The TaxPayers' Alliance - Media Coverage

Daily Mail: HYPOCRITES

BY IAN DRURY

MPs were accused of 'shameful hypocrisy' last night for refusing to back down in a battle to expose exactly how they spend their £11.8milliona-year housing perk.

Despite pledges for greater transparency on expenses from the main party leaders, MPs are stubbornly fighting an order to publish detailed breakdowns of their allowances to run second homes.

Critics said the refusal, spearheaded by Commons Speaker Michael Martin – who this week set up a review of MPs' expenses – was a 'squalid' bid to shroud taxpayer-funded Parliamentary allowances in secrecy.

Corin Taylor of the TaxPayers' Alliance said: 'It is shameful hypocrisy for MPs to behave in this way.

'It is a sad state of affairs that on one hand they say they will be more open about spending public money, while doing everything in their power to keep it secret.'

Freedom of Information campaigners are pressing the House of Commons authorities to release receipts showing in detail how each MP spends his or her £22,110-a-year additional costs allowance.

But the Commons Commission, chaired by Speaker Martin, has refused to release the information on the grounds that it is an invasion of privacy.

Today an Information Tribunal panel will begin a twoday hearing on the dispute, which has been running for four years.

The result may not be released for several weeks and could result in a further appeal to the High Court.

Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg have all urged MPs to come clean about their office and housing allowances in the wake of the Derek Conway scandal. The Tory backbencher paid his sons £75,000 of public money to do research for him even though they were full-time university students.

The outcry led to Speaker Martin promising to review MPs' perks in a bid to ensure 'transparency'.

But despite the promise of a new era of openness, the Commons Commission has refused to back down in its attempt to keep details about MPs' second homes allowances secret. Heather Brooke, of antisecrecy campaign group Your Right To Know, who first requested the information, said: 'Disclosure of MPs' expenses in a manner that allows scrutiny is in the public interest and necessary for open government. The current breakdown by categoriesis useless in terms of holding MPs to account.

'None of the current abuses of MPs' expenses can be seen in such bulk figures.

'It isn't right that the only way the public can uncover the detail necessary to ensure against corruption is through leaks, gossip and rumour.'

But Nick Harvey, a Libem member of the Commons Commission, said: 'If the public wants to know about our office, travel and staff costs that's perfectly legitimate, but what goes on behind our personal front doors is our business.

'If we're going to get to the state where local press or political opponents complain because we spent £25 on a kettle when Argos does them for £6, or we bought curtains from John Lewis when you can get them for less at the Co- op, then they can get lost.

'It's no business of the public what we spend on our own homes.'

Daily Mirror: MEET THE SLEAZEBUSTERS

by James Lyons

SIX politicians were named yesterday as Commons sleazebusters - and five of them were immediately slammed as not being up to the job.

Commons speaker Michael Martin promised urgent action to restore public trust shattered by the Derek Conway scandal and other revelations about MPs' pay and perks.

But Mr Martin sparked outrage by picking politicians tainted by scandal or a history of fighting openness to carry out a shake-up. Critics suggested the group was aimed at organising a cosy fix rather than ending abuses.

Mark Wallace, of the Taxpayers' Alliance pressure group, said: "This smacks of putting the foxes in charge of the henhouse."

Mr Martin, 62, has chosen Harriet Harman, Theresa May, David Maclean, Nick Harvey and Sir Stuart Bell. The Speaker himself has faced flak for trying to keep MPs' perks secret. He has claimed more than £13,925 in travel expenses and his wife Mary has spent £4,200 of public money on cabs in the last four years.

Cabinet minister Ms Harman was dragged into the Donorgate scandal after unwittingly taking £5,000 from dodgy backer David Abrahams.

Ex-Tory chief whip Mr Maclean led a campaign to stop voters finding out how their cash is spent. Labour backbencher Sir Stuart, whose wife picks up £35,000 as his secretary, also backed his secrecy bill.

Lib Dem Mr Harvey is a parttime lobbyist, earning up to £10,000 as a "communications strategist". Only senior Tory Ms May is untouched by any row over her financial affairs.

Former sleaze watchdog Sir Alistair Graham said last night: "I don't think people with a vested interest can be impartial and objective."

Colourful past so of MPs chosen to clean up perks scandal

Harriet Harman: Unwittingly accepted £5,000 from dodgy donor David Abrahams

Nick Harvey: Earns up to £10,000 as a "part time" "communications strategist"

Michael Martin: Claimed £13,925 in travel exs

David Maclean: Led campaign to keep details of MPs' expenses a secret

Sir Stuart Bell: Backed secrecy bill. Employs his wife on £35,000 of taxpayers' money

Daily Mirror: 2,000 civil servants sick rap

ALMOST 2,000 civil servants face disciplinary action because of unacceptable sickness records.

The Department for Social Development was the worst offender according to figures produced by Finance Minister Peter Robinson.

Poorly staff from the 11 departments and agencies face a warning or notice of dismissal.

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance said: "It is appaling that so many civil servants are failing to live up to basic professional standards.

"All taxpayers want is for the people they pay to turn up to work and do a decent job - every penny counts."

A total of 1,838 people were undergoing "inefficiency action" under statistics gathered at the end of last month.

There are around 30,000 employees across the service.

Slim down the fat cats

When Gordon Brown turned on the public spending taps seven years ago, there was general delight at the end of years of underspending on public services. But some of us warned of the dangers of giving overgenerous awards without reforms that would ensure taxpayers’ cash was spent wisely. And so it came to pass. There has been waste on an epic scale as public sector managers have gorged on the torrent of cash. Improvements in public services did occur, but they were hardly value for money when compared with the tens of billions of pounds poured in.

There was one consequence that was harder to spot at the time: the rise of the public sector fat cat. Today we report research from the TaxPayers’ Alliance, a group which campaigns for the aims of “lower taxes and better government”. It shows there are now 17 people in the public sector earning more than £500,000 a year and one, Adam Crozier, chief executive of Royal Mail, who takes home more than £1m.

Top earners in the public sector have continued to rake in ever larger amounts even as the prime minister has tried to put brakes on the gravy train for lowlier public sector employees. While Mr Brown wants rank and file government employees to settle for salary increases within the government’s 2% inflation target, the top 300 have seen their pay rise by an average of nearly 13% over the past year. Even the prime minister is falling behind in the pay race. His salary of nearly £189,000 ranks him only 143rd in the list. Such is the acceleration of salary increases at the top in the public sector that this compares with Tony Blair’s ranking of 88th last year.

Defenders of large public sector salaries will say that if you pay peanuts you get monkeys and that people handling large budgets and matters of national importance deserve to be properly rewarded. And it is true that some have deserved better salaries and have worked hard for their money. Apologists will also point to the private sector, where rewards at the top are far larger than anything the state can offer and, in the City, are on a scale that borders on the obscene.

The trouble is there is little evidence that the taxpayer is getting value for money from its highly paid public sector elite. In Labour’s ever-larger public sector tent, reward is linked only tenuously to performance and is often given even in circumstances of failure. In the private sector, executives resign or are sacked when things go wrong, as we have seen with recent high-profile departures from the top American banks, albeit with enough cash to ensure that they never have to work again. At the top of the public sector, job security and generous pensions are the norm. Comparing public and private salaries is like comparing apples and pears.

Yet such comparisons are used to bump up public sector salaries. Those who work for Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, must be paid as much as the people they regulate, so 11 of those listed in the top 100 are from that body alone. The National Health Service, whose budget has increased by 50% in real terms since 2000, has its own burgeoning elite; at least 80 NHS people in the list earn more than £150,000.

There is another issue. The TaxPayers’ Alliance obtained its information by digging through the annual reports of 126 public sector bodies. Their figures, as the group admits, are almost certainly an underestimate. Some bodies are opaque about salaries, while there is no easy way of discovering how many GPs, for example, earn more than £250,000 a year. Taxpayers should be able to find out easily how much the government pays on their behalf, as happens in the United States.

