FOI retreat could cause problems for anti-cuts campaigners

The publication of the penultimate Annual Report by the Scottish Information Commissioner recently, has drawn attention (again) to the step backward taken by the Scottish Government in refusing to extend coverage of the Act to private contractors, arms-length Trusts, the GHA and other bodies which increasingly deliver our public services. As Kevin Dunion says, “The right to know is being eroded as public services are delivered by arms length bodies and, instead of leading the way on FOI, we are in danger of falling behind.

Despite the Government’s much vaunted claims of transparency and their initial enthusiasm for extension they appear to have retreated at the ‘first whiff of grapeshot’ from the private sector. It seems that, as it has already done on PFI, this government has proved itself to be long on rhetoric, but short on substance.

It is also an example of the Scottish Government’s deferrals to big business. Despite being an avowedly ‘centre-left’ party, making positive claims over a period of some years about their desire to increase the coverage of the Scottish FOI Act and responding positively to the clear advice from the Scottish Information Commissioner that this is needed, they have withdrawn their proposals (limited as they were) at the first indication that the private contractors would oppose them! Did they ever think they wouldn’t?

In addition they have dropped the proposals - also advocated by Mr Dunion - to extend the  Act to cover the murky half-world of trusts and LLPs. As local councils in particular, look enviously at the trail-blazing by Glasgow City in hiving off its public services to arms-length bodies of different formats. Kevin has highlighted the increasing erosion of the right for us all to find out how our money is being spent by such bodies. But apparently this too, would be too much trouble.

And it is especially concerning as public bodies are increasingly squeezed financially. the upcoming period of cuts and increased outsourcing will inevitably lead to increased demands for information about such decisions. It is therefore simply wrong to allow increasing numbers of services to slip out of the FOI net, and it is also worrying (if understandable) that 41% of FOI officers surveyed identified increasing demands and decreasing resources as “the biggest FOI challenge they faced." In the face of the most severe attack on public services in living memory, it would be invidious if campaigners found problems in obtaining the information they needed.

Unfortunately, for the Scottish Government, at UK level the ConDem coalition is ploughing on strongly to increase coverage to a number of public and semi-public bodies - albeit they seem to stop short of private contractors or even Network Rail! It is deeply ironic that it is an SNP government that is presiding over a reduction in the standard of FOI coverage in Scotland below that of the rest of the country, after over five years of its pre-eminence on the UK stage!

A final warning is also appropriate. This will be Kevin Dunion’s final year as the Scottish Information Commissioner. I think that all involved in the FOI scene in Scotland recognise that the standing of the Act and the success of the legislation has significantly been down to the principles and activity of him and his office. It will be necessary to have someone with an equivalent commitment to the principles of FOI to follow him.

While I am about it, an attempt to assist in the use of FOI legislation is planned by the Campaign for Freedom of Information here in Scotland. They are running a one day course for requesters in Glasgow on the 4 June. More information and forms will shortly be available from the website http://www.cfoi.org.uk/scotland.html.

...and populist shall speak peace unto lobby group?

Good to see a incisive article by Ian Bell in Saturday’s Herald on Dave Cameron’s pal, Jeremy Clarkson and his colleagues, and in particular the spat over insults to Mexicans and Mexico that provoked a particularly half-hearted apology from the BBC - not one from Top Gear, you'll notice.

As Ian says, the dinosaurs from Top Gear ain’t clever and they ain’t funny, but they are popular, and therein lies one of the main reason for the appallingly hypocritical and/or racist statement from the BBC that national stereotypes are legitimate targets for humour. This is one of the most worrying developments in the saga, and shows exactly what many have suspected - that the current BBC management are quite prepared to abandon the corporation’s long-held reputation for fairness and impartiality when the subjects of the accusation are powerful, or popular enough.

Leaving aside the debate about how ‘national stereotypes’ become stereotypes, the BBC’s mealy-mouthed reaction on behalf of Hammond, Clarkson et al is another nail in the coffin of Auntie’s reputation.

Following on the rejection of the Palestine Emergency Appeal broadcast by the Disasters Emergency Committee - at the behest, or in fear of, the powerful Zionist lobby; the craven sneak into 10 Downing Street by Mark Thompson to debate/agree/warn Dave of the way the BBC will report the ConDem cuts agenda, and the poorly judged and appallingly handled Question Time publicity stunt for the BNP (incidentally why is the shift to Glasgow the issue concerning the QT team? Given recent poor panels and inability to read the local issues, I would have thought that cancellation would be far more of a fear) it is now a matter of real concern that Thompson’s weak-kneed bending to every powerful lobby is compromising fair and proportionate decision-taking in one of the major news and information providers of the West.

In case you might think this is over-egging this particular pudding, consider this. Given the above history, do you think similar ‘national stereotyping’ of Israelis and of Israel would have been a similar ‘legitimate target for humour’? Would anything like that even have got into the broadcast programme? Whatever the outcome of a confrontation between the populist (Top Gear) and the political (Israel) lobbies over such an event, the suspicion will always now be of a broadcaster who takes decisions on the basis of such pressures, not one with the aim of impartiality, accuracy and responsibility.

The BBC does have a responsibility for its decisions, and no-one is suggesting that it is in the same category as Fox News and their exhortations to violent attacks on people Rupert doesn’t like, but at least Sky acted decisively when a programme presenter suggested that women linespeople didn’t know the rules! 

