Glasgow - More Breaking News
Yesterday it was 'suggested' that The Times newspaper was planning to publish a scurrilous article about the fight for equal pay in Glasgow City Council.
Specifically, a journalist, on behalf of the paper's editor, claimed that he was keen to get a response to the following point:
"Suggestions have been made that Glasgow will have to implement unprecedented cuts and and look at selling assets in order to be able to honour its responsibilities on equal pay."
Albeit without confirming who was putting forward this view which had to come from somewhere, of course.
But having scanned Time Times today, I can find no trace of the intended article, even after carrying out a thorough search under the journalist's name - Marc Horne.
So maybe Mr Horne had second thoughts after Stefan Cross sent him a blistering response (see below) or perhaps Mr Horne thought better of his plan after reading the many indignant comments on Facebook and Twitter.
Who knows, but there is no article today which feels like a big victory in itself although I will keep an eye out over the weekend.
As lots of people have emphasised over the past 24 hours, Glasgow's low paid women workers did not create this problem - Glasgow City Council did and its WPBR pay scheme has since been judged by the Court of Session, Scotland's highest civil court, to be 'unfit for purpose'.
In which case it is plainly ridiculous that Glasgow's equal pay claimants should be the subjected to such scaremongering and effectively 'blackmailed' for standing up for their rights.
More will follow soon on who might be responsible for this nonsense - so watch this space.
Here is the 'enquiry' from The Times newspaper which was sent to Stefan Cross earlier today.
Sounds like a real 'put-up' job if you ask me, but Stefan's response is spot on and puts this kind of tawdry 'suggestions have been made' journalism firmly in its place.
Exactly who are these anonymous sources?
Are they elected councillors or senior council officials - in which case why do they have to hide in the shadows instead of coming out into the open to say whatever they have to say?
I smell a rat, I have to admit.
Tune in again tomorrow and find out why.
WHO ARE THE MALCONTENTS?
So This is the query from The Times :
Dear Stefan,
I wonder if you can help me?
We are looking to publish an article exploring the consequences of your recent victory on equal pay in Glasgow.
It has been suggested that the total cost of righting this historical wrong will be in excess of £500 million.
A report prepared for the council states: "The amounts at stake are very large indeed", while Susan Aitken acknowledged that "justice comes with a price" and that officers have been instructed to explore "all financial options".
In Birmingham, where the council had to settle more than 10,000 outstanding claims, the total bill came to £1.1 billion.
This led to significant cuts to services, and the sale of a number of key public assets including the National Exhibition Centre.
Suggestions have been made that Glasgow will have to implement unprecedented cuts and and look at selling assets in order to be able to honour its responsibilities on equal pay.
My editor is very keen to get your take on this.
Would it be possible to get a statement for publication outlining why this action was necessary, what the next steps will be and your response to suggestions that it could result in significant job losses and cuts to services within the council?
Our deadline would be noon tomorrow.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Marc
Marc Horne, Scotland reporter, The Times
AND THIS IS MY REPLY:
Dear Marc
Thanks for your email. Apologies for the delay. Your email arrived whilst we were in discussions with the council.
I must say that I’m disappointed at the line that you are taking, suggesting that women claiming equal pay would be responsible for cuts in services. This is no better than blaming the hostesses at The Presidents Club for the sexual harassment they endured. The women of Glasgow are the victims here not the villains.
Second, this suggestion of massive cuts from an unnamed source is not the position of the SNP leadership. It sounds like carping from those that were responsible for the discrimination, sore that they got found out.
Third, it doesn’t need to be the position. There is Scottish government fund of £500m set up to deal with these issues which remains pretty much unused. If this needs to be increased then that is what the Scottish government should do. At the end of the day by underpaying these women for more than a decade the council will have saved billions of pounds, far more than they will ever have to payout.
These women have been treated appallingly for more than a decade and for them to be blamed for seeking their entitlement is just another form of sexism and victimisation. The sooner these injustices are remedied the better.
