The Radical Independence on Tour roadshow will be stopping off at North Edinburgh Arts Centre tonight at 7pm in the first of a series of ‘community assemblies’.
Speakers include Jean Urquahart MSP, John Finnie MSP, Green councillor Maggie Chapman and community activist Fraser Young.
All welcome.
The city council looks set to accept a £1m bid to convert Leith Waterworld into a soft play area, only months after agreeing to work with local campaigners to reopen the leisure pool as a community enterprise.
The decision will be formally made at tomorrow’s full council meeting, but speaking earlier today Culture and Leisure convener Councillor Richard Lewis said the “difficult decision” to support a proposal by Glasgow-based A&G Property Group to create a soft play and leisure centre at Waterworld had been taken.
Leith Waterworld closed in January last year, but supporters have campaigned to have the popular facility reopened ever since. Campaign group Splashback have worked tirelessly to get the facility reopened as a community asset – and felt they might be on the verge of success when councillors voted to support a feasibility study earlier this year – council officers have even been working alongside the Splashback group to firm up proposals.
However campaigners were concerned when news of the A&G bid emerged last week and Councillor Lewis’ comments today has confirmed their worst fears.
Councillor Lewis said: “This has been a very difficult decision and one that this Council does not take lightly. Firstly I’d like to thank Splashback for the work and commitment they have demonstrated in progressing the community bid. However this coalition feels that the potential purchaser will create a high quality leisure facility that will greatly benefit the community in Leith and the wider Edinburgh area.
“In recognition of Splashback’s commitment to creating affordable and accessible swimming opportunities for young people in the community, we’re proposing to commit £125,000 towards free swimming for primary aged children in Edinburgh.
“Ultimately this option ensures that the community in Leith has an accessible leisure facility for many years to come, that swimming opportunities are available and also that the Council gets best value for the taxpayers of Edinburgh.”
In a statement on their Facebook page, Splashback campaigners told friends and supporters: “Outraged to report to all our wonderful supporters that Coalition Motion for tomorrow’s Full Council meeting is to pull the plug on Waterworld and accept the other bid. We have, however, been working frantically behind the scenes in the last 24 hours to salvage SOMETHING for the city’s families.
“Consequently, the motion includes a commitment to ring-fence the £125,000 they promised us in the first year for a Council-led ‘programme of free swimming opportunities for primary aged children in Edinburgh, and other free swimming initiatives; and that the impact of these programmes will be monitored and assessed.’ SORRY FOLKS, that’s the best we could do …”
Commenting on the council’s decision to sell Leith Waterworld, Lothian Green MSP Alison Johnstone said: “This decision sends the worst possible message to communities trying to come together to protect services and improve facilities in their area. Despite all the warm words we hear on community empowerment and people power, when a developer comes along with a wad of cash, community efforts seem to count for little.”
She went on: “Families in Leith and right across the city made it very clear that they valued Waterworld as a unique leisure pool, and just five months after giving everyone hope that it would reopen, the Council have pulled the plug and campaigners will be feeling totally gutted.”
Royal Bank of Scotland (RBS) is to cut a further 1,400 jobs from its retail banking head office over the next two years, it announced yesterday. The Bank said that up to half of the losses will be at the bank’s offices in Edinburgh, where the ‘back room’ jobs under threat include marketing, communications and other support functions.
The latest round of redundancies follow the loss of more than 35,000 job cuts since public money was used to bail out RBS following the financial crisis – the government still owns more than 80% of the bank.
Ross McEwan, the chief executive of RBS’s UK retail operations, said: “To serve our customers well, we have to ensure that our resources are focused on the things that matter most to them. Regrettably, we can only do that by restructuring the way we work in head office, so that every effort is concentrated on supporting our customers and the frontline staff that serve them. This is clearly difficult news for our staff and we will do everything we can to support them, including seeking redeployment opportunities wherever possible to ensure compulsory redundancies are a last resort.”
The Unite union described the cuts as “brutal and irresponsible”. Warning of the impact that the cuts will have on local economies and customer service, Unite national officer Dominic Hook said: “This is brutal and irresponsible behaviour from RBS which is almost entirely owned by the taxpayer. It is high time that the banks took its social responsibilities seriously. Since the beginning of the year RBS, HSBC, Barclays and Lloyds have announced plans to slash around 6,900 jobs. The industry almost caused the economy to implode in 2008 and now it is contributing to a jobs crisis.
