A new threat to Human civilisation

The globe is warming, the credit crunched but there is now a far greater threat to human civilisation - a shortage of Battenburg cake. Of course we all know of the birds and the bees. The birds have got the flu and the bees are on their knees, dying in their millions. But it is not the bees per se that is the big issue but rather what they do. It takes 80% of the industrial bees in America to pollinate the biggest almond orchard in the world. Since two thirds of the American bees have mysteriously died in 2008 there is a serious threat to the almond orchards. As everyone knows the main ingredient of marzipan is almonds. If the almond trees aren't pollinated then there's no marzipan and no Battenburg. I have taken measures and purchased large stocks of Battenburg cake which is being securely kept in a refrigerated vault in the Cayman islands. Battenburg shortage is a real problem for politicians. Where would we be when constituents invite us in for tea and Battenburg when there is no Battenburg. Utter chaos. If politicians don't get their Battenburg then democracy itself is threatened. We can expect riots in the streets more severe than the Community Poll Tax Charge riots of the 80's. On a lighter note, Albert Einstein once said that if the bees died out the human race would follow in five years. That might seem unlikely but if you consider that the bees are responsible for pollinating almost half our food crops, then it can readily be seen that a 40% to 50% reduction in food could cause considerable strife. There are 6.7 billion people on the planet. In 1945 there were 2 billion. Without the bees it may become 2 billion again. But if the human race does die then there'll be no need for Battenburg!

Radix malorum est cupiditas

The Co-operative movement arose because working people were being cheated by Retailers who were adulterating their products to increase their profits. The ‘Micro-Finance’ movement, or loans to the Financially Excluded is a response to the Banking and Finance industry’s refusal to cater for poorer members of the community. This left the way open for Money Lenders to exploit poorer people.
Organisations such as Provident existed for many years and provided home loans to working class people, specifically before Credit Cards and overdraft facilities existed.
Credit Unions were developed because working people were being exploited by purveyors of loans with high rates of APR. In recent years the Credit Crunch has shown that the Finance Industry were making poor lending decisions. They did this to make exceptional profits so that large bonuses could be paid out, and with scant regard for the long term future.
Credit Unions have maintained their responsible attitude to loans based on either savings or a capacity to repay.
Credit Unions have traditionally charged 1% per month (12.68 APR). Recently the government allowed Credit Unions to charge 2% per month (26.8 APR). This was to reflect the risk of the lending market.
Currently the government through the DWP is promoting loans at 2% per month.
The government is also taking action against illegal money lending :- http://www.birmingham.gov.uk/GenerateContent?CONTENT_ITEM_ID=44341&CONTENT_ITEM_TYPE=0&MENU_ID=1522.
While organisations such as Cattles (Shopacheck), Provident, and Bright House, operate within the law, they charge very high rates of interest. Currently the best way to indicate the charge for Credit is the APR. While doorstep lenders can charge high rates of interest such as 180% APR, it can be argued that this relates to the extra cost of doorstep collections and the ‘one to one’ relationships that are built up between the Representatives and their Customers. However, charges of 1000% APR are indefensible in any circumstances.
When the Monopolies and Mergers Commission criticised the APR it was not to justify very high rates of APR, but it was to point out that some organisations have hidden charges that if taken into account would show a much higher APR. It is therefore extraordinary that anyone could proffer any kind of defence to 1000% APR’s whether short or long term.
Credit Unions provide short or long term loans and the maximum APR on any will be 26.8%. Organisations or individual lenders who charge APR’s over 200 per cent are often in the illegal market.
For an organisation such as Greater Manchester Pension Fund that represents members borne largely from the Public Sector it is excruciatingly ironic that they should accept any profits from unscrupulous organisations that prey on the poorest members of the community.
An even greater irony is that their unscrupulous behaviour has now led to a significant loss to the Fund.
In 2006/2007 while a Trustee for GMPF, I argued on more than one occasion against the Fund being involved with British American Tobacco. While in Europe we have all recognised the affects of smoking on health, and many Councils purport to support the health of their Constituents, the Funds blind eye to BAT’s profits often derived from the Third World, is culpable and despicable hypocrisy of the highest order.
Likewise the involvement of the Fund in exploitative organisations such as Cattles has no defence. While a Trustee of GMPF I asked Capital International who are responsible for investing GMPF assets, whether the same return could be derived from investing elsewhere. The reply was ‘Yes’. Despite this the Fund maintained its interest in BAT and also exploitative ‘money lenders’.
In 2009 at the AGM of ABCUL (Association of British Credit Unions Ltd) a motion to withdraw any Association with Cattles was passed.

It is once again ‘ironic’ that ethical investments appear to be more profitable while greed seems to come before a fall.

Trustee’s of the Pension Fund should remember Chaucer’s, Pardoners Tale, and the dictum, Radix malorum est cupiditas. (Greed is the root of all evil).