The current administration is taking a positive approach to addressing these issues and we have a year of meetings planned to try and reach agreement on resolving these complicated problems. Sadly it seems some malcontents wish to disrail these discussions. Shame on them.
Regards,
Stefan Cross QC
So let’s see what gets printed. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that after Labour got embarrassed into backing the SNP position last week that suddenly there’s negative briefings going on. Of course I might be wrong but as the source is anonymous we are left to guess.
You make up your own mind
Stefan Cross
Sounds like a real 'put-up' job if you ask me, but Stefan's response is spot on and puts this kind of tawdry 'suggestions have been made' journalism firmly in its place.
Exactly who are these anonymous sources?
Are they elected councillors or senior council officials - in which case why do they have to hide in the shadows instead of coming out into the open to say whatever they have to say?
I smell a rat, I have to admit.
Tune in again tomorrow and find out why.
WHO ARE THE MALCONTENTS?
So This is the query from The Times :
Dear Stefan,
I wonder if you can help me?
We are looking to publish an article exploring the consequences of your recent victory on equal pay in Glasgow.
It has been suggested that the total cost of righting this historical wrong will be in excess of £500 million.
A report prepared for the council states: "The amounts at stake are very large indeed", while Susan Aitken acknowledged that "justice comes with a price" and that officers have been instructed to explore "all financial options".
In Birmingham, where the council had to settle more than 10,000 outstanding claims, the total bill came to £1.1 billion.
This led to significant cuts to services, and the sale of a number of key public assets including the National Exhibition Centre.
Suggestions have been made that Glasgow will have to implement unprecedented cuts and and look at selling assets in order to be able to honour its responsibilities on equal pay.
My editor is very keen to get your take on this.
Would it be possible to get a statement for publication outlining why this action was necessary, what the next steps will be and your response to suggestions that it could result in significant job losses and cuts to services within the council?
Our deadline would be noon tomorrow.
Many thanks and best wishes,
Marc
Marc Horne, Scotland reporter, The Times
AND THIS IS MY REPLY:
Dear Marc
Thanks for your email. Apologies for the delay. Your email arrived whilst we were in discussions with the council.
I must say that I’m disappointed at the line that you are taking, suggesting that women claiming equal pay would be responsible for cuts in services. This is no better than blaming the hostesses at The Presidents Club for the sexual harassment they endured. The women of Glasgow are the victims here not the villains.
Second, this suggestion of massive cuts from an unnamed source is not the position of the SNP leadership. It sounds like carping from those that were responsible for the discrimination, sore that they got found out.
Third, it doesn’t need to be the position. There is Scottish government fund of £500m set up to deal with these issues which remains pretty much unused. If this needs to be increased then that is what the Scottish government should do. At the end of the day by underpaying these women for more than a decade the council will have saved billions of pounds, far more than they will ever have to payout.
These women have been treated appallingly for more than a decade and for them to be blamed for seeking their entitlement is just another form of sexism and victimisation. The sooner these injustices are remedied the better.
The current administration is taking a positive approach to addressing these issues and we have a year of meetings planned to try and reach agreement on resolving these complicated problems. Sadly it seems some malcontents wish to disrail these discussions. Shame on them.
Regards,
Stefan Cross QC
So let’s see what gets printed. I don’t think it’s a coincidence that after Labour got embarrassed into backing the SNP position last week that suddenly there’s negative briefings going on. Of course I might be wrong but as the source is anonymous we are left to guess.
You make up your own mind
Stefan Cross
Glasgow - Breaking News! (25/01/18)
I suspect that disgruntled elements in Glasgow Labour are behind this kind of scaremongering nonsense, but we all know how they've been behaving for the past 10 years!
Let's see what the paper has to say tomorrow, but get ready to mount a big fightback via Facebook and Twitter.
First Minister and Equal Pay (21/01/18)
The Scottish Government has been quick to respond to my freedom of information (FoI) request to the First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon.
Apparently I will receive an answer to my FoI request by no later than 13 February 2018 which should make interesting reading.