Yet the public sector gravy train looks like continuing its well upholstered journey for some time. As always, the government promises to get tough on public sector waste. It should start by looking at those sitting round the tables in its own boardrooms, how much they are getting paid and what value they deliver.

Quango fat cats reap the price

By Maurice Chittenden with additional reporting by Anna Mikhailova and Laila Sennah

WHEN Stephen Carter ran Ofcom, the telecoms and broadcasting regulator, he kept a life-size poster of Michael Caine, star of the British gangster movie Get Carter, behind his office desk.

The £90m building bulges out of London’s riverside next to the site of the Rose Theatre where Shakespeare once trod the boards.

Today it is revealed as the epicentre of the public sector “fat cat” world. Ofcom has no fewer than 11 executives in the top 100 of a new “rich list” of public servants produced by the TaxPayers’ Alliance.

Carter, its former chief executive, leads the pack. The topiary in the front garden of his £2.9m house in Barnes, southwest London, is as exquisite as you would expect from a man who has been paid more than £250,000 to stay at home on “gardening leave” for eight months.

Even with so little time in the office Carter, 43, was the biggest earner at Ofcom last year. As the outgoing boss he picked up a total remuneration in salary, pension and benefits of £396,565.

While he was in charge at Ofcom, rigged phone-ins on GMTV generated £35m in revenues. Although it imposed a £2m fine, and the Serious Fraud Office has said it might investigate, Ofcom intervened only after the scandal was exposed by journalists.

ITV attempted to make the most of revenues from phone-ins, text messaging and “red button” voting on shows including Ant and Dec’s Saturday Night Takeaway and the The X Factor.

In all, Ofcom has 13 of the 300 places on the rich list. It claims it is not really in the public sector because its funding comes from the television and radio industry.

But it collects £61m a year from broadcasters, including the BBC, which is funded by licence fee payers. It is also listed as a public corporation in Whitehall under the joint auspices of the Department for Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform.

Neither the BBC nor Ofcom would say how much the corporation pays, but Ofcom has said it wants the BBC to pay another £32m a year from 2014 for digital broadcasts.

Ofcom, which was launched at the end of 2003 to replace the work of five previous agencies, says that from the outset “we decided to employ fewer, better-paid staff”.

Carter had already been well remunerated before arriving for work there. A one-time Labour activist, he had received a pay-off and bonus of more than £1.6m from his previous employer, NTL, the cable company, even though it had filed for bankruptcy protection in the United States.

Patricia Hewitt, then trade and industry secretary, ratified Carter’s appointment to Ofcom before her department launched an inquiry into excessive pay-offs for top executives. He was put on gardening leave when he resigned from Ofcom after three years amid rumours that he might become the new head of ITV. Instead he has now become chief executive of Brunswick, the consultancy firm, on an undisclosed salary.

Ed Richards, the new chief executive at Ofcom and a former adviser to Tony Blair on media and telecoms, earned £392,343 last year. Even Dominic Morris, who runs Richards’s office, received £213,223. That is only £1,700 less than Alistair Buchanan, who is chief executive of Ofgem, which oversees gas and electricity markets worth billions of pounds a year.

Kip Meek, Ofcom’s chief policy partner, left last year and was paid £125,335 for five months’ gardening leave. Sean Williams, the partner who oversaw competition policy, resigned in March of this year but was still paid a bonus of £40,000. The regulator says it is “entirely appropriate” to give him the sum to reflect his contribution during the previous year.

Ofcom claims the practice of imposing gardening leave is appropriate because of the confidential and commercially sensitive information seen by Carter and Meek while at work.

Carter said last week: “I am on the TaxPayers’ Alliance hitlist but the numbers say what the numbers say. It doesn’t seem to be a matter of fairness or unfairness. It’s a matter of fact.

“People must decided whether Ofcom is delivering value and I don’t think there is much debate about that.”

He added: “Efficiency of public bodies is a very legitimate debate. Funnelling that debate through individual salary makes good copy but poor analysis.”

But Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers’ Alliance, said: “Taxpayers have a right to know how much senior public sector officials are being paid because only then can we judge whether they deserve their remuneration.

“Too often public sector executives are rewarded handsomely even when they fail. At a time when the government is rightly aiming to restrain public sector pay increases to 2%, these top officials shouldn’t be hiking their pay by six times as much.”

The 300 people on the list all received at least £150,000 last year from government departments, quangos and other public bodies or corporations.

Not all are funded by the taxpayer but they are regulatory bodies set up by the government or public corporations such as Royal Mail.

At the top of the league table sits Adam Crozier, the group chief executive of Royal Mail, who saw his total package increase by 21% last year to £1.25m, while he cancelled the second mail delivery and increased the price of stamps. He lives in a £1.6m house in Weybridge, Surrey.

Mark Thompson, the director-general of the BBC, had a 2.35% increase to £788,000. He is fifth overall and is one of 10 BBC employees on the list, which has been compiled largely from public accounts.

It does not mention Jonathan Ross, who earns a reported £6m a year from licence-payers money, or other presenters and executives below board level.

Another broadcaster, Andy Duncan, chief executive of Channel 4, which receives a large state subsidy, collected £622,000 last year, an increase of 13.3%. He presided over a series of onscreen fiascos, including a row over racist abuse against Shilpa Shetty, the Bollywood actress, which led to calls for his resignation. His package included a bonus of £149,000.

John Tiner, chief executive of the Financial Services Authority, earned a 14% increase to £652,577 last year. His package included a performance-related bonus of £95,000. The FSA at last started securing scalps after two years without a single catch.

Under Gordon Brown the list is likely to grow further. Last week he announced in the Queen’s speech that seven new publicly funded bodies would be created in the new parliamentary session. They include a committee on climate change to advise on carbon emission targets. The number of quangos has ballooned since Labour came to power, despite a pledge from Tony Blair in 1996 to consign them to the “dustbin of history”.

Their total cost has increased by 60% since 2003. There are now nearly 900 quangos and agencies with 30,000 members, costing taxpayers at least £340m every day.

The public sector list features 10 people working on the 2012 London Olympics. They include David Higgins, chief executive of the Olympic Delivery Authority, who earned £631,000, and Lord Coe, executive chairman of the London Organising Committee, who collected £285,000.

Median earnings across the whole economy rose by 2.9% in the year to April to £457 a week, £23,764 a year. The latest figures show that earnings are rising by 3.7%, including bonuses.

The 82 highest-paid people within the NHS are on the list. Most are directors at hospital trusts. They earnt an average of £181,956 each - compared with the starting salary for a nurse of £22,000.

The highest-paid is Norman Lindsay, director of turnaround at Whipps Cross University Hospital NHS Trust in north London. He collects £395,000 a year - roughly equivalent to a nurse’s annual salary every three weeks. Sir Jonathan Michael, the former chief executive of the trust that runs both St Thomas’s, the hospital nearest to Downing Street, and Guy’s, received £231,000 last year. He is now at BT.

The report does not include dozens of NHS doctors and dentists who now earn more than £250,000 a year. They declare their earnings to HM Revenue and Customs which itself has eight names on the public sector rich list.

Other names include John Woodward, who earns £230,000 a year, a rise of 13.4%, as chief executive of the UK Film Council. Along with all his 85 staff, he is entitled to free cinema tickets worth £250 per year and £100 towards membership of a gym.

Peter Hendy, the Transport for London (TfL) commissioner, earned £435,200 last year - including a performance bonus of £115,200. The report calculates that it takes him 4 hours 11 minutes to earn every £1,000, roughly equivalent to the time taken by his daily commute to the office and back to his home in Bath. His rail travel is subsidised and he has a free Oyster card on the London Underground.

The 3m Tube users who suffer late, cramped and dirty trains on the London Underground might bridle at his blog on MySpace, the internet meeting place.