Cllr John Kelly

Poem : This way Mr Zheimer - you can call me Al

My memory's fine, I don't know what
I can't remember what I forgot
I came upstairs, I combed my hair
I can't remember why I'm there
I'm in the bathroom so I unzip
There's nothing coming I've lost my grip
I think I'll go and make some tea
oh here's one ready, made by me
Someone broke into my kitchen, I hit her with a heavy pan
but now she looks a bit familiar, it's my mum, or perhaps my nan
There's mattresses upon the wall, how do I sleep on that
I wear a mop upon my head because I lost my hat
A lady comes to visit daily, she sometimes sheds a tear
but now she's making me so wary I have to live in fear
The bed is wet, oh not again, I wonder who did that
perhaps I spilt the tea, there's some more upon the mat
Several people came to day with presents then they went
they let strangers in these places, perhaps they're heaven sent
The lady from my kitchen floor came to my room today
she says she loves me very much but she really cannot stay
I don't know who the hell she is, she's really such a fool
but she made me laugh so very much when she slipped up on the pool
I think I might go home today, I used to like it there
but every time I go outside, the people stop and stare
There's something strange that bothers me, I don't know who I am
I knew it twice the other day when someone called me Sam
But the Porter called me Bud today, and how you doin pal?
I find it so confusing, but you can call me Al.

Quantitative Teasing

At the time Margaret Thatcher came to prominence I was still uninitiated into the reality of economics. I recall saying to my would-be father in law that the government should spend whatever was needed for the NHS. His retort was sobering. Who's going to pay? I didn't really have an answer for that. 30 years on and I know a thing or two about economics and now in the throes of an economic meltdown, governments around the world are 'spending' money they haven't got. And I can't help thinking, Who's going to pay? All the world's governments seem to think they can spend their way out of this crisis. This is better than facing a deep recession. But are they right and is there an alternative. Thatcherism borrowed from Nobel prize winning Milton Friedman to solve a crisis eerily similar to this one. It was a bitter pill, but Monetarism really did succeed in countering the excesses of 1970's public spending. Very few people have a real grasp of what 'money' actually is. Clearly it is a medium of exchange that has fuelled an industrial and technological revolution but it has a drawback. When primitive societies traded half a sheep for a pig the 'value' was clear. Nowadays money seems to have an intrinsic value other than the assets (sheep, pig) that it represents. The result of this is that the opportunity arises for some to derive financial benefit from 'money' that has little bearing to their assets. Assets in fact represent someone's labour either present, past or future. In essence money equals labour. So what are government's doing when they spend money they haven't got. Well they are committing past, present or future labour. At some point because of the compounded interest (cost) of future labour, the benefit that can be derived from labour has diminishing returns. Workers work less and an economy stagnates. Recession is coming no matter how much government's spend. Have it now, or later. That's the only choice. Monetarism meant that money was tight and we all tightened our belts. But efficiency returned to the market place. Labour costs augmented to the new circumstances and the true value of money was returned.
We need a return to Monetarism. We need to tighten our belts and stop spending what we haven't got.

The Sharp End

(31/7/8) Last night at the Ashton District Assembly I informed members of the public of a new and increasing danger to them, and more specifically, to children. Disused needles of heroin addicts are being left in some derelict garages in my Ward. The Council have been informed and are taking action. Needles have been removed but more return even in the same day. I have also informed the police. My concern is that while we are waiting for the police to catch these users or the Council to remove the needles, there is an interim period where members of the public including children are in great danger. At the District Assembly I urged the public to be careful and even survey the areas where their children might be playing.
My solution would be to lock heroin addicts up. And if we need more prisons then build them. Not only would we be protecting the public, we would be depriving dealers of their income and saving the lives of the addicts. It's a simple solution, we just need someone with the will to do it.
Until that day I will keep the constituents informed the best I can.
(cllrjohnkelly@gmail.com)

Hazelhurst (Revisited)

(31/7/8) As was expected New Charter are planning to put forward an application for houses and flats in Hazelhurst. These properties built by a 'Social Landlord' will provide housing for the select few who manage to claw their way to the top of the 'politically correct' list. It is not a case of first come first served, it's about points, and what do points make? Prizes. The prize of a brand new apartment with an exquisite view of 'Joddrell Bank', or so I'm told. Unfortunately, this piece of ground, far more suitable for a play area, will have a carbuncle that will obscure the wonderful view from those already living there. The local people don't want the new buildings but then New Charter have no reason to give a damn about local people's concerns, some of whom are their own tenants. So instead they run roughshod over the residents and behave like any Corporate giant taking care of their own interests only. We, the two Conservative Councillors have registered our objections. Soon the Speakers Panel for Planning will make a decision. Will 100's of resident's objections be heard, or will New Charter (whose Board comprises of a number of Labour Councillors) get their way. The jury is out!

Crewe's in for a Bruising

Ah such sweet victory - and I'm not talking about Crewe. Sure it's good to give them a 'bloody nose', but I'm more concerned with the local elections. In Tameside we are only a few per cent behind the 'others'. Unfortunately that few per cent means they still hold a significant majority.
However, the floodgates are now open. Staley Dukinfield is ours and two more seats beckon in 2010/2011. The same applies to Staley North and in all probability to Ashton St Michaels and Denton West where we only narrowly lost. If Crewe and the local elections are anything to go by then 10 more seats could be ours in 2010 and by 2011...... wait for it..................... we could be running the Council. Yes its true, Conservatives running Tameside. All hands to the pumps boys and girls - GAME ON.