Blogs

The government has spent an extra £3 billion of investment through the lottery and millions more from the taxpayer in an attempt to tackle obesity and encourage kids to take up sport since 1994.  The result?  Absolutely nothing.  There has not been a change in the number of people participating in sport in the past 14 years despite all this cash.  On top of this, of course, the 2012 Games, which are likely to cost £9.3 billion, will do nothing for participation if previous Olympics are anything to go by.  The government have literally taken billions and billions of pounds and poured it down

Here's a story that will make you wish you could go private.  Take a deep breath.

500 patients a week are given the wrong treatment by the NHS.  That is almost 25,000 occasions last year, leading to deaths, serious injury and long-term harm, official figures show.

"The reality on the ground is that there is a gloomy mood. There has been an awful lot of change in a short period. Staff feel overwhelmed by it.” New Health Secretary Alan Johnson Arthur Fonzarelli last week announcing the “once in a generation” NHS review.

Government

Indirectly, not intentionally, of course.

Mark Thompson today justified the BBC's licence fee on the basis that (in the words of the FT) "the quality of commercial broadcasters' news, current affairs and comedy output is declining". I agree (at least, that it isn't getting better). In fact, I have been saying that there is a case for supporting the BBC's news, current affairs, and innovative comedy for years.

But that could be achieved by funding BBC2, Radio 4, and the World Service, "tasked with the undemocratic job of producing high-quality, diverse, educational, public-service broadcasting", as I put it two years ago. At a fraction of the cost of the BBC's current £3bn.

You will notice that Mr Thompson did not try to make the same argument for soap operas and light entertainment. He did not say that commercial broadcasters are providing insufficient quality and choice in music radio and TV. He did not pretend that there is a shortage of sports (and particularly football) coverage in commercial circles. Because even a BBC executive would not have the balls to go out in public and try to make such a blatantly untrue argument.

It seems, then, that Mr Thompson has conceded the point, and that we can move on to discussing the details of the breakup. When even the Director-General of the BBC can see that 80% of its output is not justified by providing a necessary alternative to commercial services, it is time to discuss how, not whether, we are going to move that output properly into the commercial sector.

Government  

The usually decisive Picking Losers readers have been split by last week's poll.  Rather aptly really, given the fault lines running through the Tory party.  Maybe this is just their problem - there are just too many different types of Tory now.  Maybe bgprior's idea that the Tory party should split is the only solution.  Read the entry again if you get a chance - the option was simplified for the purposes of the poll, hence it may not have scored as highly as it might.

The public accounts committee has criticised the government for seriously underestimating the cost of the London 2012 Olympics.  They have said that better management of the construction project is required if the cost is not to spiral higher than £9.3bn. It also expresses concern about the legacy use of the Olympic Park venues in Stratford, east London, and the drain of National Lottery cash from other good causes.

I posted the other day criticising the government for setting a target for 50% of school leavers to head on to university. Not only does it dumb down the standards and achievements of the universities, but it simply isn't wanted by business. We are creating a generation of graduates qualified to do absolutely nothing. The Times today reports that there are twenty nine graduates for every degree-level job in the market. Proctor & Gamble claim they have 100 graduate applicants per job.

I love it when a story like this comes along. Partly because it really upsets all the enviro-scaremongerers who seem happier to hear that the world is doomed rather than hear some balance to the debate. It turns out that cows and sheep and doing more damage to the environment than 4x4s or "Chelsea Tractors". Actually, this isn't new news at all, but the green nutters wouldn't want anyone to know this, because Chelsea tractors are evil.

Government  

.... but why has it taken so long?

Having had a meeting today with civil servants at the "new" Department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (i.e. the DTI with a bit chopped off and a bit stuck on), it is clear that their position on all issues is now that they (or their consultants) can predict the outcome of future developments with such precision that no uncertainty or dispute need be entertained (nor, logically, need free markets be utilised). It seems to me that a good test of this position (and an original objective of this blog) would be to see how accurate their past assumptions had been. I therefore went to the DBERR website (the DTI site no longer being accessible) to have a look at their old reports and consultations.

It seems that they are less than keen for people to review their past performance. Their archive holds only a motley collection of seven consultations - four from 2003, and one each from 2005, 2006 and 2007. This is a tiny fraction of the DTI's output. I wonder why these particular consultations merited preservation for public access? Are they the ones they got right (to within a tolerable level of error)?

For the other consultations by the DTI (and other departments, presumably), we are advised to find hard copy at the British Library (not enormously accessible to the majority of the population). Their website is to be your guide, but the search-term "DTI reports" yields very little, and nothing relevant online. Following a few link trails didn't do any better. Let me know if you have any more joy.

