Dundee Labour

News Digest

Week ending 8th. December 2012

Kevin Keenan

Labour group leader, Dundee City Council

A Tale of Two Cities : Dundee, October 1966 and Dundee, October 2012

7 December 2012

In October of this year, the number of men in Dundee claiming Job Seekers Allowance unemployment benefit was 3,927

46 years ago , in October 1966, the total number of men in Dundee claiming unemployment benefit was 1,476

In other words, the number of men out of work in Dundee now is almost three times the number in 1966

Comparing the same month in both years, in 2012 the number of women out of work in the city was 1,588.

In October 1966 it was 280.

In other words, the number of women out of work is over 5 times greater now than in 1966.

Commenting on the figures, Kevin Keenan , Labour group leader on Dundee City Council, said,

“What makes the comparison even more sombre is that there were more Dundonians then than there are today.

“In 1966 the city’s population was around 180,000 ; today it ‘s around 40,000 less.

" Many who remember the Sixties in the city will recall it at the time as a place of many more job opportunities and secure employment, traditional apprenticeships , and with a strong manufacturing industry base.

“Dundee made things.

“But now today only some 7,000 work in manufacturing in the city, a fraction of the 62,000 who work in the service industry.

“ However, manufacturing industry remains highly important to the city’s future

“With strong Government support , the city can expand its manufacturing base , providing jobs for our people.

“It may not return to the actual numerical levels that it had in the 1960s, but it will have a workforce every bit as skilful and every bit as committed as it was back then. “

web link :

Dundee Labour

http://www.dundeelabour.org.uk

Jim McGovern MP

Jim McGovern slams government over Remploy ‘betrayal’

7 December 2012

Dundee West MP Jim McGovern has slammed the government’s decision that the Dundee Remploy factory was amongst Remploy operations now planned for closure.

The Sayce Review recommended that the Remploy factories that were not closed in the first tranche should be considered for transfer into commercial businesses.

Jim McGovern had sought assurances on a number of occasions that this would be case with the Remploy factory in Dundee, which would have enabled it to remain functioning with the current employees in place

However in a written statement the government confirmed the factory would now close with all employees at risk of compulsory redundancy.

Ester McVey MP, the minister responsible for this decision in the Department for Work and Pensions, appeared before a debate on Remploy (Tuesday 4th December) where she suggested she would be happy to visit the factories to see the work they were doing.

No mention was made at the time by the minister that these factories were planned for closure.

Nationally 875 employees are now at risk of compulsory redundancy, including 682 disabled workers.

The Dundee Remploy factory employs 43 people, of whom 37 are disabled.

Jim McGovern said,

“This is a complete betrayal of Remploy by the government.

“Despite the Sayce Review recommending that these factories could find a future as commercial enterprises which would have enabled the staff to keep their jobs, the government for ideological reasons has decided to put Remploy’s hard working staff out on to the dole.

“Questions have to be answered by the government about what they knew on Tuesday when the minister responsible answered questions from myself and others about the future of Remploy.

“If Esther McVey knew they were going to close, why wasn’t she honest with us from the outset?”

Mr McGovern concluded,

“This shameful decision has been taken despite the fact that Dundee’s Remploy factory is in fact a very successful operation.

“Now the dedicated employees and management are facing redundancy.

“I will continue to fight this decision and I will work with colleagues to get a better result for Remploy’s staff.”

Web link :

Jim McGovern MP

http://www.jimmcgovern.co.uk

Councillor Lesley Brennan

Why the number of nurses matters

7 December 2012

“In the long run,” John Maynard Keynes once famously said, “we are all dead.”

And as our population now lives longer, “in the long run” can be contemplated in a different context when we look at how cuts in staffing in the NHS in Scotland are now storing up problems for the future.

In the past three years, over 2,000 posts amongst nursing and midwifery staff have disappeared as a result of UK and Scottish Government cuts.

After the years of continuous high spending in the first period of the last decade , when the number of nursing and midwifery staff rose by over 5,000 in Scotland under the previous Scottish Executive, we are now in a mirror image era with numbers falling.

Nursing and midwifery staff in post (Whole Time Equivalent):September 2009: 58,428September 2012: 56,082

Understandably, nursing unions have sought to defend their members’ and patients’ interests as health boards see reducing staffing numbers as the most readily available financial solution when they are being forced to cut their spending.

As a result, there are Increased workloads, skill mixes, job freezes, and a drop in staff morale flourish, piling on the problems for the future.

As well as that, a Royal College of Nursing survey of its members showed that the majority of community nurses who responded had indicated that had witnessed a rise in the number of patients in their caseload, but a reduction in the time that they spent with them.

