2013-05-23T23:03:31-04:00 Leanne Wood http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/author/index.php?author=leanne-wood Copyright 2008, HuffingtonPost.com, Inc. HuffingtonPost Blogger Feed for Leanne Wood Good old fashioned elbow grease. tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2551732 2013-01-27T19:00:00-05:00 2013-03-29T05:12:01-04:00

Leanne Wood http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leanne-wood/
There is obviously an irony, as our Scottish cousins have pointed out, in a prime minister who lambasted the First Minister of Scotland for the economic uncertainty created by delaying a Scottish in/out referendum for two years now delaying a British in/out plebiscite by five. The refusal to place a reformed British Union on the ballot paper is in marked contrast to Cameron's insistence on what amounts, in European terms, to a British version of devo-max also speaks volumes. Angela Merkel it seems is much more sensitive to the views of British voters than Cameron is to the Scots.

'Better Together' and 'Better Off Out' are obviously uneasy bedfellows as slogans go, but this reveals a hidden contradiction that is driving the tectonic shifts in politics in these islands. When the question of EU membership is posed in terms of the "national interest" it becomes blindingly obvious - we are not one nation, we are four. If the political class in England, egged on by the red-tops, wants to embrace some fading Atlanticist future, then as a democrat, despite my deep misgivings, I am forced to say good luck. But Wales - where 8% of businesses are still in agriculture, where manufacturing remains a potent force, and where we are net beneficiaries to the extent of £150 per family each year, not net contributors to the EU - things look markedly different.

The immediate effects of an EU exit for us could be the mass exodus of jobs, from car manufacturers, for example, like Ford and Toyota and the trans-European aerospace giant Airbus. The dismantling of the admittedly imperfect Common Agricultural Policy - seen universally as a sop to the French farming lobby - will be felt the keenest by Welsh upland farmers. The loss of European Structural Funds would be a particularly bitter blow having been the only game in town for the regeneration of our former industrial heartland since Thatcher destroyed the last vestiges of British regional policy. European social provisions give Welsh working people some security which could totally disappear under right wing governments at Westminster. Recent UK governments have allowed Welsh average income levels to drop to the bottom of the UK league table. Losing European safeguards will only make things worse, particularly with an England increasingly centred on the global city-state of London.

In renegotiating the relationship of the UK as a multi-national state with the European Union each of the constituent countries has different, and sometimes conflicting, national interests. The logical consequence of this is clear: each country needs to play its full part in this process and there should be Welsh Government representatives in the UK negotiating team on an equal basis. The 'Balance of Competencies' review externally - between the EU and the UK - needs to be run in parallel with an identical 'Balance of Competencies' review between Westminster and the devolved parliaments. If powers are to be repatriated, there should be specific attention as to which parliament takes up those repatriated powers, and not the automatic default that everything goes to Westminster. For example on social measures Wales should be should allowed to 'opt-in' even if England chooses not to do so.

The same principle applies to the referendum itself. The referendum results should be published respectively for England, Wales, northern Ireland and for Scotland if it's still part of the UK. Unlike Wales, Scotland does of course have the choice to avoid being dragged to the exit door of the EU if it decides to vote Yes to independence in their referendum next year. Publishing the EU referendum results respectively for each nation will encourage the UK negotiating team to take full note of the needs and wishes of the smaller nations during the negotiating process. An English vote for exit should not - by dint of sheer numbers - be able to trump a desire in Wales to stay in.

For the UK to leave the EU - which we don't wish to see - it should only be on the basis of consensus between the nations of these islands. The right-wing press, of course, may ask why a nation of 3million should dictate the future for a population 20 times the size. Yet Euro-sceptic journalists were quick to praise 'plucky' Ireland only a few years ago in stalling the Lisbon Treaty for a continent of 300million. In Europe and Britain, if we are to accept the line from London that the UK is a political union of equals then the UK has to accept that it can only move so far and so fast as is agreed by all of its members. Isn't that the very essence of subsidiarity?

The arguments for staying part of the EU - certainly with steps to make it more efficient and more responsive to the diverse needs of European regions - are more clear-cut here in Wales than as seen in England. On balance we in Wales would probably prefer to stay put.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2013:/theblog//3.2401150 2013-01-03T19:00:00-05:00 2013-03-05T05:12:01-05:00

Leanne Wood http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leanne-wood/
While the office parties and last minute shopping were going on around them, there was a visible increase in the number of people of all ages sleeping rough and looking for warmth and shelter.