First Minister and Equal Pay (16/01/18)
Here's a freedom of information (FoI) request I sent earlier today to Scotland's First Minister, Nicola Sturgeon.
Nicola is a local Glasgow MSP and made her personal position very clear last year when she said at the SNP's annual conference:
"Conference
"It may take us a bit of time to fix Labour’s mess, but I make this promise today.
"Fix it we will.
"The injustice suffered by low paid women in this city will be put right.
"Equal pay for equal work, denied for too long, will be delivered by the SNP."
Glasgow's councillors have the opportunity tomorrow to make good on these words and hopefully they will do so on a cross-party basis because, as the Court of Session has made clear - Glasgow's current pay arrangements are 'unfit for purpose'.
And that's exactly what Action 4 Equality Scotland has been saying for the past 10 years.
So let's put the past behind us, unite around the principle of 'equal pay for work of equal value' and get down to the business of putting things right.
16 January 2018
Nicola Sturgeon
First Minister of Scotland
By email to - scottish.ministers@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Dear First Minister
FOISA Request
I would like to make the following request under the Freedom of Information (Scotland) Act 2002.
1) Please provide the details of all local councils in Scotland who applied to the Scottish Government for 'additional borrowing consents' to help meet the backpay costs of their outstanding equal pay claims?
2) Please provide a breakdown of all applications approved by the Scottish Government, the sums of money involved for each council and an explanation of any individual applications that were rejected?
I look forward to your reply and would be grateful if you could respond to me by e-mail at: markirvine@compuserve.com
Kind regards
Mark Irvine
Meeting the Costs of Equal Pay (16/01/18)
Here's a very interesting and highly topical article from The Times which reports that the University of Oxford has secured a 100-year bond worth £750 million to fund the university's future development.
Now the 'bond' is really just a loan which the university has agreed to repay at the very low rate of interest of just 2.54 per cent.
But if it makes sense for one of the UK's most famous learning institutions, then why shouldn't there be a similar facility for Scotland's largest council to fix the awful mess Glasgow has made of equal pay.
https://www.timeshighereducation.com/news/oxford-issues-remarkable-ps750-million-100-year-bond
Oxford issues ‘remarkable’ £750 million, 100-year bond
University secures 2.54 per cent interest rate on borrowing to fund £1.5 billion capital programme
By John Morgan - The Times -Twitter: @JMorganTHE
The University of Oxford has announced a “remarkable” £750 million, 100-year bond, the largest yet in UK higher education.
The university, which secured an annual interest rate of 2.54 per cent on the bond thanks to its triple-A Moody’s credit rating, stronger than the UK government’s Aa2 rating, said that the money raised would finance “major new physical and virtual infrastructure development”, including “strategic capital projects that extend its outstanding capabilities in teaching and research”.
The universities of Cambridge, Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester and Southampton have already issued bonds, as have Cardiff, De Montfort and Keele universities. Oxford’s bond goes far beyond the previous largest – Cambridge’s £350 million, 40-year bond.
Universities with a bond will have to pay interest on the borrowing each year and then repay the principal amount at the end of the bond term.
Critics point out that bond borrowing must create new revenue streams that are sufficient to service the debt.
David Prout, Oxford’s pro vice-chancellor for planning and resources, told Times Higher Education: “This is a remarkable thing to have achieved today. It is a global statement of confidence in UK higher education in general and Oxford in particular.”
The money would support a £1.5 billion capital programme over the next 10 to15 years, said Dr Prout.
Decisions on the spending of the money will be “bought into right across the university and taken in a strategic way”, and directed to projects and programmes that “most benefit Oxford in terms of the academic mission of the university”, he continued.
He added: “This is a very long-term bond; [the] interest rate [of] just over 2.5 per cent is less than CPI [inflation] at the moment. It’s a great deal for Oxford.”
Asked about any potential concerns over Oxford’s level of borrowing, he said: “Oxford has managed to get a great deal on this loan. It’s a very, very long-term loan. We will take decisions that ensure that we are able to service this loan in the best possible way.”
