It's election time! Watch as Cameron cosies up to the NHS

SOURCE GUARDIAN: GP access seven days a week by 2020 ‘guaranteed’ under Tories – Cameron

Access to a GP seven days a week by 2020 would be guaranteed under a Tory government, David Cameron will announce on Tuesday, backing the measure with a £100m fund. Labour has made a separate commitment to guarantee GP access within 48 hours. The prime minister’s announcement is designed to give a clear commitment that all NHS patients would be able to see their GP between 8am and 8pm, seven days a week. The government in April launched a seven-day-a-week-access pilot scheme costing £50m and covering 7.5 million patients in 1,195 practices. An additional £100m wave of access pilots is to be launched in 2015-16, culminating in a nationwide scheme costing £400m over the next five years. The promise, which is due to be announced by David Cameron in a round of broadcast interviews, is the Conservatives’ response to Ed Miliband’s claim that only Labour could save the NHS from privatisation and cuts. Cameron said: “People need to be able to see their GP at a time that suits them and their family. We will also support thousands more GP practices to stay open longer – giving millions of patients better access to their doctor. This is only possible because we have taken difficult decisions to reduce inefficient and ineffective spending elsewhere as part of our long-term economic plan. You cannot fund the NHS if you don’t have a healthy growing economy.”

SOURCE TELEGRAPH: GPs' leader says waiting times are a national disgrace

Increasingly unacceptable waits for an appointment risk illnesses not being detected rapidly enough and chances of treating them quickly being missed, said Dr Maureen Baker, chairman of the Royal College of GPs. She spoke out as NHS figures revealed that one in six patients had to wait at least a week before they see a GP or practice nurse. A total of 58.9 million patients in England will have waited for a consultation for a week or more by the end of 2014, up almost 50 per cent from the 40m who waited that long in 2013. In mid 2011 the proportion of patients waiting at least a week was 13 per cent, rising to 14 per cent by the end of 2013 then reached 15 per cent in mid 2013 and then 16 per cent in July, according to the GP patient surveys. “Even more worrying is that we have no way of finding out how many patients decide not to see treatment because they cannot get an appointment which means we might be missing opportunities of detecting illnesses at an early stage or preventing them happening,” said Dr Baker.

OUR RELATED STORIES:

Cuts to the NHS, Military, the Courts, Prisons, Benefits, Passports... Will fixing the chaos end up costing more than the cuts saved?

Graphs at a glance: The UK has the worst investment record of the 27 EU nations

So the Giant NHS Database Care.Data has been postponed. Is that a good thing?

Liebrary: PFI saves us virtually nothing, if you believe the NAO’s figures. If you believe the Commons Treasury Committee, it costs us a vast amount that nobody has yet quantified

Graphs at a glance: how cuts have slashed the number of available hospital beds since 1987

House of Lords refuses to block bill forcing NHS to tender services, and taking away their right to reject dodgy providers

Read More

Why is political advertising exempt from rules on lying?

The Office of Fair Trading (OFT) only considers lying an offense if it fools more than half the target market. 


If OFT rules were applied, all UK elections would be judged completely "fair". 

This is because no political party for decades has won the votes of more than a third of the electorate let alone half. Therefore it cannot be said more than half the target market had been 'fooled'.

Does anyone doubt that politicians lie? Politicians know we know they lie, not least because they themselves work so hard to point out each others' fibs. Labour snitches on the ConDem coalition and the SNP, the Torygraph snitches on Labour. The question isn't why they lie, the question is how they keep a straight face when they are doing it.

After all, they are all honourable (and right honourable) men and women, our MPs in Parliament. We know because they tell us so. So why do they use deceit and dissembling as a key tool in getting their jobs, and getting into power? The answer, of course, is because it works.

Taking a Conservative Party leaflet as an example, our guest author, Barrie Singleton (author of the Spoil Party Games blog), provides an insight below:

What can be done about lying political adverts?

It is illegal under the REPRESENTATION  OF THE PEOPLE ACT 1983 to induce a citizen to vote by threats.

115 Undue influence.

(1)A person shall be guilty of a corrupt practice if he is guilty of undue influence.

(2)A person shall be guilty of undue influence—

(a)if he, directly or indirectly, by himself or by any other person on his behalf, makes use of or threatens to make use of any force, violence or restraint, or inflicts or threatens to inflict, by himself or by any other person, any temporal or spiritual injury, damage, harm or loss upon or against any person in order to induce or compel that person to vote or refrain from voting, or on account of that person having voted or refrained from voting; or

(b)if, byabduction, duress or any fraudulent device or contrivance, he impedes or prevents [F1, or intends to impede or prevent,] the free exercise of the franchise of an elector or proxy for an elector, or so compels, induces or prevails upon [F2, or intends so to compel, induce or prevail upon,] an elector or proxy for an elector either to vote or to refrain from voting.