Another decision with future consequences has been the reduction in the number of training places for nursing and midwifery students

Added to this are the effects of “ efficiency savings” where health boards are under pressure to use their creativity to develop new methods of providing the same level of service with a shrinking money pot , and the effect of the ever-rising cost of drugs and the ever-increasing demand for the NHS services , particularly as the population ages.

So, if according to the Scottish Government, the NHS budget is being protected in real terms, why is the reality in the NHS over 2,000 nursing posts lost, cuts in the recruitment numbers of those being trained for the future service, and a downward drift in morale?

It will come as no surprise therefore to learn of the concerns that health professionals have about the deterrent effect that the current condition of the NHS has upon those attracted to a career in it and upon those it wants to retain in it.

Why is the numbers of nurses important?

What difference do they make?

The RCN quote research studies which reveal that increased nursing staffing levels are related to better patient outcomes and experience where

“Patients and nurses in the hospitals with the most favourable staffing levels (the lowest patient-to-nurse ratios) had consistently better outcomes than those in hospitals with less favourable staffing”

and in the hospitals with the highest patient –to- nurse ratios

“ nurses in those hospitals were approximately twice as likely to be dissatisfied with their jobs, to show high burnout levels, and to report low or deteriorating quality of care on their wards and hospitals.”

and

“Improved work environments and reduced ratios of patients to nurses were associated with increased care quality and patient satisfaction”

While presiding over a fall in the number of nursing and midwifery staff, at the same time, the Scottish Government has set out what its own prognosis for the NHS in Scotland in the long run

“Over the next 10 years the proportion of over 75s in Scotland’s population – who are the highest users of NHS services - will increase by over 25%. By 2033 the number of people over 75 is likely to have increased by almost 60%. There will be a continuing shift in the pattern of disease towards long-term conditions, particularly with growing numbers of older people with multiple conditions and complex needs such as dementia. Over the next 20 years demography alone could increase expenditure on health and social care by over 70%. “

Long term conditions such as obesity and diabetes will require more not fewer nursing care in the form of more specialist nurses, as will dementia.

Therefore, it makes no sense in terms of long-term planning to oversee a drop in nursing numbers , particularly when the Scottish Government indicates that changes in the population structure towards an older age profile could require a dramatic increase in health expenditure and resources.

My friend and colleague Marlyn Glen , when MSP , obtained information from the Scottish Government on healthy life expectancy in Dundee .

" Healthy life expectancy” is defined as the number of years during which people may to enjoy ‘good health’.

It will become a significant factor in determining the level of care that an elderly person requires.

For men in Dundee , life expectancy in the period 2008-10 was 71.8 years.

The corresponding healthy life expectancy was 64.6 years.

This corresponds to the number of years "not spent in good health” is 7.2 years.

For women in Dundee, life expectancy was estimated at 78.0 , and healthy life expectancy at 68.8 years.

This corresponds to the number of years " not spent in good health" is 9.2 years.

If life expectancy increases with no increase in healthy life expectancy, then more care of the elderly will be required, along with more nurses.

Nurses will certainly be at the forefront of the challenges presented by increased longevity accompanied by poorer health, challenges to which there are no simple solutions.

Some of us may be these very people who will need their skills and their care – in the long run.

Web link :

Lesley Brennan http://www.lesleybrennan.com

Jenny Marra MSP

Policing (Speech in the Scottish Parliament )

5 December 2012

The fact that the SNP’s back benchers are much keener to address the botched police commissioner elections in England—an issue over which the Scottish Parliament has no jurisdiction—tells the whole story.

The SNP does not want to address the difficult problems that our motion has raised.

With just under four months to go until the start of the new police service, today’s debate has highlighted some critical questions about the Government’s handling of the transition to Scotland’s single police force.

We hoped that we would never have to seek the guarantees that our motion seeks today, especially at such a late stage in the process.

We are looking for clarification about the two most important roles in the new police service—who has responsibility over what?—and for guarantees that local officers will remain on our streets.

Kenny MacAskill: The only outstanding matter is the line of accountable responsibility that the SPA chair is seeking. Does the member not accept that? What other aspect is she suggesting is still in dispute?

Jenny Marra: From the two speeches that I have heard from the cabinet secretary today, it seems that the HR and finance issues are the same ones that were under dispute when we took evidence from the chief constable and the chair last Tuesday morning.

I hope that the committee’s deliberations and this afternoon’s debate will help their discussions to reach a conclusion on the issues of contention that still exist today.

In his opening remarks, the cabinet secretary spoke of record numbers of police officers on Scotland’s streets.

However, as my Labour colleagues have pointed out, the reality of what is happening in police forces across Scotland is far removed from what he would have us believe.

Scottish Labour has been warning the Government for months that its drive towards efficiency savings has created a culture of backroom bobbies. Backroom staff jobs have been shed and are being done by police officers who should be on our streets.