Louise Richardson, Oxford vice-chancellor, said: “The rating we have received and the scale and duration of the bond that has been issued is a gratifying testament to the belief of the outside world in the extraordinary institution that has been developed over the centuries by our predecessors, as well as in the calibre of the research and education taking place here today.
“It is our responsibility to ensure that we use the opportunities accorded us by this bond to pass on to our successors an even stronger university.”
Oxford was advised on the bond, which matures in 2117, by JP Morgan Securities as lead adviser.
The university also said that the finance raised would allow it “greater freedom to generate far-reaching new academic projects, which will help power growth along the strategically crucial Oxford-Milton Keynes-Cambridge corridor”.
john.morgan@timeshighereducation.com
I've had lots of emails in recent days asking how Glasgow City Council will be able to meet the cost of settling its outstanding equal pay claims.
MSPs, MPs, elected councillors and council officials have all asked me the same question, but the answer is really quite obvious.
Because several years ago the Scottish Government agreed that local councils could apply for additional 'borrowing consents' to meet the costs of financing their equal pay settlements.
And the post below from the blog site archive shows that in 2010 five Scottish councils applied to borrow an £20 million for this very purpose - and these were all were very small councils compared to Glasgow which is the largest local authority in Scotland, by a very long way.
But always bear in mind all these equal pay claims represent 'lost income' to some of Glasgow's lowest paid council workers over the past 10 years and counting - including the cost of their pensions.
What's clear is that Glasgow's low paid women workers have not created the problem, so it would be monstrously stupid and unfair to suggest that they should somehow 'subsidise' a solution by accepting less than what they are due for everything they've lost over all these years.
I am going to submit a new FOI request to Scottish Ministers asking for an update on the 2010 figures, but it doesn't take a financial genius to work out that a 50 year bond agreed with Glasgow City Council would go a long way towards solving its problems over equal pay and its 'unfit for purpose' WPBR pay scheme.
Because ask yourselves this question - "Why would a Scottish council borrow money from a commercial lender when the Scottish Government has put in place a scheme to help local councils meet the costs of settling their outstanding equal pay claims?"
Now I don't know the answer to that which is why I've submitted an FoI request to Scottish Ministers.
Meeting the Costs of Equal Pay (April 2010)
Several Scottish councils have asked the Scottish Government for permission to borrow extra funds - to help them meet the back pay costs of their outstanding equal pay claims.
Here's what they've been allocated by way of additional 'borrowing consents' from the Scottish Government
Clackmannanshire Council
£1,513,000
East Dunbartonshire Council
£2,786,000
Falkirk Council
£5,633,000
Midlothian Council
By John Morgan - The Times -Twitter: @JMorganTHE
The University of Oxford has announced a “remarkable” £750 million, 100-year bond, the largest yet in UK higher education.
The university, which secured an annual interest rate of 2.54 per cent on the bond thanks to its triple-A Moody’s credit rating, stronger than the UK government’s Aa2 rating, said that the money raised would finance “major new physical and virtual infrastructure development”, including “strategic capital projects that extend its outstanding capabilities in teaching and research”.
The universities of Cambridge, Liverpool, Leeds, Manchester and Southampton have already issued bonds, as have Cardiff, De Montfort and Keele universities. Oxford’s bond goes far beyond the previous largest – Cambridge’s £350 million, 40-year bond.
Universities with a bond will have to pay interest on the borrowing each year and then repay the principal amount at the end of the bond term.
Critics point out that bond borrowing must create new revenue streams that are sufficient to service the debt.
David Prout, Oxford’s pro vice-chancellor for planning and resources, told Times Higher Education: “This is a remarkable thing to have achieved today. It is a global statement of confidence in UK higher education in general and Oxford in particular.”
The money would support a £1.5 billion capital programme over the next 10 to15 years, said Dr Prout.
Decisions on the spending of the money will be “bought into right across the university and taken in a strategic way”, and directed to projects and programmes that “most benefit Oxford in terms of the academic mission of the university”, he continued.