And yet much of election literature is about threats and menaces.This Tory pamphlet from the 2010 General Election provides a fine example of all of the above:

 [For a clearer image of the original flyer click on the small image to the right]

We will never know whether the Tory “fliar” made any great difference. What we do know is the Tories’ threats that the alternative to the Tories was Gordon Brown, and “A hung parliament would mean 5 more years of Gordon Brown” all proved to be false. When enough people didn't vote Tory in 2010, the alternative to the Tories turned out to be the Conservative-LibDem coalition.

Of course, political parties are pretty much exempt from regulation when it comes to telling porkie pies. The Advertising Standards Authority makes that very clear:

"For reasons of freedom of speech, we do not have remit over non-broadcast ads where the purpose of the ad is to persuade voters in a local, national or international electoral referendum. Complaints about political advertising should be made directly to the party responsible for that advertising."

The ASA clarifies further,

Political advertisements are banned from being broadcast on TV under the Communications Act 2003 (instead parties are given airtime via party political broadcasts which aren’t classed as advertising). Meanwhile, political ads in non-broadcast media (posters, newspapers etc) whose principal function is to influence voters in local, regional, national or international elections or referendums are exempt from the Advertising Code. We can’t, therefore, look into complaints that political ads are misleading, harmful or offensive.

The real reason the ASA declines to rule on political fibbing is election campaigns last just a few weeks. By the time a lie is told, a compaint is made, and the ASA gets around to making a judgement the new government will already be in power. Perhaps slipping in with a lubrication of lies. 

The last thing the ASA wants, and knowing the power of lobbyist the last thing we the electorate would want, is an organisation created to keep tabs on phoney cures for baldness bringing down a government.

Read More

Rip-off News round-up. Our pick of the last week's media (Thu 25th Sept)

Bank of England deputy asks US to fine banks less

The deputy governor of the Bank of England, Andrew Bailey, said: “I am trying to build capital in firms and it’s draining out the other side (in fines and penalties).” Bailey has called for better co-operation with US regulators over the scale of fines being levied on banks to ensure they do not weaken their financial position. Regulators in the US levy largr penalties than their UK counterparts, which on Tuesday fined Barclays £38m for failing to keep its clients’ money separate from the bank’s own assets – a record for that offence. When Barclays was fined £290m for rigging Libor in 2012, just £87.5m was levied by the UK regulator. Since then, HSBC has been fined £1.2bn for breaching money laundering rules in the US while French bank BNP Paribas has been fined £5bn for dealing with countries that were subject to sanctions. GUARDIAN

George Osborne left with little room for pre-election giveaways as government plunges deeper into the red

The Office for National Statistics said the public sector borrowed £11.6billion in August - up 6.1 per cent or £700million compared with the same month last year. It means the government has borrowed £45.4billion in the first five months of the fiscal year - some £2.6billion or 6.2 per cent more than between April and August last year.Analysts warned that the Chancellor will now struggle to hit his target of reducing the annual deficit to £95.5billion this year from around £100billion last year and the record £153billion racked up by Labour in 2009-10.The national debt hit £1.43trillion last month - a staggering £57,000 per household in Britain - despite four years of austerity. The parlous state of the public finances underlines the scale of the task facing whoever is in power after the general election in May. Adam Kirby, director of campaign group Balance the Books, said: ‘Miniscule in the shadow of debt, all our politicians are standing terrified. 'Progress is even slower than the worst pessimists of 2010 might have imagined. And as we approach a new election in 2015 there is little sign of the fundamental reform that’s needed to turn things around permanently - the deficit is still worsening.’ DAILY MAIL

Obama announces US crackdown on corporate inversion tax 'loophole'

“Inversions” involve a US firm merging with a firm in a country with a lower tax rate and have become popular over recent years. But President Barack Obama said new treasury department measures would make inversions less attractive. Those include making it more difficult for an inverted company to access money made outside the US. One way inverted companies do that is by making loans between foreign units and the US business. The benefits of so called hopscotch loans will be removed, according to today's announcement from the US Department of the Treasury. The treasury department is also strengthening the requirement that the US owners of the new inverted firm have to own less than 80% of the new entity. It says that will mean some inversion deals "no longer make economic sense". "We've recently seen a few large corporations announce plans to exploit this loophole, undercutting businesses that act responsibly and leaving the middle class to pay the bill, and I'm glad that [Treasury Secretary Jack Lew] is exploring additional actions to help reverse this trend," the president said in a statement. In a recent inversion deal, Burger King bought Canadian coffee and doughnut chain, Tim Hortons. Under the deal the new group moved its headquarters to Ontario, Canada, where the corporate tax rate is 26.5% - much less than the US rate of 35%. BBC NEWS

New borrowing through personal loans has outstripped repayments every month this year