“Wow!” he said in one recent post. “Gordon Brown was photographed on the Tube on his way to work while a famous American actress flashed her Oyster card on the TV last week saying that buses were the fastest way to get around London.

“I’ve never heard of Kim Cattrall though I understand that the show she was in, Sex and the City, was pretty popular. I was impressed that this lady, despite her wealth, chose to use an Oyster card which saves her money! It is great to see that people from all walks of life are using public transport and appreciating it for what it is.”

While Hendy is stargazing, Tube drivers appear to be concerned with more serious matters. “District Dave” blogs about passenger safety and TfL’s decision to buy Metronet, a Tube line maintenance firm that had gone into administration.

A spokesman for Hendy said: “TfL is building a world-class transport system for a world-class city. The salary of the commissioner will reflect the importance and success of that work. If we need to pay competitive salaries to secure people with the talent and experience of Peter Hendy we will do so.

“Under Peter’s leadership, TfL has seen a continued increase in bus and Tube passenger numbers, with a record one billion using the Underground in the year to April 2007. This summer London successfully hosted the start of the Tour de France leading to a further increase in cycling numbers.”

So who protects the public from its highly paid servants? The current auditor-general, Sir John Bourn, makes an appearance himself at 149 on the list, with total remuneration of £185,725, which includes travel expenditure of £26,667 incurred when Lady Bourn accompanied him on official business. He is to retire in January, following controversy over his office’s £392,000 three-year claim for “travel and sustenance”.

Is he worth it?

SIR JOHN GIEVE, a Whitehall mandarin who has moved up the ranks to become a deputy governor of the Bank of England, tops a list of people the TaxPayers’ Alliance says have been rewarded for failure.

Gieve was moved from the Home Office after a scandal over the number of freed foreign prisoners who were supposed to be deported, and problems with the accounts.

That he should be put in charge of the financial system’s stability at the Bank was described by Sir Richard Bacon, a member of the Commons public accounts committee, as “pure Gilbert and Sullivan”.

Gieve, 57, took a break just as Northern Rock’s troubles began in August.

John McFall, chairman of the Treasury select committee, accused him of being “asleep in the back shop while there was a mugging out front” as Gieve admitted he had not read Northern Rock’s interim accounts before the crisis.

The TaxPayers’ Alliance is also highly critical of Rose Gibb, former chief executive of Maidstone and Tunbridge Wells NHS trust, who was paid £150,000 last year while presiding over a fatal outbreak of clostridium difficile.

Others on the alliance’s list include Adam Crozier, chief executive at Royal Mail, and Mark Thompson, director-general of the BBC.

Sunday Times: Fat cat row over public sector pay

By David Smith and Maurice Chittenden

GORDON BROWN is facing a “fat cat” row as official figures show that the highest earners in the public sector have seen their pay rise by six times the rate of inflation and more than three times the national average.

The top 300 bosses in the state sector saw their salaries increase 12.8% last year, boosting their pay to an average £237,564, according to a public sector “rich list”. Seventeen earned more than £500,000 per year.

The report prepared by the TaxPayers’ Alliance, a pressure group trying to cut tax, undermines Brown’s pledge to keep pay rises for rank and file public sector workers within the government’s 2% inflation target.

“It’s all very well increasing top pay in the public sector but it is difficult to see what we are getting for the money,” said Chris Grayling, the Conservative shadow work and pensions secretary. “In many parts of the public sector things aren’t getting any better and people are asking: where’s the money going?”

The study, which also identifies high-earners who underperformed or failed in their duties, understates the full extent of the pay bonanza because it only lists those whose earnings are declared in published accounts.

Several thousand unnamed GPs meet the £150,000 of annual earnings to qualify for the list, as do many executives and broadcasters at the BBC. The TaxPayers’ Alliance issues a separate rich list to cover largesse in local government.

The 10 highest paid on its list earn an average of £799,000, 40 times as much as the basic pay for a nurse or soldier.

Some of those on the list were awarded bonuses despite failing to fulfil important duties or leaving for better-paid posts.

“There is a complete mismatch between rewards and performance,” said Corin Taylor, research director at the TaxPayers’ Alliance. “Taxpayers don’t begrudge proper salaries being paid to people who perform but this list shows that plenty of people have been paid extremely well for poor performance.”

Brown has repeatedly insisted that public sector pay must be kept under tight control. In a speech to the Trades Union Congress in September, he said: “Pay discipline is essential to prevent inflation, to maintain growth and to create more jobs.”

Despite the high salaries some public sector executives receive perks such as free cinema tickets, gym use and rail travel.

Brown’s pay of £188,849, which combines his pay as premier with his parliamentary salary, is only enough to secure him 143rd place. Tony Blair was 88th last year, indicating rapid pay inflation.

Whitehall mandarins prosper. There are 10 civil servants, each from the Cabinet Office and the Ministry of Defence, on the list.

At the top of the league sits Adam Crozier, group chief executive of Royal Mail, who saw his total package increase by 21% last year to £1.25m, even as he cancelled the second mail delivery and increased the price of stamps. The figures show that he can earn £1,000 in an hour and 27 minutes seated at his desk.

Eleven of the top 100 public sector executives are from Ofcom, the broadcasting regulator, which was caught on the hop by recent scandals over televi-sion phone-in competitions.

The figures were derived from the annual reports of 126 public sector bodies. The TaxPayers’ Alliance said the information should be more freely available.

Mirror: Embassy kids' £20m school bill

OVER £20million a year of taxpayers' cash is used to send the children of Foreign Office staff to top boarding schools.

The perk for staff sent around the world, includes nine children sent to Eton and eight to Winchester.

Last year, 540 children were privately educated at a cost of £24,000 each.

Matthew Elliott at Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "Taxpayers shouldn't be expected to pick up the tab for school fees of Foreign Office mandarins."

Metro: Diplomats 'milk £20m school perk'

Taxpayers are being billed more than £20million a year to the send children of Foreign Office diplomats to top private boarding schools.

Thanks to a little-publicised perk, revered institutions such as Eton and Winchester are among schools available to foreign-posted ambassadors and other embassy staff.

Most of the 540 children educated privately are boarders and campaigners question the wisdom of spending an annual average of around £24,000 per child so diplomatic offspring can go private.

The new figures, obtained under the Freedom of Information Act, show that last year nine youngsters were sent to Eton, eight to Winchester and one to Roedean, the exclusive girls' school.

Eton costs £26,490 a year, Winchester College is £25,155 and Roedean charges £25,950.

The total cost of sending children of government workers - including spies, Ministry of Defence workers and the military's top brass working - is annually more than £100million.

The Foreign Office says it insists, where possible, that children of diplomatic staff are educated locally in the country where their parents are posted and only pays for boarding schools so their education is not disrupted.

It argues that diplomats must be prepared to move anywhere in the world at very short notice.

Last year, the Foreign Office spent £20.64million on school fees for staff children, of which £13million is paid to UK schools and the rest abroad, where around 150 youngsters are educated.

The cost of schooling for the Foreign Office has rocketed in the past two years, up £3million from 2005.

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the Taxpayers' Alliance, said: "Taxpayers shouldn't be expected to pick up to tab for the school fees of Foreign Office mandarins.

"Government policy has been actively hostile to private schools and they are considering taking away their charitable status, so it's pretty hypocritical to then subsidies private education for the children of government employees.

"Ambassadors already get top salaries, free accommodation and gold-plated pensions, so they should pay the fees themselves."

A spokesman for the Foreign and Commonwealth Office said: "We expect children who accompany their parents on postings overseas to use free state schooling if it is available locally and suitable.

"If suitable English-language schooling is not available free of charge locally but is available at fee-charging schools, we refund fees to enable children to receive the education they would be entitled to in the UK."

Daily Express: MPs' gravy train to their second home

By Gabriel Milland, Political Correspondent

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "With all-night sittings, there was an argument for MPs having a taxpayer-funded London flat, but these days those within commuting distance should go home."

