Week in Westminster

The Long-awaited and much-trailed political event of the last week was to have been the Prime Minister’s speech about our relationship with the European Union. But events in North Africa have intervened and, quite rightly, Mr Cameron has postponed his speech.

The recent headlines focussing on the benefits and welfare system point to one of the difficulties politicians have to face up to - how to face making difficult decisions that, though the decision they have reached, is popular in broad outline, the detail is less so. One of two biggest issues on the doorstep at the last election was the welfare state, in particular abuse and what were considered over-generous benefits paid to those undeserving of the taxpayers’ largesse.

The polls indicate that voters still hold to those views, but of course feel less enthusiastic if their particular benefit is reduced or withdrawn. Perfectly understandable of course but governments have, as they are very fond of telling us, to make unpopular decisions and in the present financial circumstances that’s absolutely true and it would make no difference which party was in power – you can’t pay out what you haven’t got unless you’re foolish enough to borrow beyond what you have the means to repay as Gordon Brown seemed prone to do.

I was an article in one of Thursday’s morning papers that contained figures that show action must be taken and can’t be postponed. I quote the figures not to pass judgement as to whether or not they should exist merely to show how unsustainable the present system is.

In the early part of the Blair years there was, thanks in part to the financial position he inherited, a period of unprecedented growth and yet the number of people in work and receiving benefits rose from 700,000 in 1997 to 4.7 million on the equivalent entitlements in 2010 and that figure rises to well in excess of six million if you include housing benefit. Latest estimates indicate that the bill for this, excluding housing benefit to be £22.5 billion. A lone parent with one child must earn above £34,000 before they cease to qualify for benefits, other than child benefit. I hear the voice of John McEnroe saying ‘you can’t be serious.’ £34,000 a year and still receiving benefit paid for out of the taxes of those earning much much less.

So all politicians of all parties across the Western World are wrestling with massive problems and there will have to be a lot more of those difficult decisions I referred to before we get ourselves back on an even keel.

I even heard UKIP’s Nigel Farage say on Radio 4 a few days ago that paying the winter heating allowance to wealthy pensioners couldn’t carry on. It’s unusual for politicians who know they’re are not going to be in power state something that’s unpopular. Why should they?

Talking of unpopular decisions brings me to the future of Grimsby’s Scartho Baths. Having succeeded in getting an Adjournment debate at Westminster to highlight the Council’s folly it was encouraging to hear the minister‘s reply and a couple of sections stood out.

He said: “The Government believe that it is for local authorities, in consultation—I stress, in consultation—with their communities to decide how to make best use of their assets, including the relative benefits and costs of replacing or refurbishing assets, because they are best placed to know what works and what is most appropriate for their local area, in a way that central Government cannot. To do that, local authorities must consult and work with local residents and take their views on board.”

Secondly, “Local authorities should consider the most efficient way to use what are ultimately scarce resources and, most importantly, that they do so in genuine consultation with the communities that they serve.”

The minister is in the same Department that provides the Council with most of its income – not someone you would want to fall out with if you were in charge of the Council’s finances!

Will North East Lincolnshire Council pause, consult and think again? I suspect not.