Such a consistent rise in this type of borrowing has not been seen since 2007, the British Bankers' Association (BBA) said.The monthly data from the BBA shows that there was £175m in net borrowing in personal loans in August and £346m in net borrowing through credit cards. "I was particularly struck that after years of decline, demand for unsecured personal loans is rising quite strongly again," said David Dooks, statistics director at the BBA. "Those products are often used to finance bigger purchases such as cars or major home improvements - the sort of spending we often put off until we feel confident about our financial circumstances… When customers feel more optimistic about the economic outlook they are much more likely to take on new borrowing." However, the reverse is true for overdrafts, with more money (£286m in August ) repaid than taken out. The figures also show that the amount of new mortgage lending was 15% higher than a year earlier in August, with the number of mortgage approvals for house purchases up 5% year-on-year. But the BBA said this activity in the mortgage market was moderating compared with earlier in the year. BBC NEWS

Rents rising faster than inflation

The cost of renting a home in England and Wales rose faster than inflation in the year to August, climbing 2.4%, according to a survey. Rents were up by 1.1% last month compared with July, leaving the average rent at £761 a month, said the survey by LSL Property Services. The figures, based on LSL's own data, suggested seven out of 10 regions had seen rent rises over the year. This was led by a 3.5% increase in the south-west of England. The south-east of England saw rents rise by 3.4% compared with a year ago, and there was a 3.3% rise in the north-west of England, LSL said. Campbell Robb, chief executive of charity Shelter, said: "Successive governments' failure to build enough affordable homes and soaring house prices are leaving more and more families with no choice but to live their lives in expensive and unstable rented homes, never certain of what the future holds." Rents were lower in August compared with a year ago in the North East (down 1.6%), the West Midlands (down 0.4%), and Wales (down 0.1%), LSL said. The latest figures from the Office for National Statistics, published in July, said private rental prices paid by tenants in Britain rose by 1% in the 12 months to June. BBC NEWS

Energy bills are higher on dual-fuel deals

Price-comparison website, Make It Cheaper, compared households in all the different distribution regions used by energy companies. It found that in every case a household would be better off switching to one supplier for their gas and another for their electricity rather than taking both from one supplier. The savings averaged out at £55 a year per household, but in some areas are significantly higher. The cheapest dual-fuel deal for customers in the South Western Electricity Board region, for example, costs £1,053 a year but by switching to two separate suppliers householders in that region would pay £77 less, at £976 a year. The figures are based on the data Ofgem uses for the typical annual electricity and gas consumption of a household at 3,200kWh and 13,500kWh of gas respectively. Historically, householders have been better off opting for a dual-fuel deal, as the discount suppliers have given to customers for buying this way has usually made it cheaper than buying gas and electricity separately. However, the situation changed around five months ago, according to Make It Cheaper, when single-fuel deals became, on average, around 3% cheaper. The saving has increased since then to as much as 7.4% in some cases. This saving won’t be obvious to anyone looking on a price-comparison site, which, unless you specifically ask for the results for one type of energy, will present you with a dual-fuel saving. Instead, you need to click on what are, usually, tabs next to the dual-fuel result labelled “gas only” and “electricity only”. You then need to compare the results from both of these with the dual-fuel saving.The cheapest single and dual-fuel deals in nearly every case we looked at came from newcomers Extra Energy, Daligas and Zog Energy. The latter two entered the UK market last year, while Extra Energy, which currently leads the way on pricing, started in early 2014. Anyone looking to switch to one of these newer suppliers might sacrifice customer service for price, however. GUARDIAN

Google may face $6bn EU anti-trust fine

Google could face a “statement of objections”, the formal path towards a fine that could equate to 10% of the company’s global revenue, or about $6bn (£3.7bn). “Microsoft was investigated [by the EC] for 16 years, which is four times as much as the Google investigation has taken, and there are more problems with Google than there were with Microsoft,” said Joaquín Almunia, the EC’s competition commissioner.Google controls more than 90% of the online search market in Europe, substantially more than in the US where it was cleared by the US federal trade commission (FTC) in January 2013 of favouring its own searches to the detriment of consumers. The FTC said that any such favouring helped users. But companies including European publishers, a telecoms firm, an association of picture industries and photo libraries, and an advertising platform, had complained about Google taking advantage of its dominance to promote YouTube and the Google+ network. GUARDIAN

Watchdog clamps down on anti-competitive comparison websites in bid to cut drivers' premiums, but insurers say measures don't go far enough

The Competition and Markets Authority announced it will ban agreements between price comparison websites and insurers that prevent those insurers from selling their products more cheaply on rival sites.The measures are expected to shave around £20 off the cost of a typical policy.As part of its investigation, the watchdog also recommended the Financial Conduct Authority look at how insurers inform their customers about other products sold as 'add-ons'. It said the limited provision of information over add-on products makes it hard for motorists to compare the costs and benefits, with the sale of no-claims bonus protection 'giving rise to particular concerns'. But while these measures were largely welcomed by the motor insurance industry, many expressed disappointment at the CMA's apparent failure to tackle 'inefficiencies' in the way replacement vehicle costs are handled. Currently, the insurer of the not-at-fault driver sets the cost of a replacement car, which the at-fault driver’s insurer pays.John O’Roarke, managing director of LV= car insurance called the CMA investigation a 'wasted opportunity' to tackle what he called 'systemic problems' in the car insurance industry. He said: 'The current system whereby the insurer of the non-fault vehicle controls the cost that the at-fault insurer pays, is simply not sustainable and drives up the cost of car insurance.' DAILY MAIL

