Mass Slaughter? - An apology will do nicely Sir!

Here we go again. This time laundering money for international criminals, drug barons selling to our kids on street corners, and known terrorist groups world-wide. But, on the upside, they've apologised so that's ok then eh?!
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2012/jul/17/hsbc-executive-resigns-senate 


Once again it was a failure in the 'system' but "lessons have been learned" (where have I heard that before?) and "safeguards have been put in place so that this never happens again" - Yeah right!!

It is estimated that a staggering 47,000 people have lost their lives since 2006 to Mexican drug trafficking alone and all under the financial wing of Europe's largest bank - HSBC. To this end they have been complicit in a mass slaughter. But hey! - C'mon they've apologised so now a hefty fine and that's that. No worries really since they'll probably borrow that at a privileged interest rate via the Libor system where they'll also be complicit in fixing that rate illegally too. Good innit?

If I was caught money laundering or stealing a few quid to feed my family I would be imprisoned. They collude and conspire to (in effect) fund organisations that commit murder on a mass scale and an apology and a fine will do just nicely. The whole damned system is as sick as the people within it.

Austerity Cannot Work.

We in Europe (UK included) are on the brink of being pushed in to an unnecessary economic depression. It is much the same in America but happening more rapidly. For people (politicians in the main) who would claim to have some modicum of intelligence, it is a mix of lunacy and dogma that occupies their minds. Although if they were to suffer the same financial fallout of the current austerity measures that they impose upon others with such relish or pay themselves the national minimum wage things perhaps might change a little and possibly quite rapidly.


Austerity is offered as the answer when it is not. In fact it is the complete opposite - it is and will continue to be, a main factor in deepening the economic depression even further. It simply cannot work. As a device to transfer money from the poor to the rich it works reasonably well (which is a main reason for it's current vigorous implementation) but to get the UK Plc out of depression it is counter-productive.


Like it or not we live in a consumer society. If the general public do not or cannot consume above subsistence levels then the economy shrinks and eventually implodes into a state of economic depression such as is happening right now. The solution of the conventional wisdom of today (just as was in the 1920's)? More cuts; more job losses; less disposable income; less consumption; more depression. If individuals and families cannot spend over and above what they need to survive then the consumer society we all depend on for our personal prosperity dies a slow and anorexic death. 


In addition to this if you put people out of a job they draw benefits and don't pay income tax or National Insurance and they don't pay as much VAT because they can't afford luxury items. They have to 'make do' - 'make shift - and 'mend'. Their consumerism is confined to eating enough to stay alive and hopefully to put a roof over their heads full stop. To all intents and purposes they become 'non-consumers'. Their numbers are growing.


So there's a 'double-whammy' here; they cannot spend because they don't have any income above subsistence (lowly subsistence at that too when on benefits although the ridiculous mythology of the 'Benefit Millionaire' still abounds) and they are paid to sit on their backsides. The Aboriginals summed it up neatly when they called the Australian Government dole money they receive as "sit down money".


John Maynard Keynes in the 20's and 30's had it spot on and Roosevelt's 'New Deal' in America brought his ideas to life. You have to spend and spend big and, via what Keynes called "The Multiplier Effect" alongside financial prudence, you can actually pull yourself out of recession/depression. It works and works every time unless thwarted by political dogma and/or the International Banking Financial Mafia.


Keynesianism will make a return, although it may be called something else like 'Osbornism' or 'Cameronism' or 'Cleggism' even. In fact it's already started with announcements about £Billion investments in the rail and road infrastructure, but it will take time and some may still see it as nothing more than convenient coincidence. It's not. However, it will not work alongside austerity too well as the austerity measures will be a drag on it. We need to ditch 'austerity' in favour of proven methods of economic recovery. 


In essence the economy of today is no different from the economy of yesterday. It will respond in the exact same way and this can be seen today as the austerity measures being applied right now are evidently deflationary just as was in the 1930's. A dose of Keynes would have the opposite effect.

The Way of the Banker.

Bankers.

A young man bought a donkey from a farmer for £100.
The farmer agreed to deliver the donkey the next day.

Delivering the donkey he pulled up and said, "Sorry son,

but I have some bad news. The donkey died during the trip."

The young man replied, "Well then just give me my money back."

The farmer said, "Can't do that. I've already spent it."

"OK," says the boy "then, just bring me the dead donkey."

A little shocked the farmer asked, "What are you going to do with him?"

"I'm going to raffle him off." He replied.

The farmer said, "You can't raffle a dead donkey!"

The lad replies "Sure I can. Just watch me. I just won't tell anybody

he's dead."

"But that's fraud!" states the farmer. "You shouldn't do that!"

