail. The uncertainties that exist about an Independent Scotland; the unknown economic impact; a new nations place in the world…and of course the guarantee of ‘Devo Max’.

When people go into the polling booth next week the majority of them will, in my opinion, vote NO. I wouldn’t put money on it though.