Protective shield?

On the same day that the Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond was meeting senior members of the UK government to put the case for more financial powers to safeguard jobs, Wales gets confirmation that 150 jobs are to be lost at the Newport Passport Office.

Unemployment in Wales is higher than the UK average. In difficult economic times, Wales fairs worse. Higher than average unemployment levels in the late 1960s led to a "regional policy" which devolved civil service jobs out of London. The Passport Office, the DVLA in Swansea and the Mint in Llantrisant were set up in Wales as part of this regional policy, creating hundreds of jobs. And now, because of the ConDem's public spending cuts, many of those jobs are at risk.

Every single job in Wales is worth fighting for, especially jobs which pay more than the minimum wage. Every job lost means less money circulating in our already weak economy, leading to job losses in the private sector too. As the PCS Union have argued, it makes no sense during a recession to enforce more people to take benefits from the public purse instead of paying in to the taxation pot.

Dependence on a Westminster government to either give or take away jobs is unsustainable for Scotland and for Wales. With his demands for more fiscal autonomy, the Scottish First Minister aims to ensure a long term income stream. Cuts to the Scottish budget from Westminster will continue to be savage. More fiscal autonomy will provide an element of resilience, a buffer to Westminster's cuts. Income from excise duties, energy revenues and more borrowing powers will come in handy over the next few years.

Meanwhile, Wales's First Minister was yesterday reported to be open minded about the Assembly gaining financial powers, having been decidedly lukewarm before the election. The cuts in Wales are savage too, and Labour have just won an election on the back of a promise to protect people in Wales from the Tories cuts, to act as a shield against them. Without powers over finance, they can't.

Convention of the Left

I've just returned from the Convention of the Left in Manchester, where I was a speaker at the meeting referred to here.

I talked about the progressive left agenda developing at a Welsh Assembly level with Plaid and Labour in coalition, delivering policies which are clearly to the left of New Labour in London. While the contributors in the previous sessions wrung their hands about the privatisation in the NHS in England, I was able to talk about the One Wales commitment to "firmly reject the privatisation of NHS services or the organisation of such services on market models", and to reiteriate our pledge to "guarantee public ownership, public funding and public control of this vital service". Reference was also made to the SNP government's opposition to Trident submarines in Scottish waters.

The left in England seem to have some kind of mind-blank on these positive developments. They have legitimate fears of "nationalism" because the BNP have gained ground in recent years, and because calls for an English parliament often don't come from the most progressive of places. But we (socialists from Wales, Scotland and Ireland) were saying that national identity doesn't have to be exclusionary. There's nothing contradictory about being a Welsh internationalist.

The SSP's Frances Curran posed the most pertinent question of the day. Scotland faces a referendum on independence in just two years time. People are going to have to decide whether they are supporting a yes or a no vote. The left in England won't have a vote of course, but they will have to take a position. "Whose side will you be on?" she asked. "With the Tories and Gordon Brown or with the SSP, SNP and the Greens?" The debate that ensued shows that we'll have to wait a while before we get the answer to that.

Clearance Sale

I've just returned from my holiday in the Scottish Highlands. A story at the forefront of the news in Scotland last week was the financial difficulties of the Duke of Sutherland, reportedly as a result of the credit crunch.

The Duke is one of the richest man in the UK, but he wants to 'rebalance' his family's assets by selling the major art works that he owns. Two Old Master Titan paintings are up for sale for the princely sum of £100 million. The paintings are the main attraction at the National Galleries of Scotland and are a magnet for visitors. The Duke has said that if the National Galleries buy the two paintings, as well as securing their future he will leave the rest of his renaissance collection in Edinburgh as well for the next 21 years. These paintings have great appeal and attract high-value tourism into Edinburgh. The city will undoubtedly want to do all it can to keep these paintings in the National Galleries. But the debate in Scotland is whether it is right to spend public money buying these paintings?

The Duke himself descends from the Sutherlands, a noble family who benefited greatly from the Highland Clearances, where the crofters living in the Highlands were evicted en masse by landowners who wanted to make money out of the land.

The paintings have been looked after, insured and maintained from the public purse for the last 60 years. Should a man who has inherited his wealth as a result of the Highland Clearances be allowed to take £100million from the Scottish public purse today? I'd say no, but it looks as though the Scottish Government has no way of ensuring the paintings remain in Scotland without handing over the £100million.