The young man takes the dead donkey and smiles.

A month later, the farmer met up with this lad and asked,

"What happened with that dead donkey?"

He replied, "I raffled him off and sold 500 tickets at £2 each.

I made a profit of £898"

The farmer said, "My god, didn't anyone complain?"

The young guy said, "Just the man who won. So I gave him his £2 back."

He now works for Barclays .

Management Explained.

A woman in a hot air balloon realised she was lost. She reduced altitude and spotted a man below.

She descended a little more and shouted: "Excuse me, can you help me? I promised a friend I would meet him an hour ago but I don't know where I am."

The man below replied, "You're in a hot air balloon hovering approximately 30 feet above the ground. You're between 40 and 41 degrees north latitude and between 59 and 60 degrees west longitude."

''You must be an Engineer", said the balloonist.

"I am", replied the man, "How did you know?"

''Well", answered the balloonist, "Everything you have told me is probably technically correct, but I've no idea what to make of your information and the fact is, I'm still lost. Frankly, you've not been much help at all. If anything, you've delayed my trip by your talk".

The man below responded, "You must be in Management".

''I am", replied the balloonist, "But how did you know?"

''Well", said the man, "You don't know where you are or where you're going. You have risen to where you are, due to a large quantity of hot air. You made a promise, which you've no idea how to keep, and you expect people beneath you to solve your problems. The fact is you are in exactly the same position you were in before we met, but now, somehow, it's my fault."

Bout says it all!

Punishing The Disabled - An Update.

The reality of it all. Genuinely disabled people are to be targeted in order to try to whip them in to jobs that don't exist and that they cannot in honesty do because of their disabilities and at the same time cutting essential benefits when, by their own figures, only 0.5% of claimants are shown to be cheating the system. This government is truly a disgraceful one.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/jul/27/disability-benefit-assessors-film

Atos assessors told to keep disability benefit approvals low, film suggests

www.guardian.co.uk

GP applied for job with Atos assessing whether benefit applicants were fit for work, and secretly filmed his training

Don't believe the Tory propaganda machine - this is the reality. 

When Personal Independent Payments are introduced to replace Disability Living Allowance the 'lower DLA rate' of £20.55p per week will simply disappear. It won't exists any more - nada - gonski. Anyone currently getting this will lose it completely. There will be nothing to replace it. This is an allowance 'given' to help disabled people with their everyday extra needs such as incontinence pads or special toilet adaptations, keeping warm, or extra washing of soiled clothes etc. Local Authorities supply only so much. This is not given lightly and people have to be assessed by an independent medical examination. They only get it if their disability is confirmed. 

Incapacity Benefit is also ceasing to exist - it will now be called Employment & Support Allowance. It will expire after 1 year. On expiry there is nothing to replace it. Again it is gone for good. Those on the top rate (£99.15p per week) because of their genuine illnesses (illnesses that have been doubly confirmed over the last year totally independently by a medical assessment agency actually employed by the government - a French company called ATOS) will lose it. It will simply disappear. These people are, by independently assessed medically confirmed definition the most disabled and vulnerable. They will be hit the hardest. 

The vast majority of DLA/IB claimants are not thieves or cheats or scroungers. By the government's own statistical evidence just 0.05% of claimants are fraudsters. People who have paid their NI Contributions for 40/50yrs will lose that disability income after just 1 year whether their disability still exists or not. 

As we all well know too many disabilities are chronic and actually deteriorate over time - they simply cannot get better. If that's the case how the hell can we as a society justify pushing people who have paid in to the system all their working lives (and yes I know there are some who haven't but by the governments own accepted figures the vast majority have) in to grinding poverty where the only way out will be to sell their homes and possessions just in order to live? People/couples and kids that will end up in social housing and receive housing benefit instead. This is cruel madness and driven by 19th Century Malthusean ideology and ultra right wing dogma.

A current example. The woman in question has just turned 46 years of age and is married to a 63 year old who works in B&Q for 28/32 hours per week because that's all he can get. She needs a hip replacement but has been told by the NHS that she is too young. She has needed this for the past 2.5yrs. She has Rheumatoid Arthritis. The other hip is beginning to deteriorate. There is no estimate on surgery time. She is on at least one stick but spends a lot of time on two or simply sitting in a chair in terrible pain and exhausted. This has also affected her gait (obviously) and has put extra pressure on both knees. She needs one knee replacement now but in approx 2 years time she will need the other done too. She is on high dose morphine patches. She is incredibly depressed (and who could blame her), on a cocktail of anti-depressants and was at the point of suicide some weeks ago. An increasingly regular occurrence for her. 

