Paul Greenall: Lies in our time

Cllr Paul V. Greenall began his political life in the Referendum Party in the 1990s and has been a Conservative member of West Lancashire District Council since 2001. In this article, he presents a three-point plan to fight Labour over their EU lies.

The recent comparison by Labour’s Chairman of the Commons European Scrutiny Committee, of Labour’s handling of the EU “Reform Treaty” to Neville Chamberlain’s return from Munich, may have offended David Miliband’s sensitivities, but it was largely accurate. After all, Brown’s deferential approach towards the EU in 2007 did invoke memories of poor old Chamberlain’s efforts to avoid war in 1938. And by all accounts, the “red lines” that Brown waved upon his return from Lisbon are about as much use as the piece of paper that Chamberlain waved upon his return from Munich. However, whilst the EU might want to proclaim “success in our time” and Brown “red lines in our time”, the reality is “lies in our time”. And the big question is what should we do about it?

Although Labour’s dishonesty over the EU is well documented, four of their biggest lies need to be highlighted: Firstly, when Tony Blair announced the EU referendum in the Commons in April 2004, he also confirmed to David Heathcoat-Amory that our referendum would take place, even if another EU nation voted ‘no’ in theirs. Yet just fourteen months later, our referendum was cancelled because of the ‘no votes’ in France and Holland…! Secondly, Labour claim a referendum is not required because the “Reform Treaty” does not fundamentally change the relationship between Britain and the EU. Yet on the day he announced the EU referendum in the Commons, Tony Blair said the very same thing about the Constitution, when answering a question from Ian Paisley…! Thirdly, despite the fact that other EU leaders and the Labour dominated Commons European Scrutiny Committee openly dispute it; Labour still claim the “Reform Treaty” is different to the Constitution…! Fourthly, whilst Labour claim their beloved “red lines” are novel and capable of preserving Britain’s interests, Labour MP Gisela Stuart, who helped to draft the Constitution dismisses them as red herrings that were also present last time…! 

Paul Greenall: From mistress to master - Our failed love affair with the car

Cllr Paul V. Greenall is 39 years old and married with two children. He has been a Conservative member of West Lancashire District Council since 2001.

So it appears human activity is responsible for climate change and unless we act soon, the situation will deteriorate. This conclusion confirms what many of us have long since suspected and I am pleased that ‘green issues’ are finally on the mainstream political agenda. But in this new era of environmental awareness, will anyone have the courage to tackle the menace of the motorcar?

For years we have been in love with the car, but this affair has long since soured and our mistress has become our master. The nature of this menace is illustrated by official figures that suggest the number of vehicles in Britain has increased dramatically over the past few decades. Indeed, between 1995-2005 the number of vehicles on our roads increased by over 7.5 million. That equates to a rise of over 2,000 vehicles per day, every day for ten years. Unfortunately, this rise looks set to continue, such that without radical preventative measures, we shall be facing gridlock in a few decades.

To address this problem, many people present a simple solution supported by an attractive argument, i.e. ‘our roads are full, therefore we need more roads’. Indeed, in my area as in several others, various road improvement schemes have been called for and the long ago planned ‘Ormskirk by-pass’ is firmly back on our local political agenda. However, although many people choose to ignore the issue of rising car numbers, these findings are fundamental, as they suggest the benefits of new roads will be short lived, as they will inevitably become congested, leading to more demands for more roads and so on. In short, if we are to preserve our country for future generations, then our road building madness and associated love affair with the car must end.

Paul V Greenall: Time for a Local Government Review?

Paul has been a Conservative member of West Lancashire District Council since 2001. He is a Psychologist at Liverpool University and is presently researching the evacuation experiences of those who escaped from the World Trade Centre in New York on 9/11. 

When the Northeast rejected Regional Government, they did us all a tremendous favour. However, deep inside Labour’s regional plans was an idea that Conservatives should embrace. Although controversial for some, I am talking about abolishing the two-tier system of Local Government.

Within Lancashire there are 12 District/Borough Councils, two Unitary Councils and a County Council. Between them, these Authorities elect approximately 768 councillors. This means there are more elected politicians governing Lancashire, than MPs in Westminster governing the entire United Kingdom! If for argument sake, we assume they each receive my basic annual allowance of £4,610, then before a child is educated, a bin is emptied or a street cleaned, Lancastrians have to fork out from their council tax, an unbelievable £3.5 million just to pay for the dubious privilege of having all these politicians. Of course, this cost will be dwarfed by the expense of running these 15 administrations, each with their own highly paid Chief Executives and associated Management Teams, not to mention all the policies, procedures, protocols, guidelines and enormously thick Constitutions, they doubtless churn out and constantly amend. However, it gets worse, for along with all of these Authorities, Lancashire also has a phenomenal 208 – yes, 208 Parish/Town Councils, all of whom apparently employ their own clerks, albeit mostly on a part-time basis.

If Lancashire’s Local Government model is replicated across the rest of England’s Shires, then there must be literally thousands upon thousands of councillors and bureaucrats running our local services. The cost and potential for efficiency savings must be staggering. And they tell me there is no money to fund a pedestrian crossing in my village…!

The expense of the two-tier system and the potential savings from abolishing it was illustrated by the Boundary Committee review, which Lancashire was subjected to as part of Labour’s regional plans. For example, the Boundary Committee calculated the costs of a single unitary Lancashire County Council ‘being in business’ with all Districts/Boroughs abolished, would be approximately £25.9 million less than the present set up. With Lancashire divided into 5 Unitaries, the cost of ‘being in business’ would be £12.7 million less than the present set up. Even next door in Cumbria the Boundary Committee forecast a saving of £8.5 million if the existing County Council became Unitary and the 6 District Councils beneath it were abolished. If these calculations are correct, then the savings of Unitaries being spread across the rest of two-tier England must, like I say, be staggering.