“RBS made £826 million in the first quarter of this year, the bank is returning to profit. Unite does not believe there is a business case for cutting jobs so drastically. RBS argues that the restructure will make the bank more customer focused but a bank can’t be more customer focused with 1,400 fewer staff. Unite is demanding no compulsory redundancies and we expect this state-owned bank to do everything to ensure this is the case.”
There will be a significant impact on RBS staff in head office functions in Edinburgh with the rest of the cuts spread across the country. Two departments providing support to front line staff are being cut by 80 per cent. Since 2008 the bank has cut over 30,000 staff.
Local politicians have also expressed concern over the job losses. Speaking after yesterday’s announcement, Edinburgh Western MSP Colin Keir said: “This is devastating news and I understand that the bank have spoken to the Scottish Government who are acting as quickly is as possible to ensure that appropriate support can be brought in to minimise the impact and soften the blow for the people concerned. The staff facing this terrible news are not the ones who caused the crisis at RBS but members of staff with mortgages and everyday budgets and expenses – and many of them are my constituents. I met RBS this afternoon and have discussed how they will support staff through this difficult time.
“Whilst this news is deeply disappointing the long term investment being announced for Gogarburn, highlights the strength of business locating in Scotland, and I hope this will increase long term security for RBS employees. My thoughts are with the people who are experiencing losses today.”
North and Leith MP Mark Lazarowicz said: “This is a body blow to staff at RBS at what is a difficult time for anyone looking for work. I have been in touch with union officials in support of the staff and I will be seeking a meeting with senior management to discuss the redundancies. At the meeting I will be asking for a clear indication of future employment plans for the bank’s Edinburgh operations and assurances that these job losses are not part of a policy of outsourcing.
“The Chairman and Chief Executive of RBS claimed recently that the financial restructuring of the bank was largely over and that the Government could start preparing to return RBS to the private sector. That should not be at the expense of hard working employees, many of whose colleagues have already paid the price of the failure of management at the bank in the years prior to the financial crisis through losing their jobs.”
Councillor Frank Ross, the city council’s Economic Convener, said: “While this is disappointing news, Edinburgh remains an important player in the world financial markets. We were always aware that the financial crisis would result in a degree of restructuring in the finance sector and that, unfortunately, this would impact on levels of unemployment in the city. Obviously we recognise that this brings great uncertainty and worry for those affected. For this reason, we will seek to work with the Government, their agencies and our partners to ensure the workforce are supported as much as possible and I will be pulling together a task force to coordinate this activity.”
Hugh Rutherford, Chair of the Edinburgh Business Forum, said: “Although disappointing news we need to remember the financial institutions who have recently opened centres here including Tesco Bank, Sainsbury’s Bank and the Green Investment Bank thanks to our talented and skilled workforce. This continued investment from the financial sector in Edinburgh will help keep the City economy growing. The diversity and strength of the Edinburgh financial services sector, which has been growing through the downturn, and the skilled financial services workforce, will hopefully be absorbed by the new growth sectors in the financial areas of the capital.”
Earlier this month, RBS reported a return to profit the bank hopes to return to the private sector next year.
Labour took control of the city of Edinburgh for the first time when they won the District Council Elections held on Thursday 3 May 1984.
Can you name any of these young, fresh-faced local politicians? (NB: At least one of them is a famous comedian …!)
Dear Editor
UKIP is cashing in on voters’ discontent over the inability of the TOry/Lib Dem government to maintain and create more jobs and houses. UKIP is directing people’s anger not against the causes of the problems: the system and it’s incapability ti provide jobs and houses.
They are setting people against people, seeking by their actions to maintain that system; the problems of immigration being highlighted as one of the main causes of our increasing poverty, too many people chasing too few jobs, etc. etc. – it is becoming a numbers game.
If one accepts that as the main cause of today’s decline, then the days when things were booming, of rising living standards, must in part be due to immigration labour contributing to it.
Over many, many years the emigration of Scottish, Irish, Welsh and English – whose motives for moving was to find a better life – now can be blamed for the troubles happening in Spain, Italy, Greece, Cyprus, France, etc., – where maybe the numbers game is also being played.