When, with her sitting by the side of me and on speaker phone, we contacted the DWP she was told very impolitely that next May (although all her disabilities have been confirmed by ATOS) her ESA will simply end and that unless she is terminally ill she is regarded as fit to work. In fact it seems that as long as she can move her eyes she can be (perhaps) a proof reader or maybe an eye model for specsavers?

She has been registered without regard to her condition to attend job seeking classes with JC+ and is worried because if she doesn't attend (sometimes it will be that she cannot attend) they have threatened (in writing) to stop her benefits. There are precious few jobs out there for fit people. For her I would estimate that there are approximately none. Because her husband works (National Minimum Wage and only part time) they were told they must learn to manage. Their income will be cut as from May 2013 by £4,800 per annum. How the hell are they going to do that? And this is by no means an isolated case. 

This is not just me reading newspaper headlines and government damning articles. Of course the Tory Party propaganda headlines will tell you these cases simply don't exist and all is well but that's the nature of propaganda isn't it. No - this is real life for her and many thousands of others. There but for the grace of god and all that eh?

Benefit Cheats.

Very soon (within the next year) people who are now receiving Incapacity Benefit because they cannot work due to chronic disease or injury will cease to receive it in entirety if they have a partner who is working. It will simply stop. They will lose it all. 

Of course everyone who is receiving Incapacity Benefit (IB) and especially Disability Living Allowance (DLA) is, so government propaganda goes, a 'Benefit Cheat' and/or 'Dole Scrounger'. This when the governments own figures show that just 0.05% of claimants are that and are claiming fraudulently. By their own research and statistical analysis they prove their own propaganda wrong, but hey, why let truth intervene in a crusade to pay the bankers bills (brought about by the upper echelons of society) out of the pockets of the poor and needy who never came anywhere near to causing the 'problem' in the first place? It's obviously better to bleed those at the bottom when the cancer is actually at the top.

Someone relying on their IB to live will, in many instances, have their incomes cut by up to £99.15p per week. Those who give over their DLA so that they can have specially adapted vehicles to get around will have zero income apart from their partners wage. How many ordinary working class people could afford to take a pay cut of approximately £400 per month or £4,800 per annum? But then again they are Benefit Cheats anyway aren't they? Just more undeserving poor. Burdens to society so they deserve this - well don't they? This measure will save about £4 Billion per year and push disabled people and their families in to abject poverty. 

Uncollected corporate taxes and tax havens for the rich cost the exchequer  £42 Billion (2010/2011). But then again, according to the propaganda the one group deserves their poverty whilst the other deserve their wealth. Those who evade taxes in tax havens set up in and by the City of London or pay their corporate taxes at hugely discounted rates after a private deal quietly struck with senior staff of HMRI over a rather expensive four course luncheon to include a bottle or two of £150 claret are immune of course. Those who are disabled through no fault of their own are not it seems.


"In order to succeed the poor need most of all the spur of their poverty."

A quote from that wonderful doyen of the Tory right George Gilder, (1981, p. 118)

The Undeserving Poor.

Never ceases to irritate when someone who has never experienced 'austerity' themselves preach and push the gospel of austerity to others.

In concert with that how can it be that those who are entrusted with government can fail to understand even the simplest of concepts when it comes to economics? How is it that they simply cannot understand the difference between a household budget and a macro economy.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_r-AKruzmkk

Why is credence given over to millionaire 'venture capitalists' in who's interest it is to transfer money from the lower strata of the economy to the upper strata - which, of course, includes him? And at the same time so little credence is given to people who have ready made 'off the shelf' solutions to the problem at hand?

Paul Krugman has much to say and offers that solution (it's Keynesian by the way) and in all instances where it has been applied it has actually worked. So why not apply it?

Answer - because it suits them. It offers a golden opportunity to push along an ideology. That is that the 'undeserving poor' should be made to suffer because of their inherent laziness and sub-prime humanity. They are not real people. Much like any enemy they are dehumanised and made to look and feel that they are of a different sub-species. The inbuilt and abiding attitude is that 'they' are the scum of the earth whilst 'we' are the cream of the crop and if less money was spent on things like health care and benefits when we throw them out of work there would/will be far more for us. An economy awash with millionaires at one end and the poverty stricken at the other is, for them, not only the natural order of things but something that should be actively pursued. 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=acLW1vFO-2Q

The Defence of the Indefensible.

The Labour Party was, as is said "born out of the bowels of the Trades Unions". It had a socialist heart with the central principle of 'from each according to their ability - to each according to their needs'. (Fair shares for all.)  This was 'lifted' from Karl Marx and remains the first principle of any true socialist movement even today. It cannot be otherwise.

