TAX THE RICH: AN ANIMATED FAIRY TALE

Absolutely brilliant. Written for America, but equally true in the UK and Scotland. 

If you do nothing else today, watch this, and don't let them convince you that it is your fault and that you should pay for what went wrong.

We weren't 'all in together' when they were making the money. It was the 1%. We're not 'all in it together' now when it has to be paid back. It's just the 99%.

CHARLIE COSTS US A PRINCELY SUM AND THE BBC TRIES OUT A NEW COMEDY TURN IN REAL LIFE

Yes, we are indeed all in this together.

Well, sort of together, in a manner of speaking, you might say, more or less. The Daily Telegraph has two stories, however, that remind us that some of us aren’t even slightly in it together.

First of all Charles of Rothsay has increased his staff by ten, from 149 – 159 full time equivalent staff, and doubled his travel expenses despite travelling fewer miles in the last year. His staff, includes an amazing 26 personal staff, presumably to squeeze his toothpaste and wash his face for him.
His income from Cornwall (part of the Crown Estates not ceded to the country in exchange for the Civil List) rose by £635,000, which on its own might have been considered to be a rather good deal, but his grants from the government... that is to say us...rose by 40%... yes, you read that right, 40%. That’s an even better deal.
And no one seems to be able to stop this man and Mrs Parker Bowles, from spending like they were the ruling monarchs of a rich first world country.

As usual the royals have trotted out a flunky to explain why the figure for travel is so much more this year than last. It appears that last year the Canadian government covered the cost of his foreign visit to Canada, whereas, on top of all the grant money and Crown Estate money we dole out, we had to pay all his foreign travel this year.

Apparently the royal wedding (that the Windsors and Middletons were going to pay for out of their own pockets) amounted to a good deal of the expense (so clearly they didn’t, and it was you and me who actually paid for it). We’d can presumably anticipate another bill hike when Harry gets hitched and heaven only knows how much the ugly sisters will cost us.

The other story which caught my eye related to the ex Deputy Director General of the BBC who was made redundant last year, and who received a payoff of, wait for it, £950,000. Yep, nearly a million to pay him off. (And he wasn’t even any good. I remember reading that we had to pay the travel expenses of the DG and his family when they came back from their holiday to deal with some minor crisis, despite this man being left in charge.)

Other payoffs at the BBC included a woman, who had served less than two years as director of marketing, communications and audiences, at a cost of £390,000 . I thought you got a week’s pay for every year you had been in the job... well that’s what “other ranks” get. So that makes her weekly wage look pretty special!

Why can’t these people see just how annoying it is to find that your wage has been frozen; your pension reduced; your pension age increased; your winter fuel allowance cut; your roads unrepaired; etc, etc, ad infinitum, while those who can get away with it, rob us blind.

We’re not all in it together some of us are in clover, and I’ll give you three guesses where the rest are...

GOVERNMENT MINISTERS 'ART' ALL IN THIS TOGETHER

It’s nice to know that while we’re all in it together with bills going up and wages going down (the average wage in the UK has fallen by £2,500 in the last year) that government ministers are suffering too.

So it was surprising to find that they had charged the country £20,000 for artworks to adorn their offices.

Yes, in these times of austerity, when the national debt is estimated to be as much as £4.8 trillion, our government ministers have changed all the artwork in their offices, replacing the New Labour taste for Cool Britannia with historic portraits and battle scenes from a time when Britain was great...if your definition of great is spending more money on armies than anything else and fighting almost everybody, almost everywhere.

Of course they didn’t actually buy any new art. All they did was to borrow different pieces from the reserves in the government art collection. (Why does the government need an art collection? Isn’t its function to govern, rather than to be art critics? Why can’t ministers be like everyone else and bring in a painting from home?) The money was spent on transporting and hanging the paintings. Clearly ministers can’t just bang a nail in the wall, like I do, and hang their pictures themselves. What hopeless creatures.

The most amusing thing I think is that Eric Pickles, who has, quite properly, been waging a war on waste in England’s local government, has himself spent £256.64 of taxpayers’ money hanging a new print of a photo of the Queen in his office reception.

Government Ministers. Don’t you just love them?

Pics: (none of them borrowed at taxpayers' expense)Joshua Ross Junior's Battle of Blenheim, which hangs in Iain Duncan Smith's office; the Queen and Eric Pickles

First Minister's Questions, with a good few jokes.. and a great line from Ms Goldie, is over at Subrosa's place... Go read it now....OK?

THE BANK CHAIRMAN WHO WILL BE PAID HALF A MILLION TO DO NOTHING... AND DAVE'S STYLE GURU IS NOW A CIVIL SERVANT

WHAT A STRANGE PLACE WE LIVE IN


It’s almost ... no not almost, it IS unbelievable.