GlaxoSmithKline fined $490m by China for bribery

The record penalty follows allegations the drug giant paid out bribes to doctors and hospitals in order to have their products promoted. The court gave GSK's former head of Chinese operations, Mark Reilly, a suspended three-year prison sentence and he is set to be deported. Other GSK executives have also been given suspended jail sentences. The guilty verdict was delivered after a one-day trial at a court in Changsha, according to the Xinhua news agency. Chinese authorities first announced they were investigating GSK in July last year, in what has become the biggest corruption scandal to hit a foreign firm in years. The company was accused of having made an estimated $150m in illegal profits. GSK said it had "published a statement of apology to the Chinese government and its people". BBC NEWS

Barclays hit by new £38m fine over client assets

Barclays is to be fined £38m for breaching City rules requiring clients’ funds to be kept separate from its own assets, in what is expected to be the largest fine for such an offence. The £38m fine is the second punishment Barclays has received for breaches of client asset rules. The penalty, imposed by the Financial Conduct Authority, will be the latest setback for the bank in its attempt to clean up its reputation in the wake of the 2012 Libor rigging scandal. While this time frame predates the appointment of Antony Jenkins as chief executive, the latest punishment comes as he attempts to defend the bank against fraud charges in the US in relation to the sale of mortgage bonds and after a £26m fine in May for fixing the gold price. GUARDIAN

Read More

After the Scottish referendum: Will Westminster renege on its devolution pledges?

Fee and Chris try to guess what happens next...

SOURCE SKY NEWS: Scotland Devolution Pledge 'Non-Negotiable'
Scotland First Minister Alex Salmond has accused the No campaign of tricking voters into believing the promise of devolution. He said: "I suppose I feel sorry for those in the No side who were tricked by Westminster into believing there would be an immediate offer of extra powers, an explicit timescale, the vow that was given to Scotland obviously persuaded some people to vote No at the last minute, and now within 24 hours of the polls closing they start to tear up the commitments." But Better Together leader Alistair Darling says political leaders who row back on devolution pledges will "pay a heavy price". He said: "The agreement reached by the three parties, as far as I'm concerned, is non-negotiable... It was promised, it's got to be delivered, and anyone who welshes on that will pay a very heavy price for years to come." He insisted a pledge to devolve more powers to Scotland made before the independence referendum will be acted upon within the timetable. The pledge, to be signed by the Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrat leaders, would call on the Government to establish a command paper including the devolution proposals of all three parties by October 30. Draft clauses for a new Scotland Bill would then be ready by the end of January, with the legislation being delivered by whichever government comes into office at the General Election.

OUR RELATED STORIES:

Inequality: the UK has 9 of the 10 poorest regions in Northern Europe. But Inner London is the richest

Graphs at a glance: With highest pay and highest job growth is London sucking the life out of Britain?

Graphs at a glance: Britain is already a low-pay economy with falling average wages

Is your Cost of Living crisis over?! Average wages are still back where they were 10 years ago

Read More

Graphs at a glance: Middle-paying jobs have been disappearing for years. Is that why in spite of the economic recovery, wages are still stagnant?

It used to be the case that when unemployment fell wages rose. Bank of England figures show this has been true up to the last recession, but stopped being true since the recovery that started in 2013. According to Ben Broadbent, a deputy governor of the Bank of England, 

“average pay growth [in 2014] is almost 2% points – more than four standard deviations – weaker than the 1993-2012 regression line (Chart 10)."

Statistically “four standard deviations” means this 2% deficit is extremely unlikely to be due to random chance. As James Bond, had his civil service career taken him into the Office of National Statistics, would have put it “four standard deviations is enemy action”.

So what is happening? A report by the think tank Centre For Cities provides some insight. While the number of both high pay and low pay jobs has been increasing, the number of mid pay jobs has been falling. A trend that has existed for decades:

The increase in 'high pay' has been faster than the increase in 'low pay'. Which is good nationally, but is not much comfort for those shifting down into low pay jobs.

The impact of this is different in cities across the country. In some places 'mid pay' jobs are mainly being replaced by 'high pay', while in others the jobs tend are moving into the 'low pay' category:

The overall impact of this can be seen in the graph below by the Inequality Briefing think tank, who commented: 

"The economy has grown by almost 50% since 1994, while ‘GDP per head’ – the value of the UK economy divided by the number of people living in the UK – has increased by nearly 40%. 

But over the past two decades ‘median incomes’ (‘those who are exactly in the middle of the income distribution - they earn more than the poorest half of the population but less than the richest half) have only risen by 20% - and have fallen dramatically since 2009, despite the economic recovery. This suggests that as the UK gets richer, it is mainly people at the top who are benefiting."