The Labour Party has evolved over the years to abandon this central principle as can amply be seen in hindsight when examining the time Gordon Brown was Chancellor and Prime Minister. He presided over an already huge gap between rich and poor returning almost to Dickensian levels. In effect he out-Toried the Tories. 

In RCT that 'chwarae teg' principle (fair play) has never actually been applied or even attempted. It has instead become self serving and displays openly what George Bernard Shaw called "The arrogance of affluence." Power, when in the same hands for what seems forever, stagnates and becomes self-serving. Almost totally insulated by guaranteed incomes and detached by a new found affluence it becomes 'us and them'. 

The other day the First Minister at the Assembly was caught on the hop when asked to condemn the RCT Leader's 5 jobs and £102,000 pay packet, all of which comes out of the public purse and pocket. Your purse and pocket. He would not - because he could not. How do you defend the indefensible?

RCT is officially classed as being much the same as a Third World country by the EU. That's why we get Objective One money although it's never seen. I think it was Action on Poverty who stated in a report that 48% of children in RCT are living in poverty. We even have 'food banks' where people who can't afford to live for the rest of the week can go to get some tinned or dried food to eat. The people of RCT give to that in abundance and that's because most of us were breast fed socialism in what were close knit communities, and still apply that central principle of 'Chwarae Teg'. 

It's lost on some when the wallet intervenes.

Mugged by Direct Debit - Addendum

I've offered a few comparisons over the last few weeks and some of them, like those below, are stark. Is this how RCT Councillors pay for their chauffeur driven cars and huge allowances? One of the poorest areas in Britain and classed as such by the European Union who see us in much the same light as a Third World country, but yet expected to pay far more in Council Tax Rates than even the most affluent areas of south Wales. Why?

Rates compared to Cowbridge, Vale of Glamorgan & Roath, Cardiff.

(Both very affluent areas.)

Rates Band.               A                   B                     C                      D                     E                     F

COWBRIDGE:     775.09       904.27       1,033.45       1,162.64       1,421.01       1,679.36

ROATH PARK:   614.43          737.31         860.21           983.09       1,105.98       1,351.76

PONTYPRIDD:  917.68      1,070.63     1,223.58     1,376.53     1,682.42      1,988.31

See what I mean? Mugged by Direct Debit - every month!

Graeme.

More Half Truths and Nonsense - Addendum

It was recently published on Pontypridd Town message boards by someone calling themselves 'Whitelily' that;

 "..........the Chairmanship of Overview and Scrutiny was given to Graeme Beard. (2000/2001) He took the extra responsibility allowance of £9,000 plus on offer which he now shouts about as being wrong and robbing the people of RCT!"

This was swallowed whole by another on that site. Someone calling himself 'Valleyboy'. He has repeatedly used this as a weapon on other sites to try to discredit me and question my voracity. Well - read on 'Whitelily' and 'Valleyboy'.


Actually for that year (as published in the public domain via the Pontypridd & Llantrisant Observer) I claimed £2,769. Half was given over to the 'Democratic Alliance' coffers for spending on projects within RCT and the other half was spent on my ward (again witnessed in the Pontypridd & Llantrisant Observer and The Western Mail & Echo.) So what was published by 'Whitelily' and spat out by 'Valleyboy' is in fact a barefaced lie.

More half truths and nonsense.

"The best lies sail closest to the truth." (Anon.) This was written by someone using the pseudonym of 'Whitelily' on the Pontypridd Town Website. I do wish people would wriggle out from under these masks if they want to post something like this.

"On his blog, Graeme Beard states he has never been in a Libdem Alliance.

This is untrue.

In 2001/2 he was in an Independent/Libdem Alliance with ex-Plaid then newly Independents Karen Roberts, Jim Davies, Katrina Jones - Independents Bob Fox and Paul Baccara and the Lib Dems Mike Powell and Stephen Belzak.

As a group they held the Chairmanship of Overview and Scrutiny which was given to Graeme Beard. He took the extra responsibility allowance of £9,000 plus on offer which he now shouts about as being wrong and robbing the people of RCT!

Glass Houses Graeme!"

More half truths and nonsense. I've already been through this.

Those people (including myself) were thrown together simply by virtue of the fact that they were not members of PC or Labour. It was no 'LibDem Alliance', or indeed any true working 'Alliance' at all and if it was, since that rag tag and bobtail group were mostly Independents then it would have been an 'Independent Alliance'. It wasn't that either. We all had different agendas on many an issue. There was as much disruption in that 'group' as in any other just as is the LP and/or PC. The difference being I suppose that this lot were not obliged to put their hands up to a proposal just by virtue of the fact that they were told to. Those members voted in the interests of the people who elected them and not along the lines of some faceless political party.