Lancashire Evening Post: Jargon-buster scheme is 'bonkers'

Jargon-busters are being paid thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money - so council officials can communicate in plain English.

Language boffins have been hired by County Hall at a cost of £1,000 a year to edit documents so the public can understand them.

Staff will even be sent on courses to teach them how to cut out jargon.

Bosses at Lancashire County Council said the move will save money in the long run.

But today outraged politicians branded it "bonkers" and a "total waste of money".

Nigel Evans, MP for Ribble Valley, said: "It's a total waste of money, total rubbish. They should be able to put things into plain English in the first place and if they can't they should not be in the job."

County Hall has shelled out the cash to be members of the Plain English Campaign.

County Coun David Whipp, leader of the Liberal Democrat group on the council, said: "I don't think this is public money well spent, this should be the bread and butter of local council activity."

Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the Taxpayers Alliance, said: "If council officials can't speak to members of the public in plain English they should not be in their jobs."

The council has been working with organisations that promote the use of plain English for more than five years, according to council leader Hazel Harding, but it has only recently signed up with the Plain English Campaign.

Coun Harding said "It is important to us that we clearly communicate everything we do."

Birmingham Post: AWM defends BizTV funding

By Joanna Geary, Media & Marketing Editor

Advantage West Midlands has robustly defended its funding of regional business news service BizTV, after it was criticised as a waste of money.

The regional development agency dismissed claims made by lobby group The Tax Payer's Alliance (TPA) the service was too costly as "utter nonsense" and "unfounded".

According to information obtained by TPA under the Freedom of Information Act, BizTV, which offers to produce free videos for West Midland businesses, received £3.6 million between December 2003 and September 2007. This included production, editing, design, web hosting and distribution.

Despite initially making an incorrect claim the money was spent in the last nine months, TPA spokeswoman Fiona McEvoyon said £3.6 million over five years was too much.

Ms McEvoyon said: "I am still concerned AWM is spending this amount on a website that, in my opinion, is seeing a low amount of hits. This is an organisation that has invested heavily in a network many people in the region seem to be completely unaware of.

"Surely there are more practicable ways taxpayer money can be spent to support businesses."

According to the information obtained by the TPA, BizTV attracts 850 unique users a month.

The site provides a showcase for videos it produces, including videos of business events and interviews with business people. It hosts promotional videos produced by companies and provides business pictures and regional news.

A spokesman for AWM said the agency whole-heartedly supported the work of BizTV and Ms McEvoyon's allegations were unfounded.

He said: "The fact Ms McEvoyon's original spending claim was incorrect demonstrates she does not understand BizTV or what it does. I'm shocked the TPA could make such a glaring error.

"We are very happy with BizTV. It is a superb service and has provided very significant help to small businesses. It has given small firms a video platform which they have been able to use to promote themselves in the UK and abroad.

"Our confidence in the service is demonstrated by the fact BizTV has secured further funding.

AWM gave the example of Birmingham-based business Willearn, which used BizTV to create a promotional video for security product DoorDefender.

The AWM spokesman said: "DoorDefender has gone on to great things, winning a number of contracts and awards. Now that is not all down to the BizTV video, but it has certainly made a contribution."

AWM also defended the hit rate of the website and suggested TPA had little knowledge of how it compared to other sites.

But one local multimedia expert, who did not wish to be named, agreed that the amount of money allocated to the BizTV project seemed exceptionally large.

He said: "I'm staggered at the cost. Looking at what they do, to think they've spent £3.6 million in five years is absolutely astounding.

"I have been mentoring two students that are just about to put their high-quality videos up onto YouTube. Within months I expect them to get more hits than BizTV has got in years and all for minimum cost."

Guardian: Swap stickers to help force show children its face

By Steven Morris

Children have long haggled over "swaps" of stickers featuring their favourite footballer or film character. But soon playgrounds in Devon may be filled with children poring over sticker albums containing images of their local police officers.

Photographs of officers have been turned into stickers that can be collected in albums being handed out to schools. The stickers reflect the force's hierarchy, with the chief constable, Stephen Otter, featured on a special gold sticker while more junior staff are on silver and bronze.

To win a sticker children aged seven to 11 are being asked to approach police officers, community support officers or special constables. The officer will ask the child a question about crime or safety and hand over a sticker if they answer correctly.

Sergeant Dave Casley, who devised the scheme, said: "We wanted to find a way to work with the children and help them understand what policing is all about."

More than 800 albums are being handed out to primary schools in Brixham and Newton Abbot. Each town has a set of 30 stickers, half of which feature photographs of local officers. The others show pictures of unnamed officers from specialist departments such as the dog and firearms units. Children have until January to fill their albums, after which they must take them to a police station, complete them with a fingerprint and enter a prize draw. The prize is a trip to the force's Exeter headquarters.

Mr Otter said: "This is an excellent and innovative way of working with younger people."

Matthew Elliot, chief executive of the Taxpayers Alliance, branded the scheme a waste of money. "Taxpayers are not grateful for PR gimmicks which do nothing to increase respect for the police force. Children will only respect the police if they see them tackling crime effectively."

Newcastle Evening Chronicle: £250,000 - the bill for old bill!

By Liz Walker

SUSPENDED police officers and support staff are costing tax payers a small fortune.

Seventeen police employees are suspended on full pay for allegations including assault, burglary, deception and being drunk and disorderly.

And so far their "gardening leave" has cost the tax payer almost £250,000.

Figures obtained by the Chronicle under the Freedom of Information Act revealed Northumbria Police has 12 police officers, a special constable, a community support officer and a civilian member of staff currently suspended on full pay.

These include two sergeants accused of assault and PCs accused of dishonesty, attempted burglary and inappropriate behaviour.

One PC has been suspended for 25 months - on a salary of £29,029 and in total these suspensions alone have so far cost the force £215,635.

The figure is much higher than neighbouring Durham Constabulary where just one officer and one support staff member are suspended on full pay.

The Northumbria Police Federation said they will continue to put pressure on the force to change their "robust" policy and allow suspended staff to continue to be "usefully employed" in an administrative or training role.

Federation chair Russ Watson said: "We would prefer that suspended staff are usefully employed in an administrative role so they are not a burden on the tax payer.

"We are also pressing the force over the delays in bringing the cases to a conclusion.

"The vast majority of the force are hard working and committed to protecting the public but there are a few who make mistakes - often errors of judgement.

"Many investigations result in a warning or a fine and we would like officers to be able to learn from their mistakes rather than be beaten with a big stick in a punishment culture.

"Long term suspensions also leave the employee feeling isolated and can lead to depression.

"We are working with the force to try and bring the number of suspensions down."

Deputy Chief Constable David Warcup, who takes the final decision on suspending officers, defended his approach.

He said: "Northumbria Police employs over 6,000 officers and staff, the vast majority of which act with the utmost integrity and professionalism at all times.

"However, we respond robustly when any employee is suspected of behaving in a way which is not in keeping with those high standards.

"It is not acceptable for anyone employed by Northumbria Police to indulge in criminal behaviour and all allegations of wrong-doing by officers are rigorously investigated so that the appropriate action can be taken.

"Every case is judged on its own merits and great consideration is given before any officer is suspended. Once an officer is suspended this is reviewed every 28 days."

He added: "We are sometimes relying on other agencies and criminal investigations to conclude before we can resolve a suspension."

Chair of Northumbria Police Authority, Coun Mick Henry, added: "We support the robust approach by Northumbria Police to ensure the integrity of its workforce and we have confidence in the systems they employ on such occasions."

Matthew Elliot of the Taxpayers Alliance slammed the cost of the lengthy suspensions. He said: "The police shouldn't be spending this amount of cash on suspended officers.

"Far too often, suspensions drag on for months and sometimes even years without resolution, leaving taxpayers out of pocket and fewer policemen on the beat.

"Personnel issues should be dealt with much more swiftly, so less money is wasted and the public get the service they deserve from the police."