The types of jobs in an economy change all the time. This is generally a good thing. But all sorts of people find themselves on much lower pay for reasons outside their control.  "Self service" technologies have cut swathes of jobs from supermarkets to libraries to highstreet banks. The newspaper CityAM reported that "most bank branches could close over the next 10 to 20 years". Newly created high-pay jobs requiring new high-value skills tend not to go to middle aged redundant bank staff.

The Welfare State aims to provide a decent standard of living for everyone. When a politician offers to sacrifice the welfare state in return for lower taxes, think hard before you vote for them. You may not need high quality free health, education etc now. But you, or your children, or other people whose mid-pay jobs have evaporated, may need them in the future.

 

Read More

Rip-off News round-up. Our pick of the last week's media (Thu 18th Sept)

G4S, Serco: Cancelling “guaranteed profits” probation contracts could cost taxpayers £300m-£400m

Taxpayers will face a £300m-£400m penalty if controversial probation privatisation contracts are cancelled after next May's general election under an "unprecedented" clause that guarantees bidders their expected profits over the 10-year life of the contract. Labour is already committed to unpicking the justice ministry contracts to outsource probation services but will not now be able to do so without incurring the multimillion pound bill because of "poison pill" clauses written in by Chris Grayling's department. The Ministry of Justice say they are only following Treasury guidance by including the clause, which raises the prospect that similar clauses are being included in other politically controversial contracts across Whitehall that are to be signed before next May's general election. Margaret Hodge, the chairman of the Commons public accounts committee, has asked the Whitehall spending watchdog, the National Audit Office, to challenge any politically contentious contracts that are signed in the dying months before the general election: "It is not value for money. It is unacceptable and must be challenged before the event." The disclosure comes as the two outsourcing firms at the centre of serious fraud inquiries, G4S and Serco, confirmed they had been granted new government work during a period when the justice secretary, Chris Grayling, had told MPs that contracts would not be awarded. The confirmation has led to claims that Grayling misled parliament. GUARDIAN

Southeastern handed four-year rail deal despite rating “worst” with passengers

Southeastern has been handed a new four-year deal to run commuter railways in London and Kent, despite having the most dissatisfied passengers of any train operator. The company, run by Govia – a joint venture of Go-Ahead and the SNCF-owned Keolis – was given a direct award without competition to continue services until June 2018. It is the seventh such deal after the West Coast franchising fiasco ripped up the government's timetable for reletting the railways. The Department for Transport said that the operator would be forced to improve services while its subsidy would be cut. But the deal was met with dismay by passenger groups and unions who described it as a "reward for failure". GUARDIAN

Academy schools caught making “questionable” payments to board members

A report commissioned by the cross-party Education Select Committee highlighted potential conflicts of interest where individuals on trust boards could benefit personally or through their companies from their position. One anonymous interviewee told the researchers about an academy “where the headteacher had spent £50,000 on a one-day training course run by their friend” – a decision which was not run past the governors. Another example cited in the report was that Academy Enterprise Trust, which runs 80 schools, has paid nearly £500,000 to private businesses owned by its trustees and executives over the past three years for services ranging from project management to HR consultancy. The report said a range of “questionable practices” by academies were being signed off because existing rules were not strong enough. In another academy, “the chair of governors had told all staff that if they discussed with students or used text books referencing abortion or contraception they would be dismissed”. The researchers’ report said: “The ability of the system to pick up on intangible conflicts that do not involve money seems almost non-existent.”INDEPENDENT

Tories charge £2,500 a head for access to ministers at party conference. Labour and LibDems are doing it too

The Conservatives are charging business executives and lobbyists £2,500 each for access to David Cameron, George Osborne and other ministers at their party conference in Birmingham this year. The paying guests will attend the conference's "business day", which will include lunch with the prime minister and dinner with the chancellor. They will also have a chance to talk to ministers about their specific concerns in "policy break-out" sessions. Companies sending representatives are able to avoid disclosing if they have bought a table because parties are allowed to class the cash as fees received as part of a commercial transaction, rather than a political donation. Political donations of more than £7,500 have to be reported to the Electoral Commission. The Tories are not the only party to sell access to their frontbench. Labour is also marketing a "business forum package" for its conference in Manchester that includes breakfast, lunch and a guaranteed place at its business reception for just under £1,300 a head. It also classifies the cash as a commercial transaction. The Liberal Democrats are selling tickets for their business day at £800 each and for their business dinner at £350. The party's conference website describes the event as "an excellent occasion for business leaders and public affairs executives to meet senior Liberal Democrats and discuss the current issues, challenges and opportunities facing British businesses today". GUARDIAN

Corporate tax dodging: Tougher international tax rules to be agreed by G20 countries