Alliances were certainly not the order of the day! And, by the way, you forgot to include Stuart Gregory who was/is also an Independent but I have no recollection of him joining any 'alliance' either. Bob Fox to my recollection never attended any meetings and was not part of this very loose group. And loose it was too.

It's like saying that if a decision came before Council and there was no division between PC and the LP so that they all put their hands up together then that's a 'Labour Party/Plaid Alliance'! If it's agreeable to both then it's a formality but that's not an 'Alliance' by any stretch of any furtive imagination. So if the Independents and the LibDems agreed with a proposal that came before PC but was opposed by the LP would that be a 'PC/Independent/LibDem Alliance'? How far do you stretch that one? Pretty distant logic that.

In fact as I remember we never even met as a full group of outlaws at all. Our 'group' numbers dwindled over time. We would meet on an ad hoc basis now and again when anything major was coming up. Even then the meetings were on a voluntary basis. The was no 'grouping' or any death defying master plan. We sat outside all that by default. LibDem Alliance? No! Even plain and simple 'Alliance'? No! I suppose it again depends on how it's defined but which ever way it was looked at there were very few 'alliances'. If we had come together as a group of people with a single mind (which is improbable I know) then possibly an 'alliance' but if that happened on any day then I can't remember it at all.

The Scrutiny Chair was given over to the group in 2001 (not me in particular) as was (is?) the law governing such as that and I Chaired the meetings for some months (it was then passed on to another which I think was Katrina Jones but I'm not quite sure) but at least half the 'extra allowance' (which again was given over by Katrina too as I remember) was placed in a central pot to buy goods and services that RCT would not and said they could not provide. There was talk about providing extra street cleaning services and buying a street cleaning machine etc. We bought ties for the first year students of a local school. Gave money to this and that cause. £100 here and £200 there. Nothing big but as best we could. It all helps. The other half was spent on my ward and elsewhere. (Archives Pontypridd & Llantrisant Observer.) So I actually didn't 'take the money and run' as is implied. It was used at the sharp end. If it had stayed with RCT it would have simply disappeared and never been seen again.

An extract from another page there;

"In my opinion every Councillor should spend at least part of their allowances on their wards. A large part actually. There are Pensioners Organisations; Youth Clubs; Schools; after School Clubs; Nurseries; and a multitude of other worthy causes just about everywhere. If you give it to them in cash or bought goods then all the better. If you leave it with RCT there'll be forms to fill out; a long drawn out pointless process to go through; a wait that seems interminable; lobbying at Councillor level etc. In effect begging. Just give it away for goodness sake and bypass that idiocy that only goes to keep people occupied in pen pushing exercises." (Me writing).

When I Chaired the Authority (1999/2000) I had an extra allowance. (Can't remember how much it was though. It didn't seem important since it would be gone soon anyway.) Again it was spent on my ward and elsewhere on the people (in the end I was just giving them back their own money) as can be evidenced by the Pontypridd Observer Archive material I have recently put out in a leaflet. There's no lies there either unless the reporters were in on some Graeme Beard conspiracy as well?! Utter nonsense. And they are just a few instances. But it's all a matter of public record anyway. Anyone can check it out at any time. I have never denied taking the allowances paid out at the time. In my opinion it's how I used them that's important. Left in the coffers of RCT it would have simply melted away. Bypass that and give it straight to the people. In the end it's their money.

An extract from that blog you mention 'Whitelily';

"No need to believe me out of hand. This is all in the Pontypridd Observer and Rhondda Leader archives at the local Library. Yep - I took my allowances, but if you look overleaf (on a preceding page of that leaflet there is proof of what I'm saying) there are a couple of examples of how I used to spend them. If I had left it with RCT the money would have simply disappeared in to some useless black hole (or deep pocket) without the people on my Ward seeing any benefit at all. I would rather spend it on them myself. So I did. No doubt you’ll be told otherwise but the evidence speaks for itself. The expenses I gave away came out of my own pocket either as cash gifts or bought goods. I made sure that the money went where it would be better used (to the people of my Ward in the main, but others too) so that it didn’t remain in the coffers of RCT where it would be wasted. Give it to those who deserve it, trust them and they’ll spend it right."

In fact, and this is just one example;

Western Mail on August 1 2002.

"The Democratic Alliance opposition group of Rhondda Cynon Taff County Borough Council is setting up an action group to ensure that part of Pontypridd’s Ynysangharad War Memorial Park is not compromised by a proposed shopping centre development.

They are donating £100 towards a fighting fund to help cover the cost of independent legal advice.

The money is from the special responsibility allowance of Graeme Beard." 

Check it out from your comfortable desk 'Whitelily'.