The Northern Echo: Vigilante trial 'an absolute disgrace'

By Neil Hunter

POLICE and prosecutors faced a storm of criticism last night after a father who performed a citizen's arrest on two teenagers was cleared of assault.

Father-of-three Mark Fenwick was charged over confronting a group of youths after a slab of concrete was thrown through a window of his Middlesbrough home.

Last night, after a jury took only 20 minutes to clear him of assaulting the two teenagers who made allegations against him, the decision to bring the case to court was branded a national disgrace.

Critics, including former police chief Lord Mackenzie, called for common sense to be used when dealing with cases of people defending their property.

Lord Mackenzie, a retired County Durham police chief and now a Government advisor on law and order, said: "He should have got a commendation, not a prosecution."

Mr Fenwick was hauled through the courts after he rounded up suspected trouble-makers and handed them to police on "mischief night" - October 30 - last year.

The 34-year-old has been on trial for three days, but yesterday he walked free after a jury cleared him of hurting the teenagers.

Following the unanimous verdict, a relieved Mr Fenwick hugged his tearful wife in the public gallery, but refused to discuss the case as he left.

A North-East Euro MP condemned the decision to bring charges for what he and Lord Mackenzie described as an act of public duty.

Conservative MEP Martin Callanan told The Northern Echo: "We should be hailing him as a hero, not prosecuting him. This is exactly the kind of case that should never be brought."

Lord Mackenzie, the former president of the Superintendents' Association, blamed the police for being too afraid to overlook such allegations, and accused them of being "agents for the anti-social elements".

"The police seem to have this attitude now of not wanting to take a risk," he said.

"We seem to have an adverse society, and they say 'we will not put our head on the block and will pass this to the CPS (Crown Prosecution Service)'.

"The CPS have the same attitude and rely on the courts - the jury - to make the decision, but they seem to forget that the poor guy has to go through hell for a year, not knowing if he is going to prison or not.

"It is an absolute disgrace.

"If the police would apply a bit of common sense, reasonable force means reasonable force, and juries invariably acquit, so they should look at cases like this and learn.

"The police should not be agents for the anti-social elements of society and should not be placed right in the middle of situations like this - where any benefit of doubt should be given to the householder.

"If the people who are complaining want to take matters further they should take out private prosecutions, but the police should not be acting as agents for them."

The Taxpayers Alliance also criticised Cleveland Police and the CPS for pursuing the case against Mr Fenwick, who had never been in trouble before. Spokesman Matthew Sinclair said: "The police have been exposed for persecuting a have-a-go hero, and have again let the public down.

"We don't know how much taxpayers' money has been spent on this ludicrous case, but previous nonsense prosecutions have cost thousands of pounds."

Mr Fenwick and a neighbour chased a gang of 30 missile-throwing youths after a paving slab was hurled through a window at his home in Coulby Newham, Middlesbrough.

The men caught some of the suspects and handed them to police, but Mr Fenwick was arrested a month later after the teenagers said he had assaulted them.

Sergeant Charlie Bell, of the Cleveland Police neighbourhood policing team, said: "Although people have the right to defend their homes and property, they must do so with reasonable force, according to the specific circumstances they find themselves in.

"In this case, police were contacted with allegations of assault and we were duty-bound to investigate these claims.

"A thorough investigation took place before we presented all the facts to the CPS and they deemed the matter should go before the court."

A statement from the CPS said: "This was an allegation of assault by a man armed with a wooden pole against youths whom he believed had damaged his home.

"We considered medical evidence and photographs of the injuries in making our decision that the case should go to court.

"There was no evidence to show the youths he caught had been involved in the incident or had committed any offence."

Although Judge Peter Armstrong did not comment after the case, in a legal discussion during the proceedings he said: "The legality of anyone chasing or getting hold of youths in the street who may have done something is perhaps a matter for legal discussion elsewhere."

Neighbours of Mr Fenwick last night spoke out in his support and talked about life on their estate on "mischief night" - described by one police officer as the worst time of the year in Middlesbrough.

Resident Paul Eastwood, 44, said: "The guy did right as far as I am concerned. I would have done exactly the same thing."

Claire Watkins said: "The man was just trying to protect his family, and no one can blame him for that."

Middlesbrough councillor Barbara Dunne, 61, said: "All he was doing was standing up for himself and protecting his property. There is no way this should ever have come to court."

Mr Fenwick's lawyer, Robert Mochrie, said after the case: "His actions were entirely legitimate. They were borne out of his justifiable intolerance of the wanton criminality of those youths responsible for the disturbances that evening."

Scotsman: 'Secret' £1.5 million farm subsidies to MSPs

by Karin Goodwin

FIVE MSPs received a total of £1.5 million in farm subsidies over a five-year period without having to declare it on the register of interests, it emerged yesterday.

Figures revealing all farm subsidies received by MSPs between 2000 and 2004 were released by the Scottish Government over the weekend.

The previous Labour-Liberal Democrat administration had refused to give out details of the payouts, funded by the European Union and administered by the Scottish Government, but that decision was overturned by Kevin Dunion, the Information Commissioner.

The figures show the former Labour MSP John Home Robertson's family business, Home Robertson Farming Partnership, was the largest recipient, having been awarded £559,504 over the five years. The business, in which the former deputy minister for rural affairs is a "sleeping partner", was given a further £225,000 in 2005.

George Lyon, the Liberal Democrat MSP for Argyll and Bute until May, also benefited, to the tune of £291,000 for his business, A&K Farms.

John Scott, the Conservative MSP for Ayr, who owns the farming business W Scott & Son, was given £245,000 between 2000 and 2004.

Another Tory MSP, Jamie McGrigor, who represents the Highlands and Islands, owns Ardchonnel Farms and was awarded £164,000. He has valued his estate at £500,0000, according to official government records.

Alex Johnstone (North East Scotland) was the third Tory MSP to gain - £76,000 was paid to his firm, A Johnstone & Partners.

None of the MSPs had declared the grants or put the information on the MSPs' register of interests - their inclusion was not obligatory. Two of the MSPs also failed to declare the name of the business in which they had a stake, although they did state involvement in a family firm.

However, all the MSPs contacted defended their right to receive subsidies and insisted they had done nothing untoward.

Mr McGrigor said: "I declare the income of my business, but if I were also to declare individual subsidies, I might as well declare every single sheep or cow I own.

"But I have no problem with this information being made available to the public."

Mr Scott said of the subsidy: "It goes to the company, not me. The whole point of the support system is that, without it, there would be no agriculture at all."

James Withers, of the National Union of Farmers Scotland, said, like other farmers, MSPs often faced a stark choice - accept the subsidies or go bust. "The food industry in this country is profitable, but the profits go into the pockets of the big retailers, while farmers struggle to cover their costs," he said.

However, critics claim subsidies are weighted in favour of large, already profitable farms, and smaller operations are often shut out. Jack Thurston, the founder of Farmsubsidy.org, which campaigns for transparency on the issue, said the MSPs were the latest in a long line of parliamentarians who had benefited.

"It's clearly difficult for them to represent the public interest when they have a financial stake in the system," he said.

"I welcome the fact that this information has been made available, so the public are aware who may have vested interests."

Matthew Elliot, chief executive of the Taxpayers Alliance, said: "It's unsurprising these MSPs failed to declare their subsidy payments, because although what they did isn't illegal, it does look dubious. Making money from a system you are responsible for monitoring is a big conflict of interests."

In 2005, it was revealed that major recipients of subsidies under the European Union's common agricultural policy included some of Britain's richest people. The dukes of Westminster, Marlborough and Bedford were among those who received six-figure sums.

The Sun: The Whip

The Bumper Book of Government Waste 2008 is published today with the authors claiming that £101 billion of taxpayers' money has been squandered.  They quote £250,000 spent by Hampshire Council fixing kerbs that were 2mm too high, £280,000 on a conference addressed by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown on value for money in the public services, and £5,371 hiring Hampton Court Palace for an internal conference on homelessness.