In just one year there has been a 27% increase in Wales in the numbers of those reporting themselves homeless to their local authorities, while the Cardiff food bank alone distributed 2.5 tonnes of food in one week leading up to Christmas. They also claimed to be feeding 70% more people than this time last year.

These increases have come about because of the loss of safety nets in our welfare system that used to protect those at the bottom of the pile, such as a lack of suitable housing and inability to pay rents in the private sector.

The situation is only going to worsen with council tax benefit and welfare benefit changes hitting more families this spring. Some experts estimate that only 20% of the cuts have so far taken place, with the most significant changes yet to come.

The cumulative effect of removing support services - whether financial or otherwise - from the same groups of people who are already in most need could lead to a 'perfect storm' situation as central government cuts the welfare bill and local government cut their services - forcing people onto the streets for the greater goal of reducing the deficit, like some kind of Kafka-esque dystopia which sadly is not made up.

That is what makes the case of UBS' recent £160m fine by the Financial Services Authority (FSA) so galling. It was, effectively, a large slap on the wrist. Barclays, a more household name and a high street bank, copped the brunt of public anger over its attempts to rig the inter-bank LIBOR rating, as we imagined their champagne swilling smugness. But UBS paid out hard cash to deliberately cheat the system.

The punishment must fit the crime. In the past, fines levied by the FSA upon those they monitor went back into the pot, covering the levies paid by other FSA member organisations. Effectively a bad bank given a fine would subsidise those who were acting within the guidelines. But such an approach assumes that there are no general misdemeanours, no cartel-like behaviour, no responsibility to the outside world.

In the case of LIBOR rate manipulation it is difficult to establish precisely who in the general public won and lost - some people might have had better mortgage rates than otherwise, while others might have had worse. But the principle is clear - these banks were moving the system in their direction, for their benefit.

The £160m from UBS is now going to go to the Treasury where, according to a spokesperson, "fines go into the Government's general exchequer fund to be used according to priorities set out in the last Spending Review in 2010."

But there is one place where that money should be going. It should be going to the homeless charities and the foodbanks who are picking up the pieces from the financial crisis - a crisis caused by the banks and exacerbated by the economic position of the UK's major political parties, who all called for major cuts in the 2010 General Election.

The UK government's rhetoric on the Big Society has gone very quiet recently. But homeless charities, such as the Wallich, and food banks from the Trussell Trust, are among those for whom the Big Society has been a 'success', as the UK government create new 'clients' for them and volunteers help out.

Those organisations need the money to pick up the people whose lives were damaged first of all by the banking crisis and then forced into an even worse situation by swingeing and insensitive government cuts.

Telling us that the deficit is the priority when families are homeless and starving shows a government astonishingly out of touch. It needs to back its early promises, and understand that redistributing money to those that need it from those who don't deserve it (some might even say from perpetrator to victim, in a roundabout way) will demonstrate that this we really are all in this together, and that it isn't redundant, dogmatic ideology that is providing the impetus.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2165826 2012-11-21T19:00:00-05:00 2013-01-21T05:12:01-05:00

Leanne Wood http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leanne-wood/ "A great vampire squid wrapped around the face of humanity, relentlessly jamming its blood funnel into anything that smells like money."

Journalist Matt Taibbi's memorable description of Goldman Sachs in his 2007 Rolling Stone profile remains one of the most abiding and resonant descriptions of greed in this age of financial crisis, not least because each month - sometimes each week - brings fresh stories of jaw-dropping avarice among the institutions of Wall Street and the City.

Each one brings new outrage, not just because the taxpayer is to all intents and purpose the lender of last resort. We are also the ones being financially hurt and there seems to be little that government and legislation can do. In effect, we've had our clothes taken from us by the very people that caused winter - and could do so again. It is the very definition of moral hazard and it is our vulnerability to it that breeds anger.

It seems that these Teflon Dons of the financial markets can't even be properly prosecuted when they do break the law. They are left free to launder money for drugs cartels, terrorist organisations and so-called 'rogue states'. In 2010, some two years after the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers, some of the biggest financial names in the world - Citi, Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Bank of America - were cited for repeat violations of defrauding clients and markets.

In recent months, there have been new allegations against some of our biggest companies, this time involving market rigging. In June, Barclays was fined £290m for deliberately distorting the LIBOR rate used as a base rate for a range of financial transaction. While the fine sounds huge, it should be remembered that Barclays announced underlying, pre-tax profits of £4.2bn for the first half of 2012 (an increase of 13% on the same period last year) and has also had to set aside £300m for mis-selling PPI. Several other banks remain under investigation by authorities in the UK, EU and US, and presumably await a similar fate should it be shown they too were complicit.