The slate has been wiped clean, records expunged, the history books tippexed. It's almost as though Uncle Gordo didn't want people to look back at how New Labour had performed over the past ten years. A bit like Uncle Joe and the NKVD.

Government 

The Tory crackpot policy machine has been given another crank over the weekend - this time by someone called Iain Duncan-Smith (I hadn't heard of him either). The Tory's latest battle against society is the plight of binge drinking. The Tory’s social justice policy group, headed by this Iain Duncan Smith chap, will today recommend a sharp increase in alcohol prices to reduce consumption. That will go down well with the electorate, then. IDS said that there is “almost an alcohol epidemic in Britain, particularly amongst youngsters”. Almost?! That bad, eh?

What is it with our MPs? They are happy to impose laws on the rest of us, but seem to think that they are above actually abiding by them themselves. Take the smoking ban. I think you know where this is going... the 11.05 from Paddington to Plymouth last Friday morning to be precise. Good old Charles Kennedy - or “chat show Charlie” - was caught red handed having a cigarette on the First Great Western service. When I first heard this I thought poor guy - but good on him.

Government  

Paul Newman, an Islington Conservative, has admitted on his blog that Dave Cameron may not be being entirely frank with us. His response to my challenge that "You may buy the line that he can change the balance of the tax and welfare system to benefit married couples without disadvantaging unmarried couples" (based on DC's dance round the issue in his interview with Andrew Marr on Sunday AM) was:

"I do not.They will of course be relatively disadvantaged compared to the current position when they are absurdly favoured. How would you like him to put it. 'We're going to hand single mothers out to dry'. Be serious. Political language is artfully nuanced and you have to read the signs with some care."

What about the desirability, in my view, of "a politician who comes in talking about hard choices and being honest about (short-term) losers as well as winners":

"I think you entirely misunderstand the complexity of the relationship between words and the electorate. Possible losers set their antennae to detect any hints and these are in turn amplified by the opposition. Read the rhunes and he is offering a a softened Conservatism."

But, I believe, "we need a politician that is prepared to start being honest about that [i.e. the hard choices] to the public":

"How would you know when you see him. Isn`t this bordering on the childish ? I don`t wasnt to be rude but I think my mother would say( as she does) Oh for god`s sake their politicians ! Romantic would be a kinder way to describe your wishes."

To sum up: we, the electorate, couldn't tell an honest from a dishonest politician. It is childish (or romantic) to expect politicians to be honest, because that's just not how politicians are (for God's sake). What they are speaking is not normal English to be taken literally, but a political language whose symbols - words, signs (hieroglyphics?) or runes - provoke a complex reaction in the electorate, and which therefore need to be translated carefully by true believers to discover that it means what they want it to mean (e.g. softened Conservatism). The purpose of this language is to ensure that none of the electorate's antennae picks up the slightest signal that someone might lose out. That isn't going to give much of a mandate for reducing the size of government, nor to do much else for that matter, but never mind - it will get these cunning linguists elected to power, and that's the main thing.

Government

• The government has announced an extra £13.7m to help schools improve the behaviour of pupils. Children, schools and families secretary Ed Balls unveiled the funds, which will be delivered through the social and emotional aspects of learning (SEAL) programme over four years. The scheme, which is implemented in 60 per cent of primary schools, teaches pupils how to resolve conflict to help them develop socially and emotionally and deal with anger and anxiety. It encourages children to compete fairly and work cooperatively in order to boost employability skills, focusing on self-understanding, motivation and empathy.
• Government launches new plan to help parents by text messages and social networks. Parents will be able to receive text and instant messages to help them with their children, thanks to a £34m new initiative launched today by Children's and Families Minister Kevin Brennan. Using phone helplines and the internet, 'Parent Know-How' will signpost parents to information and support services. It will be targeted at people who may struggle to find the help they need - such as the parents of disabled children, fathers and those from disadvantaged communities.
• The union flag is flying over Downing Street after Gordon Brown scrapped a rule saying it could be flown only on certain days of the year. The prime minister said it will now be up to individual public offices when they fly Britain's national flag. He said: "When I came into government I realised that you could only fly the flag on 18 days in the year and I thought that was wrong."

Not everything on Picking Losers is about the bad side of government. For example, here is a heart warming tale of giving and kindness from the corporate hospitality boxes at Wimbledon. Spotted this week, lurking behind a bowl of strawberries and through the bubbling fizz of a champagne glass, was a Mr Jim Campbell. Jim who? You may ask. Jim Campbell. Mr Campbell is the civil servant in charge of regulating Britain's oil and gas industry, including responsibility for pollution and oil spills. So what? You may continue to ask.