So we were called a 'Democratic Alliance' eh? Not something I remembered until I got hold of this a few hours ago. Now I remember though! Thanks for the heads up. You are handing me gold!

Cwn Taf Health Authority - What the hell is going on?

As a result of a FOI Act request I sent in to Cwm Taff Health Board I have found out that they recently spent £13,500 (of public money) on a 'trip' to Dubai to try to recruit nurses and doctors to work in the MIU's in Cynon and the Rhondda. It doesn't stop there though. A fee of 20% of the first year's salaries of any Doctors recruited are to be paid to an agency. The final bill will be astronomical. 

Both Minor Injury Units in Cynon and the Rhondda were closed recently through lack of trained staff. Human Resource Planning which has the basic function of training staff for 'stock' (so they are already in place and properly trained when needed), seems to be beyond them.

In a recent article in The Guardian it's estimated that the NHS is going to 'lose' (a nice little sanitizing term for making nurses unemployed) 50,000 properly trained staff over the next few years. So we spend money going abroad to find staff when we could and should be spending that time, money and effort on training our own people who are about to be thrown out of a job. It's disgraceful. Just click on the link below to see what's happening to our own. 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2011/feb/23/nhs-to-lose-50000-jobs

A Personal Message.

The only thing I would ask is that you hear the truth before you judge. Please read on.

Here goes. I was a faithful member of the Labour Party for about 16/17 years. I was elected to RCT as a Labour member in 1995. I saw them waste £26 million in 'reserves' (that's your money that they had in the bank) over just 3 short years. I saw services failing from lack of money but top bosses increasing in number and with astronomical salaries. (Nothing’s changed there then!) I saw my Ward (this Ward) treated like a backwater whilst money was lavished elsewhere. I was told to 'toe the line' on decisions even though they were made with the people who elected me (that’s you of course) relegated to about 3^rd or 4^th down the priority list. These and so many other things led me to 'cross the floor' and join Plaid. They were going to offer a bigger, better, brighter future, or so the promises went. I was re-elected as a Plaid member and truly thought things would improve for you. They didn't.

I was the first Chairman of RCT after we had abolished the post of Mayor with all its gold chains and enormous costs. I never once wore the Mayoral Chains and actually wanted them sold off (as I remember there are around 11 or 12 of them!) and the money put to better use. I was blocked from doing that time and again. There were three chauffeurs and three cars when I became Chairman. Within weeks there was only one of each – but not for me! (Two chauffeurs were redeployed and the cars sold off.) I used my own car to travel from event to event until the fuel pump packed up. Only then did I have to use the one remaining official car for the last 3 or 4 appointments. I gave them change back out of my Civic budget (which I had reduced from approx. £250,000 to £20,000) at the end of my year and at the same time raised £30,000 for Meningitis Research. It had hit our kids in RCT very badly at the time. I made sure my year as Chairman was an investment and not an expense. It’s all too easy to be all too easy with other people’s money. I can’t do that. It’s hard to earn but easy to waste. Especially when it’s not yours. I even found £3,000 worth of booze stashed away. You had paid for that! Party pints for the boyos.

I was told that you (out of public funds entrusted to me) had to pay for wreaths on Remembrance Day for (believe it or not, but true) the two main trades unions; and all 75 Councillors on all 54 Wards! I refused and made them pay for their own. Why shouldn't they? I bought six (two for each area) on behalf of you, the people, out of my RCT budget and paid for my own out of my own pocket. All this was done in close consultation with the Royal British Legion and their Regional Commander Colonel Tony Davies. Why should you have to pay when people can afford to pay for their own? I have the greatest respect and deepest gratitude for those who died for us (and still do) but think that others who 'say' they feel the same should show it and buy a wreath themselves. Actions speak far louder than words.

One of the main whingers (of course) was Cllr. Russell Roberts who had claimed almost £45,000 in allowances and expenses in the 3 previous years and when he was Mayor managed to get through about £278,000 of public money in one year.

This is the same Russell Roberts who was on the front pages the other day. “4 Jobs Roberts” who currently ‘earns’ (if you can call it that) just short of £100,000 out of the public purse and pocket! I was branded a ‘skinflint’ at the time when it was actually they who were the skinflints by having to be shamed into buying their own! A wreath at the time cost just £13. I think they could afford it don’t you? Disgracefully, but typically, this was used to score some very nasty, cheap political points at the time but when the truth came out they were shown up for what they are. If you send me to that Council Chamber the risk for them is that it will happen again, and they really don’t want that! They want sheep not shame. I have never courted controversy but I have never run from it either.

