Litmus - Rainbow Coalition Blogging

Coalitions come in many shapes and sizes. If the one put together in May took people by surprise, then how about a combination of Tim Montgomerie, Will Straw, and Dr. Mark Pack to add to the confusion. Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat hand-in-hand? Whatever next!

This powerhouse combination, though, is not holding sway at Westminster but rather in the publication of a new political magazine for the Conference season, Litmus.

Quite aside from the clever name, Litmus promises to be a very interesting publication. A partnership between three major blogs – Conservative Home, Left Foot Forward, and LibDem Voice, it has considerable clout when polling for contributors, with Tom Watson, Lynne Featherstone, Damian Green and Chris Huhne amongst the commentators on topics as diverse as Immigration, Climate Change, and Electoral Reform.

I was particularly interested to read David Boyle’s argument on income tax. Disregarding the LibDem insistence on progressive taxation, he instead called for a movement away from income tax to a programme of corporate reform and energy taxes.

“Increasing income tax these days just serves to entrench the separation of the mega-rich”

Indeed!

Thought has also evidently gone into distribution strategy. The first issue of Litmus is available for free if you promote it for them on Twitter; very savvy. With no cost involved, there seems little more to say other than go get it.

The Big Society - A Flower Bed Too Far?

The Big Society was always one of the more diaphanous elements of the Conservative manifesto in the recent General Election. Ostensively a codification of previous attempts to conjoin local government and local community groups, it has been described as the Conservative Manifesto’s ‘Big Idea’ as well as an easy way to get cuts in through the back door.

Personally, I have always been a fan of the idea. The concept that community groups, charities, and NGOs should be more involved in the delivery of local services is not new, but if it is to succeed in any measurable way, the involvement of Westminster is welcome. Local Councils too, I had imagined, would be fans of the scheme. In the face of declining government grants, any chance to use interested parties to ensure the money goes further would be welcome. It seems, in Epsom and Ewell at least, I was wrong.

I have blogged previously about the recent Hub project – an excellent example of the ethos of the Big Society in action. A post on the Epsom Conservatives blog – run by Conservative Leader on the Borough Council, Sean Sullivan – the other day seemed to offer up another potential scheme; gardening. With less money available for landscaping in the Borough, why not get local groups involved? Hey, it worked for Newsnight!

It seems, though, that my suggestion of getting local groups involved to assist the Council in keeping its flower beds up to scratch didn’t go down too well with Liberal Democrat Councillor Anna Jones…

Not a believer in the Big Society, it would seem.

Personally, I see only positives in using the talents and interests of the local community to help the shrinking Council budget to stretch further. I’m not talking about getting local residents in to replace redundant public servants. I’m merely saying if we muck in here, they can focus their time more efficiently in other areas.

For the record Anna, time allowing, I would be willing to help out in any way I can. As far as school dinners go I’ll even cook the pudding. We could call it Jamie’s School Dinners?

Publicity costs in Epsom

When Epsom and Ewell Borough Council posted their annual accounts for public consumption last month, there were some curious omissions. Not least the fact that, for some reason, officers were not keen to detail any publicity costs for the Council over the past year. A few well-placed questions from our local paper later, and the reason becomes more clear. At the same time as cutting services for its residents, our Council is spending £54,000 a year to outsource its newsletter to an external agency…which is then charging them to advertise in their own publication.

A month ago, the Local Government Secretary Eric Pickles announced a toughening up of rules regarding council newsletters. His goal is to ensure that local newspapers are not put out of business by tax payer-funded publications. Indicating that Council-authored papers increase junk mail, and undermine the free press, Pickles said:

"Councils should spend less time and money on weekly town hall Pravdas that end up in the bin, and focus more on frontline services like providing regular rubbish collections.”

I couldn’t agree more. The situation is even more exasperating in Epsom, however, as the company which won the tender to produce our local ‘Borough Insight’ (EM Communications) claims the Council specifically asked them to price advertising separately from the production and distribution costs of the paper. As the Epsom Guardian reports, the Council voted against allowing commercial organisations to advertise in the Insight to drive down costs. Instead, EM Communications only accepts Council-sponsored adverts, charging the Town Hall £150 for each one.

At an approximate cost of £10,000 per issue, the Epsom and Ewell ‘Pravda’ is a luxury this Council can no longer afford. If Eric isn’t looking hard at Epsom and Ewell Borough Council now, I’m guessing he soon will be. I think the Council’s Liberal Democrat Leader Julie Morris put it best:

“Spending £54,000 each year on a publication which, for the most part, is very dull and merely props up the policies of those in control of the council, is no longer appropriate…£54,000 would offset quite a lot of the spending cuts this year, wouldn't it?”

(N.B. - links to Epsom Guardian story to follow once it is posted online)

Post-election 1: Epsom & Ewell

So now that I've actually managed to get some sleep in after a mammoth Thursday night's electioneering, I thought it was high time I added my two pence in about the results, both locally and nationally. First up - the local area and campaigns I was directly involved in.

It was good to see that the Conservatives did so well in Epsom. My slightly bullish prediction of a 20,000-plus majority for Chris was always in doubt after the Liberal Democrat surge in the polls (which actually led to an increase in their vote in Epsom, unlike elsewhere), but to increase our percentage of the vote and poll above 30,000 votes is no mean feat. Full results were as follows:

Chris Grayling - 30,868 (56.2% of vote +1.2%)

Jonathan Lees - 14,734 (26.8% of vote +5.3%)

Craig Montgomery - 6,538 (11.9% of vote -8.1%)

Elizabeth Wallace - 2,549 (4.6% of vote +1.1%)

Peter Ticher - 266 (0.5% of vote)

Labour saw its vote all but disappear to the Liberal Democrats, who ran an aggressive campaign in the area. Our unfortunate independent cabinet - Peter Ticher from 'Radical Reform' - had a disappointing night, and didn't even bother to stick around for the count.

These results mean that next year's Borough elections could be very interesting. The controlling Residents' Association will be sure to come under increased pressure from all national political parties. The LibDems will hope to make inroads in the Town and Stamford Wards. Labour will look to add another Councillor in Court (perhaps even the former PPC if the rumours are true and he decides to stick around?). Finally, the Conservatives will be hoping that the increase in their vote translates to further successes following their recent by-election victories in Ruxley. It's going to be interesting!