And just last week, Seth Freedman, who works for ICIS Heren, a gas price benchmarker, reported suspect trading on 28 September, the end of the gas industry's financial year and the date used to set prices for the forthcoming period. His allegations of inflated prices are now being investigated by the Financial Services Authority and Ofgem.

Leaving aside the alleged and unresolved illegalities, what we are witnessing is an ongoing transfer of wealth upwards, often from those who cannot afford it to those who do not deserve it. It cannot go on forever, and steps need to be taken now to stop this flow.

In this, the Welsh Government can and should lead. It could and should coordinate concerted legal action by the Welsh public sector against the banks and energy companies, to recoup financial losses incurred through market manipulation. If done successfully, it could pave the way for successful action by Welsh consumers and a playing field levelled to the benefit of customers.

At present, any fine paid as punishment for market rigging does not benefit the taxpayer or the consumer. Barclays' fine was paid to the Financial Services Authority, which is funded by the financial services sector through a levy. The monies from the fine will be used to lower the levy for next year, so Barclays will recoup part of what it has paid. No benefit will accrue directly to those affected by Barclays' action. Similarly, energy minister Ed Davey has already confirmed to MPs that any fines resulting as a consequence of Mr Freedman's allegations will be paid to the energy regulator Ofgem and not to energy consumers, as suggested changes to this process won't be introduced in time.

Welsh public bodies could have lost money through LIBOR misreporting in a number of ways, according to public services law experts Bevan Brittan:

"Financial swaps at the close of many infrastructure deals will be benchmarked on LIBOR. Many local authorities will have become involved in PFI or other funding arrangements. When the financial swap was made, it is likely that it will have been indexed to the LIBOR, thus potentially suffering an indirect loss. Many local authorities have short-term cash balances which they will lend to banks and other financial institutions, sometimes just overnight. The interest rates for such short term lending are normally influenced by LIBOR."

Losses to individual consumers through rate-rigging would come in two basic categories:
• Losses by borrowers: some mortgages are directly linked to LIBOR, such as buy-to-let or poor credit history loans, while short-term fixed rate loans are also influenced by LIBOR. These losses would have been incurred during periods when banks pushed rates higher than they need have been;
• Losses by investors: when the banks pushed rates down as they did in the aftermath of the crisis then savers and investors would have received lower returns.

Losses from energy market manipulations would come in the form of artificially inflated bills. Providers are already being accused of adding an additional £753 million to winter fuel bills in recent weeks, with an unprecedented one-in-four households put into fuel poverty through spending over 10% of their income on fuel. In Wales the figures are starker again with an estimated one in three households in fuel poverty according to Consumer Focus Wales. In 'off-gas' regions, this figure is higher again with an estimated two-fifths of Welsh households in fuel poverty. And Barclays has already been fined for electricity market manipulation this year in the US.

In the United States, the City of Baltimore has been leading a class action against sixteen US and UK banks since June 2011 - preceding the Barclays settlement and in spite of the fact that the investigation into the remaining banks is continuing.

Class action is not so prevalent in the England and Wales legal system but there are notable examples. They were used, for example, in the successful NACODS union compensation cases, contested by the then Westminster Labour Government, for former colliery workers with Vibration White Finger in 1997 and for those with chest disease in 1998. Just last month NACODS won a case for compensation taken out on behalf of former workers of Phurnacite plant at Abercwmboi, Rhondda Cynon Taf. So-called Group Litigation Orders are made in these cases where plaintiffs opt in to a register to record claims. Since group litigants are liable to pay opposing costs it is unlikely that ordinary members of the public will want to bring test cases. But successful litigation by the Welsh public sector will set a precedent for further action on their behalf.

It's an idea that deserves further exploration by the Welsh Government and its civil servants. For decades, we have been told that competitiveness among our utilities is crucial (and banking is a utility), in order to benefit us as consumers. The past few years have shown this to be patently not the case. We have witnessed the amalgamation and growth of an ever-decreasing number of companies and suppliers who are too powerful to be anything but indifferent to our concerns and calls from politicians - and now it is being suggested that they are prepared to collude illegally to rinse us for more money.