No need to believe me out of hand. This is all in the Pontypridd Observer and Rhondda Leader archives at the local Library. Yep - I took my allowances, but if you look overleaf there are a couple of examples of how I used to spend them. If I had left it with RCT the money would have simply disappeared in to some useless black hole (or deep pocket) without the people on my Ward seeing any benefit at all. I would rather spend it on them myself. So I did. No doubt you’ll be told otherwise but the evidence speaks for itself. The expenses I gave away came out of my own pocket either as cash gifts or bought goods. I made sure that the money went where it would be better used (to the people of my Ward in the main, but others too) so that it didn’t remain in the coffers of RCT where it would be wasted. Give it to those who deserve it, trust them and they’ll spend it right.

My year as Chairman came to an end and to my disgust my Plaid successor decided that she would go back to wearing the Mayoral Chains of Office and using the chauffeur driven car. I complained bitterly but they wouldn’t listen. We had cut the post of Mayor and got rid of the gold frippery and huge associated costs only to have it all return just a year later. To this end I refused to enter the Council Chamber if those chains were worn. I was expelled from Plaid for that particular sin. From then on it became 'same old, same old' and it was really difficult to see the difference between Plaid and Labour and because of that RCT went back to Labour in 2004. That was the year I gave up my seat.

Now me, having been a member of Labour and Plaid is painted as a negative (traitor and not to be trusted etc.) but it's not really a negative at all. In fact the exact opposite – it’s a positive. Because I've been on the 'inside' and know only too well how the party machines work and how the party hacks and spin doctors twist and distort reality I know how to fight them. That would be to your distinct advantage. I know how they work and how to get the best I can for you. And I have never been a member of any ‘”LibDem Alliance”. When? What day was that on? I must have been asleep or something! Utter rubbish.

Well, I'm still no sheep to be herded around by any party political machine unlike others who just nod along. I am outspoken and will tell you how things truly are warts and all. More importantly, I will tell them in the Council Chamber how things truly are warts and all and if they don’t like it well that’s hard lines I’m afraid. Truth hurts sometimes.

You see in reality I’m not YOUR worst nightmare; I’m THEIR worst nightmare and that’s why they’ll tell you anything but the truth! They will do and say anything to keep me out of that Council Chamber. They are petrified I will once again expose them for what they really are. Mind – I have to get there first! I need your help to do that.

I won't be knocking on your door and bothering you with this. The Labour Candidates the local AM and MP probably will though. Big guns rolled out in desperation to try to defend the indefensible and prop up a broken system and to ask you to vote for their party mates. A sort of “Please vote for the same old same old.” “They are wonderful people really.” “Look what they’ve done to the pavements and roads blah blah blah.” Repairs really well timed just before an election strangely enough too! And (the best one of all) “It’s really to do with the cuts from this Tory/LibDem Government not them!” In small part that’s true but if less went to waste on enormous salaries and inflated allowances for the top dogs more could be spent on the people. If wages are cut for Carers or School Dinner Ladies or Bin Men then all should be cut – especially those at the top! They blame anyone and everyone except themselves. Hell’s fire, they think we’re so, so stupid! Please don’t let them mug you any longer.

If you want to contact me to talk about the above or anything else that I believe in and want to do for you just ring me. Leave a message and if I can't answer I will get back to you as soon as I can. I’ll come to you if you want.

So please don't believe the distortions, the lies and the worm-tongued nonsense that you will be fed in leaflets poked through your door or even on your very own doorstep and especially what’s in the ‘Labour Herald’ propaganda sheet. Ask me for my side and you'll get it straight away. There are no lies here and anyone can check out what I’m telling you at any time. It’s all a matter of public record. You need to be made aware of the truth so you can see that there are some that have almost no idea of what that is.

Graeme.

Mugged by Direct Debit.

You work hard all week, or maybe you’re living on a pension, or perhaps unfortunate enough to be unemployed. Whatever it is your weekly or monthly income is limited and sometimes seems to be far too little all too often to pay your bills. Sometimes you look in your pocket and wonder if you can last until next pension or pay-day. One of those increasingly expensive bills of course is the Rates (Council Tax), and it’s a big part of the money flowing out of your pocket. 

Let’s just say though that you’re lucky enough to have a job. And let’s say you’re a Home Carer for the Elderly and Disabled. Hard, and sometimes difficult work but it’s a job and it’s also essential work in the community. Then one morning you wake up to a 90 day notice on your doorstep telling you that unless you take a cut in pay and working conditions, perhaps even up to 40% then you’re out of that job. Shocked would be an understatement. Maybe even feeling sick? How are you going to pay your bills now? Your Rates? Rates that are far higher than in neighbouring Authorities. Hundreds of pounds more actually. Ever wondered why? Well read on.