Scotsman: MSP expenses outstrip rate of inflation to top £10m

by Louise Gray

MSPS received more than £10 million in expenses and allowances last year.

Politicians received a total of £10.3 million, some £492,000 more than the previous year or a rise of just over 5 per cent.

The bulk of the expenses go towards staff costs but this is not broken down, to protect the privacy of the individuals. The rest of the £3.58 million spent by MSPs on accommodation, travel and other costs can be shown to the public in a league table.

At the top of the table were the four former Scottish Socialist Party MSPs: Frances Curran spent £70,003; Carolyn Leckie £68,358; Rosie Kane £60,995; and Colin Fox £60,197.

The SSP is the only party to include staff costs in its expenses as members pool the money in order to share staff.

Next on the table were MSPs who live in far-off constituencies. Alasdair Morrison from the Western Isles spent £53,888; John Farqhuar Munro from Skye £48,738; and Jamie Stone from Caithness £47,049.

Mr Stone, the Liberal Democrat MSP for Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross, and one of the few in the top ten who still has a place in the Scottish Parliament, was unapologetic about his expenses.

"I represent one of the biggest constituencies furthest away from Edinburgh. I do a huge amount of travelling in my work for the constituency and that is why my expenses are high; they have been in the past and will be in the future."

At the bottom of the list, excluding Margaret Ewing whose death brought about office winding-up costs, came Mark Ballard, who lost his seat as a Green MSP for the Lothians region. He spent £1,776.

Second from bottom was the Conservative Mary Scanlon, who stood down as a list MSP to fight, unsuccessfully, the Moray seat made vacant by the death of Mrs Ewing. She received £1,849.

Third from bottom, at £1,970, came the Greens' Robin Harper, one of only two Green MSPs to return to Holyrood after the May election. Mr Harper, the Green MSP for the Lothians, said:

"I do try to set a good example. I take the bus and walk.

"It is not because I am lazy [to claim so little]. I have plenty of commitments outside the parliament, but I try to use the bus or the train. If I do use a taxi, it is because public transport is time-barred."

By category, one of the areas MSPs spent the most money on was the Edinburgh accommodation allowance, at more than £500,000. The scheme has attracted adverse publicity because it allows MSPs to purchase properties in the capital with interest-only mortgages paid for by taxpayers. They are later allowed to sell the properties at a profit - which they can then pocket.

MSPs spent £529,650.93 on their own travel, £79,166.42 on staff travel and £11,244.39 on travel for family.

Despite the Scottish Government's emphasis on public transport, just £1,221 was spent on bus travel and £216 on bus season tickets, while MSPs spent £39,764 on taxis and £423,474 on mileage.

More than £40,000 was spent on childcare vouchers - and there was £6,311 of "security- related expenditure".

The books put on expenses revealed an insight into the research of some of the MSPs. Jim Mather, the enterprise minister spent money on Statistics for Dummies and Statistical Analysis and Excel for Dummies, Six Sigma Workshop for Dummies, while Wendy Alexander, the leader of the Labour Party, spent £20 on a book called Has Devolution Delivered?

Of the staff costs, which make up the bulk of the £10.3 million total, just over £80,000 less was spent this year than last year at £6.411 million.

A spokesman for the Taxpayers Alliance said the year-on-year increase in allowances must stop. He said: "MSPs should hang their heads in shame over the above-inflation rise, which has pushed their expenses to over £10 million a year.

"With council tax rising and the overall tax burden on the increase, MSPs should be looking for ways to cut their expenses to provide people with some much-needed tax relief.

"All politicians are the same: they bicker over policy but sing in unison when it comes to their perks, despite the fact that it comes directly out of the pockets of their constituents."

However, officials argued that the increase was broadly in line with inflation.

In the past year the retail price index, which shows the increase in the average price of goods, has gone up 3 per cent. An alternative measure, the consumer price index, rose by an average of 2.7 per cent in the same period.

Daily Express: How £100bn of your cash is wasted every year

WHITEHALL is wasting more than £100billion a year of taxpayers' money on pointless or farcical projects, it was revealed yesterday.

And the drain on public funds is getting worse after campaigners showed it shot up by a quarter in the past year.

The findings show that every household in Britain is having £4,000 taken from it every year in tax only to see it go up in smoke. The waste would be enough to paper the entire East Midlands and London with £5 notes and still have enough left to build a giant silver-plated crane to look at.

Or, if the cash was converted into one penny coins and piled high, there would be enough to reach the moon and back five times over. The embarrassing probe into Government spending revealed that more than £2million was spent by tax inspectors on flights to Scotland and hundreds of thousands of pounds on a conference about value for money.

In another example, a local authority spent £250,000 on adjusting kerbs because they were a tenth of an inch too high. Matthew Elliott, chief executive of the TaxPayers' Alliance and coauthor of the dossier, said: "We've uncovered a bewildering array of ways in which Government blows your money. Some are hilarious, until you realise it's you who's footing the bill.

"We hope that putting the spotlight on this conveyer belt of waste will shame those responsible into taking more care of what they take out of our pockets."

The squandering is unveiled in the second edition of the Bumper Book Of Government Waste, published this month. It shows the Government and local councils threw away £101billion in the last year including:

. £3million by tax inspectors at HM Revenue and Customs on flights, including £2.1million on trips to Scotland, . £280,000 on a conference addressed by Tony Blair and Gordon Brown on value for money in the public services, . £250,000 by Hampshire Council fixing the too-high kerbs, . £100,000 to assess if £400,000 spent on modern art for seven mental hospitals was good value, . £5,731 hiring Hampton Court Palace for an internal conference on homelessness.

Co-author Lee Rotherham added: "It's an astronomical sum, enough to give the Bill Gates of the world the jitters. It's a scandalous state of affairs, and one for which ministers, senior civil servants and their management consultants are generously rewarded."

The waste is even greater than the £80 billion uncovered in the first edition of the book last year.

Then officials were found to have splashed out £225,000 on a campaign advising pensioners on the "dangers" of ill-fitting slippers.

And hospital managers lavished £40,000 on drawing up a 46-word "patient experience definition" for the NHS. They discovered that patients wanted to be treated "with honesty, respect and dignity".

A spokesman for the alliance added: "It's hardly a surprise that they don't have a tight grip on our finances when you see an official statistic claiming that an impressive 102 per cent of all threeyear-olds are in nursery school.

With this level of numeracy, no wonder we're in trouble."

Daily Telegraph: An election will waste another £100m

If Gordon Brown is so prudent, why does he waste so much of our money? He spent the weekend pondering another raid on public funds in order to take advantage of Labour's recent improvement in the opinion polls which was brought about because the party jettisoned an unpopular leader.

The purpose of this unnecessary election, should it happen, is specifically to dish the Tories. I object to my money being used in this way. An election is not required by law, nor by constitutional convention, nor on the spurious grounds - which Mr Brown has rejected - of providing him with a personal mandate since, as his speech to the Labour conference made clear, he intends to govern on the basis of the manifesto set out in 2005.

The cost to the public purse of staging a general election is now close to pounds 100 million. The bill for the last contest was about pounds 80 million and for the 1997 election about pounds 50 million. In 1974 it was only pounds 6 million. In 1945, the election cost pounds 700,000 to stage and that involved the additional expense of soldiers voting overseas. In today's money, that is about pounds 18 million.

The costs include fees and expenses for returning officers in 646 constituencies; free postage and TV advertising for parties; the provision of police officers to guard polling stations; printing ballot papers; postal voting; special tactile voting devices for the blind and partially-sighted; and setting aside halls and recruiting staff for the counts.

These are the costs of democracy we should all be happy to pay when we have to, when a government falls or has reached, or is close to, the end of its allotted five-year term.