In effect, we have again what Margaret Thatcher and her neoliberal colleagues sought to reform, only with a far higher cost to the customer. If this Welsh Government is serious about working in the interests of people living here, it needs to explore new ideas to keep this unpleasant breed of capitalism from our doors.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.2082456 2012-11-07T19:00:00-05:00 2013-01-07T05:12:01-05:00

Leanne Wood http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leanne-wood/
The horrors of war are not just confined to the history books and the stories of older generations. In recent years, Welsh soldiers fighting in Afghanistan and Iraq have also experienced those horrors. They have seen friends and comrades killed and maimed in battle. They have experienced being away from loved ones and of not seeing their children growing up. And the horrors need not leave visible scars and visible wounds either. Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD) can be the lifelong result of horrific war experiences and it can be as debilitating as any physical disability. The same applies to other co-morbid conditions such as TBI (Traumatic Brain Injury), depression and anxiety-related disorders.

Wales has over a quarter of a million armed forces veterans - a disproportionate number of our population compared to the other nations of the UK - and cases of PTSD are rising and will continue to rise. Over the past decade many will have seen active service in Iraq and Afghanistan. Rest periods between tours have become shorter and the increase in stress and pressure on servicemen and their families has had a devastating effect. We know that veterans are facing difficulties in re-adjusting to civilian life and are more likely to face homelessness, mental health problems, substance misuse, and in some cases may end up the criminal justice system. The National Association of Probation Officers (Napo) produced figures in 2009 that suggested that one in ten prisoners once served in the armed forces. These figures, Napo said, were up by almost a third in five years.

It should be a given that a country looks after those who fought for it in a war. However the treatment of our veterans shows that often doesn't happen. Soldiers tell us they feel abandoned once they are discharged; forced into the bureaucratic minefield of a benefits system, work capability tests that fail to treat PTSD as a disability, and into a health and social care system that fails to provide adequate treatment and support. Instead of ensuring good care for soldiers post discharge, the Ministry of Defence (MOD) is content to leave the care of veterans in the hands of charities - often small charities run by dedicated volunteers. More than two years ago I called on the first minister to make representations to the MOD, asking them to fulfil their obligations to armed service veterans in Wales by providing "the full psychological and practical support that they need."

Healing the Wounds is an example of one such charity. Largely operating in the valleys and area around Bridgend, it provides counselling and support to veterans suffering PTSD. However it has struggled for funds throughout its existence, with volunteers raising funds all over Wales to ensure their work could carry on. There are other small charities like this throughout Wales, operating on a shoestring. Far more help and support could be provided to these charities and the PTSD support groups like the one I visited in the Rhondda earlier this year. I will be paying a visit to the treatment centre operated by Healing the Wounds in Porthcawl this Friday. I will be speaking to veterans affected by PTSD and listening to what they want. The Party of Wales has already made a good start. In Westminster Elfyn Llwyd MP started a campaign to improve the treatment of veterans, which led to the MOD accepting the recommendations of an all-party group he chaired. Only this week, Elfyn also gave evidence to the Welsh Affairs Select Committee investigation on veterans in Wales.

We need to do far more in identifying problems earlier such as ensuring mandatory mental health assessments as part of the discharge process and funding specialist support workers for veterans. They deserve better than relying on volunteers shaking buckets in Cardiff Airport at 5am.]]> tag:www.huffingtonpost.com,2012:/theblog//3.1922754 2012-09-30T19:00:00-04:00 2012-11-30T05:12:02-05:00

Leanne Wood http://www.huffingtonpost.com/leanne-wood/
People in Wales are particularly feeling the pinch. Unemployment is higher than the UK average and our latest Gross Value Added (GVA) figures show that the value of goods and services produced in Wales are a mere 74% of the UK average. The cull of the public sector has, and will continue to, hit us especially hard since it employs a higher proportion of our workforce than in England or Scotland.

There can be little doubt that the Welsh economy is weak and needs urgent attention. My party, Plaid Cymru, will continue to call for the devolution of borrowing powers and responsibility over macro-economic levers to turn things around. In the meantime, we have called for a re-think of the one very powerful tool at our disposal; public procurement. In order to revitalise the Welsh jobs market, there is a need to begin looking at public procurement as a driver of economic development rather than as a source of efficiency savings.

Every year a budget is passed in the Senedd that represents just over a third of Wales' GVA. About a third of that again constitutes the purchasing of goods and services by suppliers in the private and social enterprise sectors where over 70% of Welsh employees work. It stands to reason therefore that the people of Wales - are, directly and indirectly, the biggest customer in the land whose purchasing decisions have huge ripple effects. This opportunity to pursue progressive procurement is the foundation of what I call Plan C - the plan to revive the Welsh economy, and it is an opportunity that we cannot afford to miss.