Gary Hoffman (right), who was brought in by the government to run the Northern Rock Bank, is leaving to set up a new bank, and, although he leaves with immediate effect, he will have the next six months on “garden leave” at taxpayers’ expense.

The man is paid £83,000 A MONTH!

Not only that but he will continue to enjoy all the benefits of his job whilst sitting with his feet up waiting for May 1, when he starts his new job:

He will earn £350,000 in that time; additionally he will accrue £140,000 in pension contributions and he will continue to enjoy his company car and free fuel worth an estimated £6,000.

It’s all down to a clause in his contract, drawn up, you would have thought, at the very highest level, when he was appointed by the government (which own the bank on our behalf). So maybe the Noble Lord Myners (left), who was advising the then government on this matter, had a hand in it. After all it was he who agreed the termination contract of Fred the Shred. (When I say termination contract, I don’t of course mean.... well, you know that, Right?) But Fred went away a very happy man, you’ll recall, his pockets bulging with cash and a beaming smile on his greedy little coupon.

So what kind of contract exactly contains a clause that says: “If I leave of my own free will to go and do something that I want to do, I will be paid my full salary and my other benefits for 6 months”? One drawn up by a moron. That’s what kind of contract! So even if it wasn’t Myners, there are plenty of others to choose from on the last government’s financial benches.

And on the same day I hear that Mr Cameron has transferred his style consultant, presumably previously paid for by the Tory Party, to the Civil Service, thus saving the Tories an nice packet of money. "Brand Dave", it seems will continue to be overseen by Anna-Marren Ashford, but we’ll pay her to do it. And there’s more. She will be joined by Andy Parsons, Mr Cameron’s personal photographer, if you please. Personal photographer Dave....? Ewww get you sweetie!!

But it’s good to know that after just a few days of George Osborne’s new tighter financial controls we have saved enough money to put all of Team Dave’s personal flunkies on the state’s payroll.

How many useful people did we sack to afford that?

I don’t know what your game is Cameron, but it seems that you’ve forgotten that when we said that we were all in it together, that was supposed to mean you too. Why not? You've forgotten everything else you promised.

FANCY A 55% PAY RISE?

All you need to do is be a FTSE company director.

Another example of how we are so NOT all this together has come to light.

New figures from the Institute of Development Studies show that FTSE 100 director pay increased by 55% in the year to June. In the FTSE 350, boardroom pay climbed by 45% on average.

FTSE 100 chief executives paid themselves on average £4.9m during the year. But the study found the rise in pay packages was enhanced by share options, long-term incentive plans and bonuses.

In the meantime another survey by the same consultancy found that employers were still pushing through pay freezes, which effectively means that pay is being cut when inflation is taken into account.

Unions were rightly shocked at the levels of pay at a time when workers suffered real cuts to their wages, pay freezes and redundancy.

What a charmless and unequal society we live in. How did we get to this stage where greed is so good, the devil take the hindmost, and the poor depend on Boris Johnston to save them from eviction?

MAY IT PLEASE HIS LORDSHIP TO GET A TRAIN, LIKE THE REST OF US

I was somewhat miffed to read that the Scottish Court Service has plans to spend £300,000 on chauffeur-driven cars for judges, whilst all around us people are cutting and making do. The chauffeurs will be used to take judges between courts all across Scotland.

The expenditure of our money has been rightly questioned by opposition politicians. After all the Scottish government is expecting a cut of £900,000,000 in its pocket money for next year.

The courts service has defended the arrangement. They say that judges needed a safe and secure environment in which to travel. Erm, well, we all need a safe and secure environment when we are travelling be it to and from work, or for pleasure. What exactly is different about judges? Can they not drive? Are they incapable of getting on and off buses, or trains?

If so, maybe they shouldn’t be sitting in judgment on the rest of us.

They say of course, that despite the financial challenges, the service is vital to provide a safe and secure environment for court documents or equipment accompanying them to court. It is also deemed necessary for the judges to work on cases confidentially while travelling “so that hearings can be dealt with promptly and efficiently without causing delays.”

WHAT? Has anyone ever been in the chaos that is the court system? And does no one else have to work whilst travelling for work, sometimes on confidential papers?

Presumably then, counsel for the accused and the defence will also require chauffeur driven cars so that they too can work in confidence in transit?

Richard Baker for Labour criticized the decision, swaying that in England and Wales there would be job losses and court closures following last week’s spending review. What exactly England and Wales have to do with this I’m not sure, but it does seem that Mr Baker hasn’t quite grasped the idea that having separate parliament and a separate legal system does mean that we do things differently here. Being Labour of course, he has been in the habit of taking his orders from London. But one thing for sure Mr Baker, the English judges won’t be getting bus to court.