But why should we when the Government has a majority of more than 60 and was elected just two years and five months ago? The Association of Electoral Administrators has also warned the Government that a snap election has huge potential for "administrative chaos" as a result of the constituency boundary changes, delays in printing and distributing postal ballots and an out-of-date electoral roll.

On top of that, how much has been wasted on drafting and debating all the Bills that would fall by the wayside if this parliament ends now?

When parliaments end normally, usually at around the four-year mark, deals are done with the Opposition to speed outstanding legislation on to the statute book and drop those Bills that are controversial.

Why should Mr Brown be given any help to get his laws through when he is engaged in such brazen opportunism? Among the measures still before Parliament are the Child Maintenance and Other Payments Bill; Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill; Crossrail (Hybrid) Bill; Further Education and Training Bill; Greater London Authority Bill; and Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Bill. Why risk killing them off with an unnecessary election?

But, hey, it will only cost around pounds 100 million, a mere bagatelle to a Prime Minister who - given that he has been in charge of our cash for 10 years - has probably been responsible for the greatest waste of public funds since King John lost the Royal treasure in The Wash.

The latest example of this profligacy is the imminent demise of the National Offender Management Service, or Noms. Why this was set up in the first place was always a mystery. It was intended to bring together under one administrative roof the Prison Service and the Probation Service, thereby providing a "seamless" approach to penal policy. It is about to be scrapped just three years after coming into being with, of course, the requisite multi-million pound rebranding. Since 2004, Noms has spent more than pounds 5 million on consultants. When it tried to install a new computer system, to link up two that already existed, it ended up with a pounds 33 million shortfall after spending pounds 155 million. Ministers have now halted work pending an emergency review. One Whitehall insider said: "God knows where all the money has gone." This is a familiar story. How much has been wasted over the past 10 years on IT projects that have gone wrong or vastly over-budget? And who was responsible for looking after the nation's finances throughout this time?

Mr Brown is no more able to escape responsibility than the finance officer of a company whose accounts show a huge black hole. The big difference is that the latter will be sacked; the former is an unapologetic spendthrift to whom we have entrusted a bottomless pit of money. Yesterday we learned that the Government has paid out pounds 450,000 for an end-of-terrace house in one of the Victorian streets being bulldozed across northern England to make way for modern housing developments under the Pathfinder scheme. It would cost pounds 100,000 to refurbish it. The extravagance of Mr Brown is further exposed in the annual Bumper Book of Government Waste published this week by the Taxpayers' Alliance. It estimates that of the pounds 587 billion spent by the state last year, pounds 101 billion was wasted, enough to cut the tax burden of every household by over pounds 4,000 a year. It includes in this the pounds 65 million fine from the EU for the farm payments fiasco, pounds 36 million for road building overruns, pounds 380 million for written- off tax credit overpayments, pounds 1.4 billion on unnecessary consultants, pounds 1.6 billion on failed IT schemes, pounds 5 billion increase in public administration since 1997. The list goes on and on.

The European Central Bank found that if public spending were as efficient as that of the US, or Japan, the Government could spend 16 per cent less, while still producing the same level of public services. The Government will no doubt dispute many of the TPA's calculations; but even if they are only a quarter true, this is dissipation on an epic scale. Now Mr Brown proposes to spend pounds 100 million of your money and mine on an election that is not needed. How generous of us. The bravado of the Conservatives in egging him on is as reckless as that of the Black Knight in Monty Python and the Holy Grail, since they risk having their legs and arms chopped off. If that is what they want, that's a matter for them. But it's time someone entered a plea on behalf of the long-suffering taxpayer.

'The Bumper Book of Government Waste: Brown's Squandered Billions' by Matthew Elliott and Lee Rotherham is published by Harriman House

The Times: Taxpayer fury at troubled bank's vow to pay dividend

By Christine Seib

Northern Rock yesterday vowed to press ahead with a £60 million shareholder payout, despite having been forced to obtain an emergency loan from the Bank of England to stay in business.

The move infuriated organisations representing British taxpayers. A spokesman for the Taxpayers’ Alliance said that Northern Rock shareholders should be made to “take a hair-cut” while the Government was underwriting the bank’s operations.

Following the Chancellor’s decision on Monday to guarantee the safety of savings with Northern Rock, taxpayers will face a £28 billion bill if the bank goes bust. They also face the prospect of having to offer similar guarantees to other banks that get into trouble.

A spokeswoman for the Newcastle-based bank said yesterday that the dividend guidance given by Northern Rock two months ago remained unchanged. The company promised to spend almost £60 million on a 14.2p per share dividend, up more than 30 per cent on the previous year to try to appease investors who were disappointed by a profits warning in June. The dividend payment will be made in October.

The spokesman for the Taxpayers’ Alliance said: “Having enjoyed all those years of fantastic returns, bank shareholders must be made to take their haircuts. This is not a one-way bet.

“Before taxpayers are required to shell out a bean, the Northern Rock shareholders must lose everything. They’ve had the upside, and now they must pay the price.”

But stockbrokers said that they could not recall a recent example of a company pulling a declared dividend. One broker said that even Partygaming, which saw its shares plunge 57 per cent in one day in September last year, continued to pay its dividend.

Daily Express: Uproar over Hamza's rants in public libraries

Matthew Elliott, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, added:  "The idea that our money is being used to buy books that incite people to attack us is outrageous."

Birmingham Mail: Council business trips cost £53,000

By Neil Elkes

Travel: TaxPayers’ Alliance says staff must learn to budget and fly on the cheap

City Council bosses and staff have been slammed for enjoying a jet-set lifestyle at the taxpayers’ expense.

During the age of budget airlines and low cost travel, flights taken by Birmingham City Council staff cost an average of £500 each.

While the 107 flights taken in the last 12 months include trips to Australia, the Caribbean and China, the vast majority are to European cities covered by budget carriers such as Easyjet and bmibaby.

Details of the globetrotting trips were uncovered through a Freedom of Information Act request by the West Midlands branch of political lobby group TaxPayers’ Alliance.

It showed that 107 flights were taken at a total cost of £53,000, of which £39,000 was covered by City Council expenses. The remainder was paid by events hosts.

Last month the Mail revealed that staff had been sent on all expenses paid trips to see shopping facilities in Milan, Dublin Zoo, the World Choir Games in China, a library in Minneapolis, street lighting in Shanghai and the Cannes Film Festival.

Alliance spokeswoman Fiona McEvoy said: “It’s bad enough that taxpayers are subsidising these junkets to far flung locations without the fares being at inflated, non-economy rates.”

Recently Birmingham City Council has made a concerted effort to cut the junkets, with Tory Councillor Tim Huxtable earning the nickname the ‘smiling assassin’ after ruthlessly culling many trips.

A Birmingham City Council spokesman said: “There are rigorous criteria set before any overseas trip is organised. The council must be able to demonstrate that there is a job to be undertaken and a practical benefit to the city to be obtained from the visit.

“We are a leading player on the international stage, which means that we have to make flights to attend many different events to ensure Birmingham is recognised as a global city.

“Low-cost carriers are used as much as possible, and travel by other transport methods such as train is always encouraged where they can be used.”

He added that foreign links forged on trips had generated investment of millions of pounds in Birmingham.

Evening Times: £350,000 'washing line' art work has critics in a flap

CRITICS say it looks like a giant washing line - and have pegged it as a waste of GBP350,000.

The 60ft by 30ft sculpture outside the BBC's new Glasgow headquarters at Pacific Quay is the city's most expensive piece of public art.

A spokesman for Taxpayers' Alliance criticised the BBC for spending so much on art while cutting jobs.

But a BBC spokeswoman said: "One of the planning conditions was a public art strategy."

The sculpture, by Toby Paterson, is called Poised Array and is said to represent the topography of Scotland.

The Australian: Non-courses make no sense

ABAN CONTRACTOR

DURING the past few weeks the markets have taken a tremendous pounding. Billions have been wiped off share prices, personal pensions have been hit and mortgages across the globe look set to rise again.