Bold updates to international tax rules designed to force some of the world's biggest multinationals – including Google, Apple, Amazon, Vodafone and GlaxoSmithKline – to contribute their fair share towards government budgets are to be agreed by G20 countries this weekend. Under draft rules published on Tuesday by tax experts from the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) many of the world's largest and best known corporations face being forced to rapidly dismantle their elaborate cross-border corporate structures. The moves by governments to corral companies back into a joined-up, modernised network of international tax treaties mark the halfway point in a two-year reform project begun by world leaders in Moscow last summer. If nerves hold among the 44 countries involved – which together represent 90% of the world's economy – the impact on corporate profits and treasury receipts could be significant in many economies, large and small. Meanwhile, countries that have courted multinationals with tax-friendly regimes – Bermuda, Ireland and Luxembourg among them – could suffer an investment exodus. Existing international tax rules, laid down in a network of about 3,000 bilateral tax treaties, have for decades been straining to keep up with innovations in technology and tax avoidance. The OECD has said the G20 reform project is urgently required "to prevent the existing consensus-based international tax framework from unravelling". GUARDIAN

An economy built on debt? Bank of England confirms high levels of mortgage debt made the recession worse

The UK's household debt to income ratio rose from around 100 per cent in 1999 to a peak of 160 per cent in 2008. Mortgage debt accounts for around 80 per cent of total household debt, and explains most of the increase in the debt to income ratio, the Bank said. The rapid rise in mortgage debt prior to the credit crunch had inflated household spending in general, boosting growth, but much of this was reversed when the crisis hit. The Bank said: 'In the second half of the 1990s, households with mortgage debt to income ratios greater than two appear to have increased the share of their income spent on non-housing consumption by more than mortgagors with lower debt to income ratios. But these higher debt mortgagors subsequently made larger-than-average reductions in spending relative to income after the financial crisis. In June, the Bank introduced measures to designed to prevent dangerously high levels of indebtedness. Mortgage lenders now have to be satisfied that borrowers would be able to meet repayments if the Bank Rate were to rise 3 percentage points. Lenders must also limit the proportion of mortgages of 4.5 times income and above to no more than 15 per cent of new loans. These measures could be tightened further if the Bank becomes more worried about household debt. DAILY MAIL

Water firms deluged with 300 complaints every day - and one in five households can't afford their bill

As many as 123,218 written complaints were received in the year to April 1, and more than half were about billing and charges, the Consumer Council for Water said. Complaints fell by 18 per cent compared to the previous year – and have now fallen for six consecutive years. But water firms were warned the cost of bills faced by hard-pressed households is still a crucial factor despite improvements. As many as one in five customers cannot afford their water bill, the study found. It warned that water companies and the regulator Ofwat must deliver prices that customers can afford and find acceptable or 'risk a backlash from struggling households'. Southern Water and South East Water were singled out for being the two worst performing companies when complaints are measure per 10,000 connected properties. Wessex Water, Portsmouth Water and Cambridge Water were hailed as the industry's best performers. DAILY MAIL

Fraudulent car insurance claims running at 500 a day

The Association of British Insurers (ABI) revealed that in 2013, UK insurers detected 180,675 attempted fraudulent applications for motor insurance. These cases involve motorists lying about, or knowingly failing to disclose, important information such as previous claims or unspent motoring convictions when asked. A combination of factors including the challenging economic climate, increases in the costs associated with owning and running a car, the fact that many people see it as a victimless crime and a lack of effective deterrents are all seen as helping to drive up the number of cases of insurance fraud. In turn, fraudulent applications and claims push up the cost of premiums for the majority of honest consumers, according to the industry. It is said that more than £2.1bn of undetected insurance fraud is committed every year. Examples of fraudulent applications that have been uncovered include: A driver with a poor credit rating who tried to use an alias to buy motor cover; An applicant who failed to disclose four previous claims and an unspent motoring conviction which had led to a three-year prison sentence;  A motorist who attempted to alter his driving licence to remove the driving convictions. An ABI spokesman said initiatives such as the Insurance Fraud Register – the first industry-wide database of known insurance fraudsters, which went live at the end of 2013 – and the soon-to-be-available MyLicence initiative, which is aimed at tackling the non-disclosure of motoring offences, would make it harder for people to use deception to try to obtain cheaper motor cover. GUARDIAN

Read More

The BBC’s Nick Robinson v Alex Salmond: where will corporation tax be paid? Both are wrong, surely?!

SOURCE TELEGRAPH: Alex Salmond goes to war with BBC over RBS 'leak'

An irate Alex Salmond today declared war on the BBC after the Corporation disclosed Royal Bank of Scotland’s decision to move its headquarters to England if there is a Yes vote. The First Minister dismissed the economic significance of announcements by RBS, Lloyds Banking Group, Tesco Bank, TSB and Clydesdale Bank to re-domicile south of the Border, saying they only meant moving “brass plates” instead of jobs. Mr Salmond directed a tirade at Nick Robinson, the BBC’s political editor, who repeatedly challenged him to answer questions about the economic impact of RBS’s decision. Mr Salmond said the change would not affect a separate Scotland’s corporation tax receipts, referring to a letter to staff by Ross McEwan, the RBS chief executive, saying jobs and operations would not move.