Serious questions do arise about the level of wages and conditions of work that are found in private-run companies whose interests are profit-making as a priority. Public services in the main do have Unions and Associations to try to maintain wages and conditions.
The system of capitalism under which we live cab only continue if the capitalists’ search for ever greater profits is aided by competition, driving down costs by making individuals compete for jobs and security, and nations competing for markets. In this system the problems of jobs and security become a source of conflict in which it is handy to have scapegoats to blame. This is what UKIP is doing; a quick look at modern history blaming sections of people shows just where this can lead.
Real problems do exist and people worry for their families, but the greatest problem is the system itself: it cannot solve the problems it creates, it is time for it to go.
A. Delahoy
Silverknowes Gardens
Dear Editor
In the 1920s and 1930s people in the UK were suffering widespread poverty, imposed on them by a Conservative Government and their allies.
Following the end of the 1939 – 1945 war it was the returning servicemen and women, mainly in the age group 20 – 40 – and allied to the older generations – that determined there would be no going back to pre-war conditions, and that radical changes would be made. The war had devastated the UK financially and the main basic structures – railways, coal mines, power stations and gas works – were worn out and failing. A brief reading of those times will give an idea of the colossal tasks faced, but they were backed by serving the interests of all people, taking those main basic industries out of private hands and control, thus introducing a whole series f social welfare services – of which the NHS is the most important.
Starting with the Thatcher government and continued by the Conservative government and it’s allies of today, the process of returning industries and social welfare services to private ownership has been stepped up. Despite their protestations to the contrary their first interest us to make money; why otherwise would they be willing to take over?
With regard to the NHS, the privateers know that people at large recognise it’s importance and are prepared to defend it. So instead of outright privatisation the Government is dismantling it piece by piece, allowing private companies to tender for NHS services amongst other ways.
This, almost the last of the universal public services, must be protected from those whose aim in life is to make a profit. As in the period after World War Two, men and women in their twenties, thirties and forties – again allied to the older generations – must make sure that the wealth produced by the nation is used for the benefit of all, not the few.
A. Delahoy
Silverknowes Gardens
In the latest of what promises to be a long series of cross-border skirmishes two political heavyweights squared up to each other over Scotland’s future currency yesterday. In the red (white and blue) corner we had Westminster’s George Osborne while in the blue (and white) we had Holyrood’s John Swinney.
Old Etonian ‘Gentleman George’ Osborne is well versed in the Marquis of Queensberry Rules but ‘Slugger’ Swinney is a capable street scrapper; in a bruising contest of contrasting styles neither fighter landed a knock out blow, so there’s sure to be a rematch soon. And it’s no clearer whether we’ll be spending pounds, euros or even dollars here in Scotland after next year’s referendum
The clash came following the publication of a report on Scotland’s currency and monetary policy, helpfully produced by the Westminster government to ‘inform the debate on Scotland’s constitutional future’, launched by Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, and Chief Secretary to the Treasury Danny Alexander in Glasgow yesterday.
The report reviews how the current UK currency and monetary policy arrangements work and examines the options in the event of independence. The analysis sets out in detail the advantages and disadvantages of the potential currency options open to an independent Scotland, including: a formal sterling currency union with the continuing United Kingdom; using sterling unilaterally, with no formal agreement; joining the euro; or introducing a new Scottish currency.
The paper concludes that none of the options under independence would serve Scotland as well as the current arrangements in the United Kingdom, which is one of the most successful monetary, fiscal and political unions in history.
All of the alternative currency arrangements would be likely to be less economically suitable for both Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom.
Speaking during his Glasgow visit Chancellor George Osborne (pictured above) said it would be a “very deep dive into uncharted waters” if an independent Scotland kept the pound in a currency pact with the UK, and added that there was no guarantee that the UK and Scotland would be able to come to an agreement on a currency union. That would mean a separate Scotland was left with three options – unilaterally keeping the pound, creating a Scottish currency or joining the euro.
Mr Osborne said: “All of these alternative currency arrangements are less suitable economically than we have now for both Scotland and the rest of the UK. The fundamental political question this analysis provokes is this – why would 58 million citizens give away some of their sovereignty over monetary and potentially other economic policy to five million people in another state?