John Lamont for the Tories said that in these hard times people would question whether this was really the best use of a large amount of their money. Damned right we will John. I trust Kenny MacAskill will be looking into this. I’d hate to think that the Scottish government would let it pass.

Judges need to be reminded that we are all in this together, even them.

WE ARE ALL IN THIS TOGETHER ....(EXCEPT THE OLD AND THE FRAIL WHO ARE EVEN MORE IN IT THAN THE REST)!

“But the Future Jobs scheme is to be axed in the Coalition cuts. It is by no means all. Liverpool City Council has been told its Area-Based Grant budget – the money local councils get from central government – is being cut by £9.28m for the current financial year. And that is before the Coalition cuts proper start next year.

Already being axed are funds for a project to help unemployed people in the most deprived areas of the city set up their own businesses. A project to speed the rehousing of people made homeless by mortgage repossessions will go. Free sports and recreational facilities for young people have already gone. Free fruit and vegetables for primary school children have been reduced. A keep-fit programme to help the elderly stay active has been cut, which will almost certainly send some of them into residential care earlier than need be the case.

Quit Smoking and Cut Down on Booze projects have been cut. So have handyman services available to help the old and frail cope. Grants available for families with children with Special Educational Needs have been cut. So has a scheme to provide free smoke alarms for the old and vulnerable. “

The above piece is cut from the Independent (linked to the story).

It gives some idea of the kind of things that are being cut in the interim. And all this is before the real cuts start to happen next year.

We are told that we must have cuts so that the UK government can replay the massive borrowing undertaken by the last government. By my recollection at least half of that borrowing was done to secure the future of the banks, which are now, according to The Telegraph are making excess profits for loans....... and which as we all know have returned to the champagne and oyster lifestyle that they were enjoying in the run up to the crash that they created.

Don’t you just think that it’s wrong, plain wrong, that the old and the frail, the unemployed, the sick and the poor are paying back the money these ...erm... bankers..... gambled and lost?

I’ve been here before with this story and I make no apology for highlighting it again. It wasn’t these people’s fault, and although at least some of them wouldn’t mind sharing some of the pain, this kind of cutting is disproportionate.

Lack of some of these things will kill people, of that there is no doubt. For others it will just mean lives, already unhappy, will be made a bit more miserable. And in some cases, as hinted in the story, it is short-termism staring them in the face. If old people’s services are reduced, some will have to go into homes and that, in the end, as well as being totally miserable for them, will cost more money.

If this is only the start, what will we be left when the real cuts start? And David Cameron, for whom, and for whose family, none of this is even vaguely relevant, tells us that when the crisis is over the cuts will not be restored (but of course the 50p tax rate will disappear).

And we're all in this together?

Aye right we are.

WE'RE NOT ALL IN THIS TOGETHER BY A LONG CHALK

There are some words and phrases that governments use to evoke sympathy and understanding, even tolerance, from us. We have heard much about “pensioners” or “our boys” or “hard working British families” when the government is trying to paint a warm picture of the country.

On the other hand if the government wants to spread derision, all it needs to do is mention “the unemployed”, “immigrants” or “the EU”.

These words create a certain effect, often the one that was desired. We all naturally think well of pensioners or soldiers as a generality. Of course when we delve a little further we all know that there are some pensioners that are far from the cuddly granny type, and some soldiers that are drunken louts. Likewise the general impression of the family is warm and good. Add hard working and we are really cooking and just for the final touch sprinkle the word British and we have the perfect imagery, but then when we stop and think, we all know families from hell too.

Stop and think? That’s what the government never wants us to do.

The latest phrase designed to con us is “we are all in this together”. Not that it’s a new one. I’m sure they used it in the Second World War when there wasn’t much food to go round (but the Ritz was still open), and when there were clothes coupons, (but the then Queen reputedly managed to find different things to wear every time she ventured from the palace [and to be fair that was often]).

It’s much the same thing this time. We are not all in this together. Decisions being made in London by the coalition are going to be felt far more in the North of England and in Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales where manufacturing and mining were the mainstay of the economy until the 1980s.

In post industrial Britain the public sector grew in these places. It was the government’s way of finding work for the vast numbers of unemployed. At the last count, public spending accounted for 62.7% of the GDP of Northern Ireland; in Wales 57.4%; in Scotland, 50.3%. The north-east of England 57.1%; the north-west 50.2%, and just like in the last Tory era, they will suffer as much of what they have built to replace manufacturing, is taken away.