SOURCE DAILY RECORD: Alex Salmond clashes with BBC political editor Nick Robinson as he is asked about the economic dangers of independence

RATTLED Alex Salmond clashed angrily with TV’s Nick Robinson as he tried to shrug off dire warnings about the economic dangers of independence. Tempers flared as the BBC’s political editor raised Royal Bank of Scotland’s contingency plan to move its HQ to London with Salmond at his curtain call with world’s media. To applause from his Nationalist aides, the First Minister laid into Robinson. He insisted RBS was just looking to move its “brass plate” and that any change of HQ would not have any impact on jobs or taxes. And Salmond tried to turn the tables on Robinson by brandishing a print out of a BBC website report that quoted Treasury sources revealing that RBS could move. The SNP chief demanded a leak inquiry. Briefing “market sensitive information” broke basic Treasury rules and the RBS share price had changed overnight as a result, he said.

OUR RELATED STORIES:

Global corporate and super-rich tax dodging in numbers (and a cool animation)

It's NOT good capitalism when one company pays its taxes and its rival dodges them

Pirate enterprise: Britain controls 9 overseas tax havens

Graphs at a glance: 9,836 prosecutions for benefit fraud v 617 for tax fraud. Yet benefit fraud costs us a fraction of tax fraud

Financial services corporation tax only contributes only 2% of UK tax revenues

Read how companies use "inter-country" ruses to dodge tax

Read More

Graphs at a glance: How policy makers use averages to rip-off half the population

In an earlier post we pointed out that London is sucking the life out of the UK. Were we being fair?

 

It is certainly true that London has a greatly disproportionate share of the UK's economic activity.

One consequence is things in London cost more, from the price of a pint to the price of a house. 

So are people in London paid more than in the rest of the UK so they can afford higher "London Prices"?

Well, yes and no.

On average Londoners are paid more: 15% more than the UK average.  

But take a closer look, and the story is different.

The wealthiest fifth of Londoners are paid much more: 30% more than wealthiest fifth in the UK as a whole.

But the poorest fifth of Londoners don't get hardly anything extra: just 4% more than the poorest fifth in the UK as a whole.

All the above figures use the 'median' as the average value of incomes. The 'median' is the salary where 50% of the population is paid more, and 50% is paid less. 

The thing about this 'median' measure of average is you can raise the median while leaving half the population behind.

When a politician says "We will be better off if you do what I say", take a close look to see whether you are included in the "we". In the words of the old song:

It's the same the whole world over,
It's the poor wot gets the blame,
It's the rich wot gets the pleasure,
Ain't it a bloomin shame?

 

[Wage figures from Department of Works and Pensions]

Read More

Rip-off News round-up. Our pick of the last week's media (Thu 11th Sept)

MPs' pay rise of 9% 'should go ahead'

Marcial Boo, chief executive of the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority (Ipsa), said MPs did an important job and should not be paid a "miserly amount". Their pay will go up from £67,000 to £74,000 under Ipsa's plan. The PM, Nick Clegg and Ed Miliband called the hike unacceptable when it was proposed at the end of last year. The Conservative, Liberal Democrat and Labour party leaders argued it would be wrong when public sector pay rises were capped at 1%. But speaking to the Sunday Telegraph in his first interview since taking on the job, Mr Boo said a review of evidence had shown that economic forecasts were improving while MPs' salaries had "fallen behind" others working in comparable public sector roles. The proposed £74,000 figure was now seen by some as being "at the low end", he claimed, adding that pay needed to be fair to attract good candidates. The one-off increase is part of a package that will see MPs pay more into their pensions, as well as the end of resettlement payments. Ipsa says that overall the reforms will not cost taxpayers any more than the present scheme. BBC NEWS

Bedroom tax bill splits coalition as Lib-Lab pact forces second reading

David Cameron's authority received a damaging blow on Friday when a Liberal Democrat-sponsored bill aimed at modifying the bedroom tax was voted through to the next stage in parliament after dozens of Tory MPs ignored whips' demands to vote with the government. Labour MPs joined with the Tories' coalition partners to send the affordable homes bill, sponsored by Andrew George MP, through to a second reading vote by 306 to 231. Seventy Conservative MPs ignored a three line whip and stayed away from Westminister. Angie Bray, Tory MP for Ealing Central and Acton, voted against her party. Usually, the government can rely on a majority of more than 60. Social housing tenants judged to have too much living space have had their housing benefit cut since 1 April 2013, under a proposal known as the spare room subsidy by the government, but widely known as the bedroom tax. However, a shortage of smaller available homes has meant large numbers have been unable to move to cheaper accommodation yet still suffered the cut. If passed, the new bill would mean people who cannot be found a smaller home would be exempt from the cut in housing benefit. Disabled people who need a spare bedroom or who have had their homes adapted would be exempt. GUARDIAN