It would remiss of me at this point not to acknowledge the progress that has been made in this field. Welsh public sector contracts with Welsh-based companies have risen up from around a third in 2003, to a little over half today. That has safeguarded 98,000 jobs in total. However, there is so much more that can be achieved. Germany sources 98.9% of its public sector contracts domestically - and we wonder why they have weathered the storm. France does almost as well at 98.5%. The UK achieves a self-procurement rate of 97%. Yet in Wales half of the value of our procurement budget is lost through leakage.

So shouldn't we in Wales have a goal of matching the Scottish rate of 75% of internal procurement by the time of the next Assembly election? And we shouldn't be content with that - the Scots aren't. Is it too ambitious to aim towards a goal of 90% by the end of the decade, to be on a par with most other countries? By achieving Scottish levels of self-procurement of 75%, the direct and induced employment effects would mean we would create another 48,000 jobs, potentially reducing Welsh unemployment by 40%, increasing GVA growth by an additional 0.5% a year and beginning the task of closing the gap between the widening gap between the economic performance of England and Wales that we in Plaid Cymru have termed Offa's Gap.

To get to this point, we must embrace all of the 28 recommendations in the McClelland report on public procurement in Wales which was published earlier this month. But I think Wales can go one bold step further and do what the Senedd was empowered by the people to do: legislate. The only sure way to reform procurement is to mandate it through passing a Welsh Procurement Reform Act. This would be legislation of the type that the Scottish Government is currently consulting on. Such a law could make community benefit clauses mandatory above a certain level and ensure a single simplified pre-qualification system across Wales with limits on the level of turnover required and a duty to consider the impact of the tendering process on SMEs and the Third Sector. It could mainstream the living wage and environmental sustainability making Wales the greenest and most pro-social procurer in the whole of Europe.

There could be opportunities to influence local procurement even by public agencies and bodies that are normally outside of the National Assembly's competence. Plaid Cymru has received advice that Scottish procurement law could potentially cover contracts signed in Scotland by non-devolved UK Government agencies, as well as Utilities. While this wouldn't effect centralized and specialist UK procurement deals, it could cover the local sourcing of food, for example. Another key plank of Scotland's procurement legislation is to increase apprenticeships and reduce youth unemployment. Welsh legislation should interpret these lessons, according to Wales' own needs.

Creating our own legal framework, setting our own parameters is the first step - but being creative within those parameters - thinking within the box - is the next. Wales is constrained by limited powers, but that just means we have to be more imaginative. In an age of enforced austerity economists have begun to talk about the role of unconventional fiscal policy - not cutting taxes or raising spending - but changing the composition of public spending as a catalyst for growth. That is perfectly designed for a situation like ours where our financial straitjacket prevents us from varying taxes or raising additional borrowing. Unconventional fiscal policy involves shifting the balance from revenue spending to capital expenditure. Why? Because capital expenditure's multiplier is greater. This "investment effect" has been confirmed in international studies, for example the effect of capital versus revenue expenditure at the regional level in the Japanese economic crisis of the 1990s. Shifting the balance in capital versus revenue expenditure in the current Welsh budget by 1% a year will have significant and immediate effects on Welsh economic recovery, all the more so when coupled by a progressive procurement strategy.

One of the key factors in delivering this Welsh economic boost is overcoming the barriers that exist between the silos of Welsh Government. It is time they were torn down. The Welsh Government's Economic Strategy has nine key sectors. Shouldn't the procurement strategy be geared to driving innovation in these key sectors? In other countries and regions across the EU they call this process pre-competitive procurement, pump-priming Research and Development by being a demanding customer to locally-based firms? And it's not just me arguing this. Competiveness guru Michael Porter in his advice to the Welsh Government in 2002 said: "Use public procurement as early and sophisticated demand." (www.isc.hbs.edu/Wales%20Reg%20Comp%2004-02-02%20CK.pdf)
The Welsh Government should probably have listened. His advice doesn't come cheap, and in the decade since, Wales has slipped further behind.

For all the constraints and the limits on our powers, there are things that can be done. Plan C is for a 'can-do' country and a 'can-do' assembly. It's for a new consensus - because nothing can be done in the Senedd without that - a new creativity in politics and policy, and confidence in our ability to chart a new course.]]>