Kenny MacAskill: Where?

Jenny Marra: The cabinet secretary is looking surprised and asking me where this is happening.

We have been telling him for months that it is happening in police stations and control rooms in Tayside and up and down the country.

Kenny MacAskill: Does the member dispute the fact that HMICS has investigated the allegations of backfilling and found that the only instances of backfilling are in a limited number of situations in which pregnant police officers and male and female officers who have been injured cannot be put on front-line duties? Apart from that, HMICS is not aware of any instances of backfilling.

Jenny Marra: According to Unison, this is going on in 53 per cent of the posts that have gone. It is going on with custody officers in the cabinet secretary’s constituency and in control rooms in Tayside.

I suggest that he go out to police stations across the country and ask people on the ground whether it is happening.

Audit Scotland has just confirmed to us that it is.

As far back as May this year, I highlighted to the cabinet secretary evidence from Unison that 900 police staff jobs had been lost and were now being done by police officers.

In his response, he sought to deny the problem and then told me that it was an operational matter.

When I raised the same issue at First Minister’s questions in October, the First Minister dismissed the claim as ”utter

nonsense”, despite the fact that my evidence came from a leaked document prepared for his justice department by Kevin Smith, the head of the police reform sub-group.

That evidence makes clear the new single service’s intention to cut police staff jobs in favour of officers doing administrative tasks themselves.

As I said, just last week, Audit Scotland published a report that said that each force has cut an average of 12 per cent of civilian posts to balance its budget.

The report also says that

“at a time of continued financial pressures there is a risk that this”

backfilling

“is not an efficient and sustainable use of resources if adopted longer term.”

We agree with Audit Scotland’s report, which confirms what we have articulated and heard for months.

The lack of honesty from the SNP about its guarantee to put extra police officers on our streets is concerning and unsustainable and it must stop.

The SNP’s fig-leaf figure of 65 more backroom staff does little to mask the 907 jobs that have been lost since March 2010 and the further 3,000 that Stephen House predicted will be lost in the future.

Kenny MacAskill: Ms Marra was a member of the Justice Committee when Chief Constable House made it clear to that committee that he had no intention of backfilling and that it would meet no purpose. Is she suggesting that he is a liar?

Jenny Marra: The cabinet secretary needs to look at the evidence for himself.

I suggest that he goes out to his constituency, speaks to custody officers and trade unions and reads Audit Scotland’s report.

He might then get an accurate reflection of what is going on in the police force in this country.

Hard-working police staff should not have their fate hidden in leaked documents from reform sub-groups or in Audit Scotland reports, only to have it denied by the First Minister and the cabinet secretary.

That is why Scottish Labour has asked for a clear guarantee from the Government today that it will reverse its intention to backfill police staff jobs.

We are disappointed that the cabinet secretary has chosen to ignore that in his amendment.

The need for clarity is why we brought the debate to Parliament.

Nowhere is clarity more necessary than in the single police force’s leadership.

From day 1, the public must have confidence that those who are in charge have an irreproachable mandate yet, as Lewis Macdonald said, we have reached the astonishing point at which

our chief constable and the SPA’s chair are already seeking separate legal advice on their job descriptions.

We are all for “creative tension” between colleagues, which can help to establish better relationships and define responsibilities.

However, it strikes me that, when that gets to the stage at which people feel that they must seek legal advice on their job descriptions, there might be a problem with the employer.

I say to the cabinet secretary that we do not seek political interference, but the Government must act on behalf of Parliament, which agreed the important Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Act 2012, by exercising ministerial accountability, not ministerial control.

The whole Parliament knows that my colleague Graeme Pearson has pushed for improved scrutiny of the single police service since the Police and Fire Reform (Scotland) Bill was introduced.

He argued passionately for better scrutiny by Parliament of the chair and the chief constable and for a specialist commission that would deal swiftly with issues such as the one that has arisen.

We are glad that a slightly watered-down version of his proposal has received cross-party support and we hope that it will be advanced as quickly as possible. Until that happens, it is the Government’s responsibility to facilitate a resolution to the conflict as quickly and efficiently as possible.

Web link :

Jenny Marra MSP : http://www.jennymarra.com

Marlyn Glen

Counting the Cost of the Lack of Affordable Childcare

7 December 2012

The envious eyes of those desperately seeking affordable childcare in this country will turn towards Sweden at the news of the extension of its childcare policy to include the opening of childcare facilities during evenings, nights and over weekends.

There is a new funding package which begins next summer , scheduled to run for three years , and which is encouraging councils not already providing childcare at these times to do so.

The Swedish pre-school system spreads from the age of one upwards until compulsory education which begins at 7, with an optional “pre-school year” at the age of six which the vast majority of children attend.