He added: “This is a very long-term bond; [the] interest rate [of] just over 2.5 per cent is less than CPI [inflation] at the moment. It’s a great deal for Oxford.”
Asked about any potential concerns over Oxford’s level of borrowing, he said: “Oxford has managed to get a great deal on this loan. It’s a very, very long-term loan. We will take decisions that ensure that we are able to service this loan in the best possible way.”
Louise Richardson, Oxford vice-chancellor, said: “The rating we have received and the scale and duration of the bond that has been issued is a gratifying testament to the belief of the outside world in the extraordinary institution that has been developed over the centuries by our predecessors, as well as in the calibre of the research and education taking place here today.
“It is our responsibility to ensure that we use the opportunities accorded us by this bond to pass on to our successors an even stronger university.”
Oxford was advised on the bond, which matures in 2117, by JP Morgan Securities as lead adviser.
The university also said that the finance raised would allow it “greater freedom to generate far-reaching new academic projects, which will help power growth along the strategically crucial Oxford-Milton Keynes-Cambridge corridor”.
john.morgan@timeshighereducation.com
Meeting the Costs of Equal Pay(12/01/18)
I've had lots of emails in recent days asking how Glasgow City Council will be able to meet the cost of settling its outstanding equal pay claims.
MSPs, MPs, elected councillors and council officials have all asked me the same question, but the answer is really quite obvious.
Because several years ago the Scottish Government agreed that local councils could apply for additional 'borrowing consents' to meet the costs of financing their equal pay settlements.
And the post below from the blog site archive shows that in 2010 five Scottish councils applied to borrow an £20 million for this very purpose - and these were all were very small councils compared to Glasgow which is the largest local authority in Scotland, by a very long way.
But always bear in mind all these equal pay claims represent 'lost income' to some of Glasgow's lowest paid council workers over the past 10 years and counting - including the cost of their pensions.
What's clear is that Glasgow's low paid women workers have not created the problem, so it would be monstrously stupid and unfair to suggest that they should somehow 'subsidise' a solution by accepting less than what they are due for everything they've lost over all these years.
I am going to submit a new FOI request to Scottish Ministers asking for an update on the 2010 figures, but it doesn't take a financial genius to work out that a 50 year bond agreed with Glasgow City Council would go a long way towards solving its problems over equal pay and its 'unfit for purpose' WPBR pay scheme.
Costs of Equal Pay (23/0814)
Here's a post from the blog site archive which explains the background to my recent Freedom of Information (FoI) request to Scottish Ministers about financial support for councils in relation to outstanding equal pay claims.
Now I don't know the answer to that which is why I've submitted an FoI request to Scottish Ministers.
Meeting the Costs of Equal Pay (17 May 2010)
As reported in last month several councils have applied to the Scottish Government for additional 'borrowing consents' - to help meet the back pay costs of settling their equal pay claims.
All of the councils involved have now been approached - to see if they are prepared to make renewed settlement offers - in the light of these new circumstances.
Any developments will be reported on the blog site - but readers are free to ask the same question of their local councillors and council leaders.
Contact details will be available on your own council's web site
Meeting the Costs of Equal Pay (April 2010)
Several Scottish councils have asked the Scottish Government for permission to borrow extra funds - to help them meet the back pay costs of their outstanding equal pay claims.
Here's what they've been allocated by way of additional 'borrowing consents' from the Scottish Government
Clackmannanshire Council
£1,513,000
East Dunbartonshire Council
£2,786,000
Falkirk Council
£5,633,000
Midlothian Council
£9,091,000
West Dunbartonshire Council
West Dunbartonshire Council
£4,413,000
It seems fair to assume that having asked to borrow these additional funds - the councils involved should now get their fingers out and put firm proposals on the table.
And given that large sums of public money are involved - Action 4 Equality Scotland will ensure that there is a fair and just settlement of people's claims.
It seems fair to assume that having asked to borrow these additional funds - the councils involved should now get their fingers out and put firm proposals on the table.
And given that large sums of public money are involved - Action 4 Equality Scotland will ensure that there is a fair and just settlement of people's claims.
