Recessions can hurt, but austerity kills!

As we have witnessed over the past 5 years the government bailing out banksters with our cash has made no impact on improving our economic plight. This week the Prime Minister has warned of potentially worst to come, whilst in the meantime the cause of austerity, our banks are still unregulated encouraging high risk money gambling practices. Banker bailouts do not stimulate the economy. It is more likely the bailout funds end up stashed in offshore bank accounts and less likely to get reinvested in our economy. If the same bailout funds were invested in health and education they would confer both short and long term economic payoffs.  In the short term, these funds would be absorbed and turn into productive work for teachers and nurses and technology firms. In the long term from these investments we would see a smarter and healthier workforce and population.  For proof of reinvestment stimulus being the solution rather than bank bailouts you only need to look at the economic turnaround of Iceland since it's banking crash of 2009.

In 2010 Iceland's population forced it's government to have a referendum and voted 93% in favour of reinvestment.  Iceland put in place a strong social protection system to maintain food, jobs and housing and bolstered support to those in need even further. The Icelandic government's reinvestment programme didn't lead to inflation, or runaway debt that has been impossible to pay back, or foreign dependency - the predicted disasters that austerity advocates claim will result from stimulus programmes.  Recently, Iceland's president said "The government bailed out the people and imprisoned the banksters - the opposite of what the rest of Europe did."  Iceland's banks had been deemed "too big to fail," and the government let them fail.  The consequences were clear in the data showing Iceland's successful recovery while most of the rest of Europe continued to suffer.

The response of Iceland's government to the crisis reminds us how important it is to safeguard democracy, even at a time when extraordinary responses are needed.  Even if hard decisions need to be made, a bitter pill is easier to swallow if you administer it yourself.  In 2012 Iceland's economy grew 3 percent and unemployment fell below 5 percent, while the UK's economy, under the coalition's austerity programs, continued to sink and still does today.

It is my contention that the only UK referendum question that matters right now is not on Europe, it is - "Do we continue to absorb the debts created by banksters, drastically cutting local and central government budgets?  Or shall we say no to paying for banker's gambling and avoid a larger dose of austerity, instead investing in rebuilding the economy?"  

The 2012 UN  World Happiness Report indicated that despite the ongoing economic crisis Iceland had the highest quantity of "positive effect" (good moods) of any country surveyed. The report also found further evidence that health statistics were moving in a positive direction during the recession.  This last point about health is so important.

Economic health and human health go hand in hand.  Social safety nets are slashed, economic shocks like losing a job or home can turn into a health crisis. This is not merely a correlation, but a cause-and-effect relationship.  As citizens, we can call on our government to make the right decisions - decisions that protect our health during hard times. Recessions can hurt, but austerity kills.  Far from decreasing debt, austerity increases it as the economy slows. Debts get worst and we don't stimulate economic growth. Collectively, we have lost sight of what matters most.  Debts, revenues and growth are important.  But when you ask people what they value most, the majority will say their health and that of their families. The price of austerity is calculated in lost and ruined lives, depression and suicide. And these lives will not return when the economy bounces back.

The Silence is Deafening

It is my understanding that part of a councillor's role is that of an advocate in supporting the views of their constituents through being 'visible' and out and about in their constituency.  It very clear to me and from what the public of Rock Ferry tell me that spotting any of their three Labour councillors going about enquiring of their opinions and concerns is as likely as spotting the abominable snowman!

Case in point - part of the WBC's public consultation 'Future Council' questionnaire which closed yesterday asks for views on community libraries - "This option would see our community libraries, which are smaller and less well used, 15 in total, reduce their opening hours to an alternating 2/3 days per week, 10am-2pm. This option would NOT affect central libraries or libraries with one stop shop facilities included."  Now it maybe that Rock Ferry library will not be affected by reduced opening hours, as it exists alongside a one stop shop - it also may not be the case?  Why, because we cannot trust this council when making decisions the public support.  

When talking with librarians they tell me that Rock Ferry Cllr. Christine Meaden, Cabinet Member Leisure, Sports & Culture who's portfolio covers libraries supports the library service cuts - but based on who's opinions?  She has not engaged the Wirral public on the issue, nor has there been any sightings or reports of her consulting with librarians. So, I can only conclude her deafening silence is down to towing the labour party line and staying low in the hope we don't bother her.  For a councillor who received £16,626 (not incl. expenses) last year for her council role and cabinet responsibility we are all paying for a very expensive silence! Furthermore, the council could save a lot of money reducing the number of councillor's representing us - a reduction most of us would welcome, particularly in the case of one of the three silent Rock Ferry councillor's