Striking differences between Sweden and the UK are :

* the large public investment in pre-school childcare resources in Sweden contrasted with the private sector involvement here.

* Sweden has capped the cost of affordable childcare at between 1 and 3 per cent of a family’s income, so that all children can enjoy it.

Sweden’s governments have spent soundly on high quality childcare provision, regarding it as a wise investment in the family, the future and females.

2 per cent of the country’s Gross Domestic Product has gone into childcare compared with just 0.5 per cent in the UK.

Central to Sweden’s childcare policy is the maintenance of women’s participation in the workforce and the compatibility of the role of parent and work.

As a result, over 4 out 5 women in Sweden with a child under 15 are at work whereas in the UK it is only 2 out of three.

Typically childcare costs in Sweden are around £140 per month for full-time care.

The Day Care Trust and Children in Scotland published the findings of their survey of childcare costs in Scotland this year .

They concluded that “There are very significant gaps in the availability of childcare in Scotland.

“Only a fifth (21 per cent) of Scottish local authorities reportthat they have enough childcare for working parents and only one

in ten local authorities have enough childcare for parents who work outside normal office hours.

“Scottish local authorities also report that there is insufficient childcare for older children, families in rural areas and those with disabled children……..

“High quality, accessible, affordable childcare is essential for Scottish families. It supports children’s social development and learning and enables their parents to work or study.

“Failing to ensure affordable childcare drives parents out of the labour market and on to benefits and pushes more children into poverty.

“Where childcare is unaffordable or unavailable, children may suffer, families remain in poverty, and often it is women’s skills that are lost as they stay out of the job market for longer.

“ Retaining a skilled workforce is a key issue for Scotland’s future economic prosperity. “

Here are their figures on the weekly cost of childcare for 25 hours a week in Scotland ( compare these figures with a Swedish average of around £35 per week)

Scotland

Nursery under the age of 2 - £101 per week

Nursery aged 2 and over £94 per week

Childminder under the age of 2 £93 per week

Childminder aged 2 and over 2 £92 per week

Out-of-Schools clubs (13 hours per week ) £48 per week

( Dundee City Council offer a limited number of full-time places where full time care ( 5 days of 9am-3.15 pm) costs £50 per week. )

Recent changes to benefits have seen the maximum amount of money that parents can claim towards the cost of childcare cut by around £10 per week.

The Daycare Trust and the Save The Children investigation found that a quarter of parents questioned said that childcare costs had got them into financial difficulties , with almost 2 out of 3 of them having to struggle to meet these costs.

Investment in childcare is a contributory investment in jobs .

Without it , many talented women remain unemployed.

Their talents would benefit both society and the coffers of the Treasury.

Oxfam told the Scottish Parliament Finance Committee that research conducted by Price Waterhouse Cooper suggested that “ the economic costs and benefits of providing childcare for all one to four year olds are similar in the first 20-30 years”

The traditional “male breadwinner “ family is no longer the only family image for a society that strives to be egalitarian, where both parents’ earning abilities and careers are respected and encouraged.

Next door to Sweden is Norway, another believer in large government spending on the family.

One participant to the Guardian’s recent forum on childcare wrote of her different experiences of the level of childcare in Norway and the UK .

It shows how far we have still to travel.

“ (In Norway) when my child turned one year old, I was offered a full-time kindergarten space at a cost of £180 a month, as the kindergarten system was heavily subsidised by the government.

“Because I chose to stay at home with my child for the first two years, I turned down the kindergarten space, but was given something called "cash-for-care benefit" of £400 a month.

“This allowed me to directly receive the cash that would otherwise have gone towards the kindergarten fees. This cash was on top of regular child allowance (£110 per month).”

“ Most of my Norwegian friends did go back to work, as the system is very flexible and isn't costly.

“I had my second child in the UK.

“When I started to evaluate whether I should go back to work or not, I discovered that nursery fees in the UK (in my area) are £60 a day (that is £1,200 a month, compared with the Norwegian £180 a month).

“Most of my British friends stayed home with their children or worked part time.

“Some became stay-at-home mums by choice and didn't want to return to work.

“However, some wanted to return to work because they needed the money to pay the mortgage or they needed to keep in the loop with their careers or they were concerned for their pensions. But they couldn't! “

Last month the Economist Intelligence Unit published its findings of its study of the best countries in the world for a baby to be born in 2013.

Life expectancy at birth, the quality of family life, quality of community life and gender equality were some of the factors determining the rank order of the countries surveyed.

Switzerland came first, then Australia.

Only slightly behind came the three Scandinavian countries , Norway, Sweden and Denmark, ranked third, fourth and fifth respectively.

Britain, with its high childcare costs, came twenty-seventh.

Web link :

Marlyn Glen http://www.marlynglen.com