House builder Barratt doubles annual profits on back of Help to Buy scheme

The chief executive, Mark Clare, said: "Following the launch of Help to Buy, sales rates over the summer period last year were exceptionally strong. This year we have seen a return to more normal seasonal trends." The mortgage-subsidy scheme has given housebuilders a huge boost since it was introduced in April 2013. Barratt's profits soared to £390.6m in the year to 30 June. The private average selling price climbed 12.9% to £241,600, partly reflecting Barratt's move away from building flats to larger family homes since the downturn. The company completed 14,838 houses – 8.6% more than in the previous year (13,600). The builder expects to construct 15,700 homes in the current year, a slightly slower rate of increase. The Help to Buy scheme accounted for 30% of Barratt's sales last year, and 35% for Redrow, another major housebuilder. Help to Buy, which was due to end in 2016, has been extended to 2020. GUARDIAN

Sports Direct faces action from zero-hours staff over bonus scheme

Sports Direct, the retailer founded by billionaire Mike Ashley, is facing legal action from 250 workers excluded from a multimillion-pound bonus scheme because they were on zero-hours contracts. Lawyers acting for the part-time staff are preparing to file multiple claims for breach of contract at the high court. The employees were excluded from a bonus scheme that paid out about £160m worth of shares to 2,000 "permanent" workers in 2013. The claims, which have been gathered in partnership with workers' rights group Pay Justice, could amount to a £4m-plus bill for Sports Direct. The retailer has been widely criticised for employing nearly 90% of its staff on zero-hours contracts, which do not guarantee a minimum number of working hours a week and also fail to provide for annual leave and sick pay. Elizabeth George of law firm Leigh Day, which will lead the claims, said: "These are the staff whose hard work over many years has brought about the record profits that funded the bonus awards in the first place. It's plainly unfair that they should have missed out... We believe that they had a contractual right to the bonus because regardless of the zero-hours label that the company has given their contracts, they were all permanent employees of the company for the necessary number of years." Many of those taking part in the action continue to be employed by Sports Direct. Pay Justice is encouraging any other staff who believe they might be eligible to make contact via its website. GUARDIAN

Public may end up paying £11bn for obsolete smart meters that save little, MPs warn

The government's £11bn roll-out of smart gas and electricity meters will cost every home about £215 over the next 15 years. Householders would save an average of just 2% on the typical annual bill of £1,328 until 2020, rising to 3% (£43 a year) by 2030, the influential public accounts select committee said. The new in-home displays are designed to reduce consumer bills, enable faster, easier switching of suppliers, and give households control at the touch of a button. The mass roll-out of smart meters –already delayed – is due to start late next year and suppliers must commit to taking reasonable steps to have them in all UK households and small businesses by the end of 2020. But suppliers, rather than households, will gain most from the programme, as they will no longer have to absorb the costs of inspecting old analogue meters. Households, meanwhile, will see their annual bills rise further to pay for the installation. The Commons committee also warned that technology was advancing so rapidly that some aspects of the smart meter programme could be out of date by the time it is rolled out – so consumers could be receiving the information for free on their smartphones while still having to pay for a redundant meter. GUARDIAN

Energy firms to refund £153m to three million households

On average, customers are owed around £50 each. Typically that money got left behind when they switched supplier. Ofgem warned the companies that unless they make good progress with refunds, they will face enforcement action. Over the last six years the large energy firms have accumulated £153m, which remains to be claimed by customers. Often that is because customers have changed supplier, or moved home, and not left a forwarding address. If the money is unclaimed after two years, it will be used to help vulnerable customers. However, customers have no limit on when they need to claim by. Any valid claim will always be refunded, however old it may be. The regulator warned the firms that they not only have to make progress in getting the money returned, but they must stop such build-ups in the future. The big six are: British Gas, EDF, SSE, Scottish and Southern, E.on and Npower. BBC NEWS

The great Isa rip-off: Prudent savers moving from shares to cash earn pitiful interest and are hit with sky-high fees

Britain’s biggest investment names are behind an Isa rip-off that penalises customers who want to protect their nest eggs by moving them into cash. These careful investors are being offered derisory - or no - interest on their savings, forced to pay fees for cashing in their investment and face sky-high charges to move to another company. At best they get 0.1 per cent - or £5 interest a year on £5,000. On a bog standard easy-access cash Isa on the High Street, you can get more than 15 times extra - earning £77.50. It’s time for big names, which include the banks Barclays and Halifax, broker Hargreaves Lansdown and investment giant Fidelity to do better by their customers. These rip-offs are against the spirit of new Isa rules introduced in July, which allow everyone to save up to £15,000 a year tax-free. The creation of the Super Isa was one of the flagship policies unveiled by Chancellor George Osborne in his last Budget. He also changed the rules so savers could move easily between cash and shares. But the dream that this would become a flexible and simple incentive for people to save is being hampered by the fees and rates being offered. Since they were launched 15 years ago, Isas have become wildly popular - more than 24million people hold money in cash or shares. DAILY MAIL

Read More