Mark Thompson has presided over this denigration of the BBC, and should go now, while there is still a (slim) opportunity to rescue our public service broadcaster.

CBI economics is busted flush

Interesting to read the thoughts of CBIScotland (or at least its Chair - Iain McMillan) in the Herald today (29 December). No doubt this was taken from a ‘end-of-year message’ press release used by many organisations to get some press coverage at a thin time of the year.

You might think that, as the representative body of private sector organisations, including finance companies who bear the responsibility for the economic crisis and the attacks on public funding by the Tories, the CBI might be expressing some contrition for putting us all through this - but no. Mr McMillan has the effrontery to chastise the Scottish Government (and other political parties apparently) for not following the CBI’s preferred course out of the economic crisis!

Just for the record this includes - cutting public spending and so-called ‘red tape’, increased PFI, using more private firms to deliver public services, selling-off Scottish Water, and building more nuclear power plants. (He grudgingly welcomes the council tax freeze - despite the damage that this has already done to local services and indeed local businesses who depend on public work).

Thus the CBI show that they have learned nothing from their members’ failings in too lightly regulated markets. Cut red tape? We should be demanding that banks and other finance companies are penalised for the damage they have done to our economy. Increase privatisation? Far from exposing more services to private sector risk, we should accept that this risk will always lie with the public sector, and supply these services publicly - not via expensive and poor value private companies. 

I hold no brief for the Scottish Government - indeed there are many areas where I could be even more critical than Mr McMillan - but his analysis of the economic situation would lead us even deeper into the mire of stagnation and even recession. Just watch what ConDem policies - slavishly following a big business line - deliver for us at UK level

But apparently defending public services and public funding is ‘populist’. According to oor Iain “...real leadership is about doing the right things for Scotland at the right time and explaining why they are necessary.” Given the track record of the UK business community in losing trillions of pounds and then screaming for a huge public handout, I think we can see why ‘the right things’ are unlikely to be done by the CBI, and why it has forfeited all credibility as a business leader.

And a memo to Iain Gray. Just because someone is having a go at the SNP - it is not always in your (or our) interests to agree with them. The old Maoist doctrine of ‘The enemy  of my enemy, is my friend.” has led China’s leaders into some very strange alliances over the years. In the run up to an election, to be seen to side with the busted flush of big business will not gain support.

Zippin' up my boots, goin' back to Netroots!

Recent violence arising from protests against the huge rise in English student tuition fees have served to slightly obscure the positive message that has come from these protests. The message - also commented on by some, not necessarily left-wing columnists - http://www.heraldscotland.com:80/comment/colette-douglas-home/political-awakening-of-a-new-generation-is-a-stirring-sight-1.1072816  is that students are becoming politically active again. This is a most welcome sight, and is paralleled by a reawakening in the Trade Union movement signalled by both increased activity of young members, and attempts by the leadership to reintroduce political awareness training, and to spread the use of new media and new styles of campaigning.

These developments are at early stages, of course, and could still fizzle out. Student politics still has the capability of dropping out of fashion as happened during the post-Thatcher years. And the fact that much of the resentment is down to a rapid disillusionment with Nick Clegg’s LibDems - who promised a radical change in British politics, and then delivered a pit prop for the Tory establishment - means that apathy might still win out. Remember the election lockouts at many uni area polling stations? But it looks more hopeful than for some time. 

The violence will not help the politicisation of the majority of these young people. On one hand it sends the message, that a cause only gets reported when violence flares - but conversely we also see that reports then concentrate on violence and disruption; the personal connections of protestors and targets; anything in fact - apart from the actual issue that caused the protests in the first place!

But there is much imagination tucked away in the protests that have been undertaken by other young campaigners. the use of ‘flashmobbing’ for example, to target businesses who have been in the frontline of tax dodging, or other antisocial activity (see http://www.ukuncut.org.uk/) is derived from art and dance initiatives of ‘spontaneous’ public performance and shows a) the importance that arts can bring to this struggle and b) the need to involve people and the wider community in this campaign. 

Trade unions also, where they still exist, have had too many years of marking time. Those of us who have been active for a while have noticed the absence of a generation or two of activists. In particular, the absence of political activity for at least a generation. We must take much of the blame for this - we didn’t train up our successors politically, concentrating too much on mechanism and process. But now there are strong signs that a new generation IS keen, willing and eager to take on the struggle. 

And political training is beginning once more. But this time it is being linked, not just with public demonstrations and protest, but the use of social networking, the internet, video clips, blogs and other accoutrements of the digital age. UNISONScotland’s recent MOBILISE festival took a weekend to take both trade union and community-based activists through both the politics of the fight, and the variety of avenues available to promote our cause. This not only dealt with media training, economics, and political lobbying, but involved cartooning, comedy and songwriting - not likely to be the Christmas no 1 but check it out !!  BTW the Christmas no 1 should be Captain Ska! 

Another important event is scheduled for the New Year in London. Netroots UK, on the 8 January promises to be the next step in developing campaigning against the ConDemNation. Priced at £5, it must be the best value conference covering a number of key organisations (Obama digital campaigners, anti-cuts websites, thinktanks) on the left. Hopefully it will also spark much new activity, and campaign ideas. Both students and trade unionists need these. 

And more than that, they need to remember that to be successful they need to connect with the community. Tossing fire extinguishers off roofs is unlikely to achieve that at this stage. See you in London.