Star comment: A jolly? Or a jolly good way to boost our region?
The full facts should be presented.
There are two sides to every story and a disagreement over the cost of a foreign trip is unlikely to be reconciled any time soon.
The Taxpayers Alliance is infuriated that officials visited the French Riviera to attend a major property conference. The organisation has an axe to grind when it comes to spending public money. It highlights areas where it believes public money is being wasted and seeks good value on behalf of citizens.
On the face of it, their protestations about a trip to the French Riveria may be valid. The trip appears to be a ‘jolly’, which certainly beats a wet day in the Black Country.
The proof, of course, will be in the pudding.
The councils involved say the visit brought in deals and also raised the profile of our region. It is up to them to provide tangible proof that the money was well spent, rather than offer PR spin to satisfy critics. It is no good talking about wider benefits, people will rightly want to know what deals were secured and what they are worth. There will be an expectation that the tangible benefits far outweigh the costs.
It is up to regeneration bosses representing Dudley, Wolverhampton, Staffordshire and Birmingham to present evidence. People need to know that they caught the eye of potential suitors during their visit to Cannes.
They are duty bound to be open and transparent on the full cost and benefit of the trip. They should publish all details of contacts signed as a direct result of the trip to Cannes. The facts will help people to decide whether the trip was a jolly or whether it was good value for money. The full facts should be presented.
Should we be eating more fruit and veg? Absolutely. Should they be subsidised by the taxpayer? Well, maybe.
A report by experts based in the West Midlands has found cheaper veg would increase the amount we eat by 15 per cent. There’s no surprise in that. It’s a basic concept of supply and demand, the kind of thing many of us learned in A-level economics. Make items cheaper and we will be more inclined to buy it.
Mention the word subsidy and people get worked up. Any minister taking action would inevitably stand accused of turning Britain into a nanny state.
The truth is we are already there – we tax cigarettes to discourage people to buy them and even hide them away in shop cupboards; we tax sugary drinks because they are bad for us; add duty to petrol because driving is bad for the environment. Subsidising fruit and veg could be the next natural step.