But then you find out slowly and bit by bit that the Managing Director of the company earns more than £100,000 a year; that he is completely protected from any cuts and those managers below him who are faithful followers and favoured by him are also paid huge sums and again are immune from any cuts to their income. They take anything between £43,000 plus and £23,500 plus a year. Something wrong here isn’t there? Shouldn’t everyone suffer?

In fact not only does his income exceed £100,000 a year but every penny of that comes out of public funds, as does the incomes of his faithful nodding followers. Public funds that originated out of your pay packet and bank balance in the first place. So you are taking a huge knock and having to tighten your belt time and again but they are just fine thanks and as ironic as it is it’s actually you who are paying for their privileged existence! Is it me or is there just a touch of mockery and  injustice here? Well that’s exactly what happened and is happening in RCT for those workers such as in the example given above and us - the Rates payer.

We have a Council Leader with (so far) 5 jobs, all paid out of our pockets, and his underlings below him again all paid for out of those increasingly empty pockets of ours. The song lyric, “You got to pick a pocket or two boys – you got to pick a pocket or two!” always comes to mind when I look at these huge sums being paid to people who keep banging on about “serving” the public. Well I question who comes first in the queue. Sounds more like self-service to me. Sounds more like a Gravy Train; and it's Gravy for the few but never for you!

For instance ‘Extra Responsibility Payments’ to the Chair of the Environmental Services Scrutiny Committee, (2010/11 - Cllr. Tina Leyshon) amounting to £9,700 and that committee having met only 7 times. That is in effect £1,386 that she received per meeting and that’s just one example. There are far more. Nice work if you can get it eh? No wonder they want to hang on to their jobs.

We are being mugged and that mugging is by Direct Debit every month. Another 5 years of this and more? What will they do next? Company cars for Councillors? Now that sounds silly doesn't it? An outrageous thing to say. Well did you know that this actually happens right now and regularly with at least the Mayor and the Leader of RCT? Not only that but it's a chauffer driven company car may I add. And of course there's a choice. Now shall we take the Volkswagen Phaeton purchased in June 2008 at a price of £19,570 or shall we take the Jaguar XF which was purchased in August 2008 at a price of £23,329? It must be so hard to choose. My heart bleeds. When I was Chair of the Authority in 1999/2000 I used my old Toyota Corolla and drove myself around.

Well 4 years ago I didn't think that we would have a Council Leader with 5 jobs on more than £100,000. I never suspected that they would be paying themselves so richly for being so ordinary. It was beyond me that they would cost us more than £1,300,000 a year to 'employ' as Councillors. And it never entered my head that they would make those least able to pay for cuts actually pay for them whilst completely protecting themselves. Company cars? Doesn't sound so crazy now does it?

Graeme Beard. 

Nothing to fear?

We are constantly force fed the adage; "If you've got nothing to fear then you have nothing to hide." And especially in these days of 'eye in the sky' CCTV and being placed under ever increasing surveillance by both corporations and the government they control.


Well if that mantra applies to the ordinary every day individual then should it not also apply to local and central governments? The answer should obviously be a resounding "Yes" of course. Why is it then that the only way to get information from Rhondda Cynon Taff Council is via Freedom of Information requests?


Why are we, in a democratic society (yeah right!) barred from recording in any way the meetings of our elected representatives? Why are they not broadcast on the internet? After all it's even free. OK - not every persons idea of entertainment but don't complain to us about non-participation when you're conveniently hidden away in Clydach Vale and to all practical purposes inaccessible.


Open? Accountable? Transparent? Ummmm! No!

Capping Benefits.

Yes - I agree with 'caps'.

 Like caps on utility bills for state pensioners, some of whom will die (again) this winter from malnutrition or hypothermia. Caps on the incomes of the top 100 CEO's in the UK who earn an average of £4.8 million per annum. Caps on bankers salaries and bonuses but, strangely, no cap on the time they should spend in prison. Caps on tax havens where the rich and super rich can avoid paying any taxes at all. Caps on the number of jobs we can export to China where 'a dollar a day' prison labour is used that puts our people on the dole in the first place. Caps on the amount of money spent on wars in the name of democracy when it's really about oil. Caps on the number of our kids, and of course, their subsequent deaths when we send them to fight those wars based purely on deceit and propaganda like the 'weapons of mass destruction' lie we were deliberately fed. Caps on public money spent on arms manufacture and their sales to regimes that commit genocide. Caps on the amount of money this government can withdraw from the disabled, the poor, the young and the old. Caps on the number of homeless people living on the streets for lack of a bed. Caps on the mentally ill living under bridges and on park benches for lack of places in hospitals. Caps on starving the NHS of enough money and resources to provide the service it exists to offer. 

Yes - good things are caps are they not? Or at least perhaps they could be eh?