In these places, taking a pruning knife to the state, far from boosting private enterprise (which is what the government seems to think will replace it), will weaken it. Surely this is self evident. Who on earth wants to start a business in an area where tens of thousands of people have been made redundant?

And it’s hard to see what industries are going to thrive in these places. When it comes to manufacturing of low cost goods we can’t compete with China and India; when it comes to quality goods we can’t compete with Germany or Japan which never lost all their high level skills as we did when we stopped apprenticeships (Thanks Thatcher!)

In London and the South East the financial sector has already recovered and bonuses are back to the pre-recession levels. Head offices of national and international companies together with tourism and the vast population (37 million people... around ¾ of the population of England) mean that a huge service industry exists. The public sector accounts for only 34.1% of GDP, and much of this is the high level pay of the Whitehall mandarins, who, doubtless will be cushioned from any payoffs.

So “all in this together “? I don’t think so. Do you?

Tory respect for Scotland means longer train journeys

It has emerged that the UK coalition Government is considering axing the direct link from London to Aberdeen to save money.

Plans to upgrade the line and replace diesel trains with faster electric models were put on hold in February amid funding difficulties.

Former Audit Commission chairman Sir Andrew Foster, who was reviewing the deal for the government, suggested stopping the electric services at Edinburgh could save tens of millions of pounds. After a "passenger-friendly train change" in Edinburgh, passengers heading further north would go by diesel to Fife, Dundee and beyond.

His report states, "Some significant long-distance destinations (Aberdeen, Inverness and Carmarthen) are served by lines which are not, and may never be, electrified and therefore require diesel propulsion" and such routes would be best served by "high-quality connecting trains rather than through services."

He said a commitment that connecting services would not leave without all passengers would be needed to make the system work.

Scottish transport minister Stewart Stevenson said it would be "unacceptable" for the UK government to follow the recommendations.

"It is not acceptable that the department of transport go ahead with the intercity express programme while ignoring the realities of delivering cross-border services to Aberdeen and Inverness.

"We already face the end of services from Glasgow to King's Cross next year, and further cuts to cross-border services are unacceptable."

Another strand to the respect agenda is revealed. We are all in this together so people in Scotland can suffer.

I’m wondering if Sir Andrew has ever actually been on a train. If he had he would be well aware that this notion of a passenger friendly interchange is just totally mythical. When you have young kids and several heavy items of luggage getting off one train and trying to find another is a nightmare.

The fact of the matter is that the trains that run on the main line from London to Aberdeen date from 1976 and not a thing has been invested in the service since then. Now it’s getting difficult and costly to keep these antiques running, so rather than Scotland finally, at last get its share of the new trains we can just do without. And electrification north of Edinburgh, not a hope!

After all why would the Tories fund infrastructure in Scotland? We didn’t vote for them, we only pick up the cheque in the shape of all that lovely oil revenue that gets spent in England. So they can have their high speed electric link to Paris from London and Birmingham making journey times in England shorter but here in Scotland journey times will be going the other way. But we are all in this together!

Is Prince William with us in the "we are all in this together" syndrome?

The Sunday Times reports today that Prince William is to cost cash strapped North Wales constabulary an estimated (remember these royal expenses are not subject to FOI, for some reason) £1.4 million in extra protection costs as a result of his decision to live in an isolated cottage rather than on the RAF base where he is doing his flight training.

Incredibly this means that the savings forced on the force will be wiped out in a stroke. The North Wales force had been told that it would have to save £1.4 million as a result of government cutbacks. This entire saving is now going to be obliterated in employing a 15 strong unit of armed officers to protect William. A cost that need not accrue if he were to live on the well protected RAF base where he is doing his three year helicopter pilots course.

The reason for William’s decision is so that he can spend more time with his girlfriend, Kate Middleton and friends. Well that is nice. I guess the people of North Wales can just do without police for the duration of Wills stay.

St James’s Palace has said that it is not unusual for officers of William’s rank to live off base. What is unusual is that “normal” officers do not need a round the clock escort of 15 armed police. Nor are their expenses, paid for by the British taxpayer, exempt from Freedom of Information Legislation.

Of course William and his brother are very keen to display a veneer of being just normal lads. But from time to time that slips and we are all made painfully aware that we are not all in this together at all. You know the sort of thing: young role models dressing up as Nazis or assaulting journalist while pissed outside night clubs or borrowing a MOD Chinook to fly through one of the most heavily protected airspace corridors in the country to take you mates to a stag party. That sort of thing.

William don’t put yourself out one iota will you. The rest of the country is in a financial pickle but you just keep on milking the state for all you are worth.

Protecting Willie’s love nest in rural Wales? Good value for money? Hardly. Cheap at twice the price? Really?