He added: “Let’s be clear – abandoning current arrangements would represent a very deep dive indeed into uncharted waters. Would a newly independent Scottish state be prepared to accept significant limits on it’s economic sovereignty? To submit it’s economic plans to Westminster before Holyrood? The only way to be sure of keeping the pound as Scotland’s currency is to stay in the UK.”
However the Scottish Government has commissioned it’s own study and believes that a Sterling zone monetary union is the best option for an independent Scotland.
The Scottish Government’s currency paper, also published yesterday, fully endorses the findings of the Fiscal Commission Working Group’s expert report that as an independent country in a Sterling zone Scotland would have the powers needed to exploit areas of comparative advantage and also tackle those areas where we need to improve performance.
Scottish Government – Currency
Commenting on the paper, Finance Secretary John Swinney (pictured below) said: “A Sterling zone, with the pound as a shared currency will provide the full flexibility to set tax and spending decisions to target key opportunities and challenges in Scotland.
“The sharing of the pound between an independent Scotland and the rest of the UK is the common sense position supported by the Fiscal Commission. A sterling zone is also in the overwhelming economic interests of the rest of the UK every bit as much as it is in the interests of Scotland. An independent Scotland using the pound will mean Sterling’s balance of payments will be massively supported by Scotland’s huge assets, including North Sea oil and gas – which alone swelled the UK’s balance of payments by £40 billion in 2011-12.
“The Fiscal Commission Working Group includes two Nobel Laureates, and their expert report – having examined several possible currency options – concluded that sharing Sterling with the rest of the UK is the best option, offering freedom and flexibility for Scotland to develop our own taxation and spending policies to boost growth and address inequality. At present, the Scottish Parliament controls just seven per cent of Scotland’s revenue base, and that would only increase to 15 per cent under the terms of the Scotland Act. With independence, Scotland will control 100 per cent of our revenues, which is what it needs to be to build a stronger economy and fairer society.
“The combination – which only comes with independence – of keeping the pound, accessing Scotland’s abundant resources, and taking decisions on tax and other economic policies that are right for Scotland, is the best way to boost jobs and growth.
“Scotland’s finances are consistently stronger than the UK’s – generating more revenue per head than the rest of the UK in each one of the past 30 years – and Scotland has had a lower fiscal deficit than the UK over the past five years. With the additional economic levers that independence will provide, and the up to £1.5 trillion asset base provided by Scotland’s oil and gas reserves, an independent Scotland will stand on a strong financial footing.
“Next year’s vote is the choice between unlocking the opportunities independence will open up or continuing to allow economic and welfare policy to be set by a Westminster system that isn’t working for Scotland.”
A deep dive into uncharted waters, or unlocking opportunities? Ultimately, you’ll decide next autumn.
Mark Lazarowicz MP has strongly criticised Government plans for employees to trade in basic rights at work such as statutory redundancy pay in return for shares in the business they work for.
In a Westminster speech yesterday the North and Leith MP (pictured below) said: “I am a strong supporter of employee share schemes to enable them to benefit from the growth of their company and participate in the way it is run. However, these Government plans would produce exactly the opposite result since employees would lose basic employment protection in return for shares that can always go down as well as up in value. A number of leading businesses have already said they want nothing to do with the scheme – good employers realise there are much better ways to motivate their workforce than a bribe to give up basic employment rights.”![Mark_Lazarowicz[1]](https://i0.wp.com/nen.press/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/mark_lazarowicz11.jpg?ssl=1)
The Government proposes that in return for shares in the company they work for, employees would lose the right to statutory redundancy pay, request flexible working and training, challenge unfair dismissal (apart from where this relates to anti-discrimination law) or be required to give longer notice to return from maternity or adoption leave.
Mr. Lazarowicz was the author of the Employee Share Schemes Bill which became law in 2002. That sought to encourage employee share ownership and long term involvement by them in the running of the business, but he believes these latest plans would make it easier to sack them.
The House of Lords initially voted to delete this part of the The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Bill, with several former Conservative Ministers voting against the Government. However the Government reinserted the proposals for the Bill to be debated in the House of Commons and won yesterday’s vote. The Bill will now return to the Lords for further discussion.