In Britain, where hundreds of thousands of people are up to their eyes in serious debt, the penny has finally dropped. There is very little spare cash around. Budgeting, although not quite a fashionable word, is openly being used again.

So it came as no surprise when the TaxPayers' Alliance chose one of the worst weeks on financial record to lodge its claim that "non-courses" cost British taxpayers more than pound stg. 40 million ($99 million) every year.

Sound familiar? Australian voters, especially those with links to the higher education sector, will have little trouble remembering a buoyant former education minister, Brendan Nelson, repeatedly listing a range of wasteful cappuccino courses -- including surfboarding, aromatherapy and the paranormal -- offered by the nation's 38 publicly funded universities. It had the desired effect: taxpayers were not happy.

When the TaxPayers' Alliance released what it described as "Britain's first ever list of university `non-courses"' last Tuesday, it was similarly received. Attending university is an expensive business and the alliance hit a nerve when it pointed out that the average student graduates with more than pound stg. 13,000 of debt. Worse still if that money has been spent on a three-year course that no employer will recognise.

The alliance defined a non-course as a university degree that lends "the respectability of scholarly qualifications to non-academic subjects", claiming that many were "of dubious academic merit, offering training better learned on the job".

"In the worst cases, they offer neither intellectual stimulation nor any improvement in employment prospects," it said.

The student and the taxpayer paid the price.

And, according to the alliance's calculations using Department for Education and Skills figures, if the pound stg. 40 million were spent on other undergraduates, their fees could be cut by pound stg. 104 a year. "Or pay for a pint of beer a week for each student."

Having trawled through the list of every course offered in Britain through the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service, it found 401 non-courses available in 89 institutions in the 2007-08 academic year. One, the University of Derby, offered 41 non-courses.

A personal favourite is equestrian psychology. It is available at the Welsh College of Horticulture to anyone with a grade C in four GCSEs, the equivalent of Australia's Year 10 exams. Once completed, students can "top up to a BSc (Hons)".

Included in the alliance's top five were the three-year BA (Hons) degree in outdoor adventure with philosophy at Marjon College and golf management at the UHI Millennium Institute. The latter promises "a high-quality qualification with a comprehensive understanding of the modern golf industry. Regular field trips to courses such as St Andrews and Carnoustie are a feature of the course."

These courses fulfil an important function for many higher education institutions: they put bums on seats and help fund less popular courses such as maths and science. But the alliance has an important point, one that every parent with a child at university understands: young people are spending thousands of pounds and three years of their life studying a subject that may leave them no more employable than when they started.

And the figures back them up. The National Audit Office says there is a 20 per cent dropout rate at British universities. That means one student in five starting a full-time course next month will fail to complete their studies.

"The cost to the taxpayer of this dropout rate alone has been estimated at pound stg. 300 million each year in subsidised loans and tuition fees," the alliance said.

Now that is a figure to be reckoned with.

Irish Times: Enrol the dice, swig, swing or tackle.

Students can now study for degrees in gambling, beer, golf or rugby, writes Rosita Boland   

Got your Leaving Cert results? Wondering what to do with them? Forget the days when students had to choose between familiar academic subjects in the areas of arts, humanities and the sciences. You can now learn in college hours things that students used to pursue only during after-college hours. It sounds like an ad for a well-known beer, but the reality is that you can now take courses in playing rugby, pulling pints, being in a band, and gambling.

This week, the TaxPayers' Alliance (TPA) in Britain published a list of what it has described as 401 university "non-courses" what the British media have gleefully called "Mickey Mouse courses". The TPA argues that taxpayers are paying more than £40 million (€59 million) a year to subsidise courses which it believes are unsuitable to be included on any university syllabus.

Among them are culinary arts and adventure tourism at the University of Derby. "We offer regular guest demonstrations and table service training, wine courses and a look at the anthropology of food. As well as practical training, you'll study aspects of world cuisine, the history of food and the diversity of culinary arts." There's also golf management, at Scotland's UHI Millennium Institute. "The course provides a high-quality qualification with a comprehensive understanding of the modern golf industry. Regular field trips to courses such as St Andrews and Carnoustie are a feature of the course."

There's more. The Swansea Institute of Higher Education offers activity and play leadership. At the University of Central Lancashire, you can study adventure travel, where "You will have plenty of opportunities to experience a variety of outdoor pursuits and will be encouraged to achieve additional outdoor activity qualifications".

Believe it or not, this autumn, you can enrol on a course which ensures that when you graduate, you will be working for a billionaire. The UK Sailing Academy, at Cowes, has designed a course to train crew to skipper luxury super-yachts. There are now apparently so many obscenely wealthy people who have commissioned the design of their own private sailing boats and motorboats that there just aren't enough skilled staff to crew them. The UK Sailing Academy estimates there are 10,500 super- yachts cruising the world's waters. Hiring crew members who know what they are doing helps owners to protect such investments.

John Ely, chief executive of the UK Sailing Academy, estimates there is currently a demand for 4,000 qualified crew members.   

The luxury-crew course may just be starting up, but for the past 20 years, students have been graduating from the International Centre for Brewing and Distilling, based at the school of life sciences of Edinburgh's Heriot-Watt University. This four-year course aims at giving students an understanding of the science and technology involved in managing a brewery. At the latter end of their studies, students must work for at least eight weeks in a maltings, brewery or distillery in order to pass their degree. With all that experience to draw on, students at Heriot-Watt must have the best-organised student parties in Britain.

Then there's the opportunity to take a degree in business economics with gambling studies, at the University of Salford, Manchester. The university's website explains, "This unique degree was created in response to the need for a more academic approach to the study of gambling and commercial gaming. Students learn about economics, focusing on the use of economic theory in the analysis of business problems, and examine gambling from an economic, social, cultural and mathematical perspective." Students also have "the possibility of vacation employment in the industry".

Closer to home, this year, the Institute of Technology at Carlow offers a BA in sport and rugby. The first course of its kind in Britain or Ireland, it's being run in conjunction with the Irish Rugby Football Union and Leinster Rugby. Students will be expected to show their rugby-playing skills, so presumably each candidate will be getting down and dirty to compete for one of 20 course places. The course combines coaching, fitness, player development and a business or communications module. What rugby students do in their spare time might be a question for the philosophy students.

Independent on Sunday: The Spectator

By Simon Redfern

Sport   

The taxpayers" alliance have attacked "non-courses" in further education. "The Government has failed in its pledge to abolish Mickey Mouse courses," they squeak. Top of their hit list is Outdoor Adventure with Philosophy at Marjon College, Plymouth. Hmm... if I was going mountaineering I might feel safer being guided by one of Marjon"s alumni than, say, a classics graduate. And presumably the philosophy comes in handy if things go wrong. For a real Mickey Mouse course, the place to go is Disney University in Florida, where students destined for jobs in Walt Disney World can "practise on cash registers, ticketing machines and turnstiles". And all at no expense to the taxpayer, one assumes.

£1m   

The insurance policy organisers of a duathlon - a 10km run and 20km cycle ride - around Loch Ness on 2 September have taken out against the chance of an attack on entrants by the reputed monster. If it"s a publicity stunt, I suppose it"s worked.

Golf drive of the week   

in town for the Scandinavian Masters golf tournament, Bill Murray was stopped by police in the early hours of Monday morning driving a golf cart through downtown Stockholm. This, curiously, is not illegal, but drink-driving is; the results of a blood test are awaited. It is not thought the actor was rehearsing another sequel to his seminal 1980 oeuvre "Caddyshack", and suggestions that his next film will instead be titled "Lost in Transportation" are, frankly, far too silly to be mentioned here.

Good week for   

Ben ainslie (right), Finn champion at Sydney 2004, won the Olympic Test Regatta over the Beijing 2008 course... David Healy took his goal tally for Northern Ireland to 31... and Sheila Drummond hit a 144yd hole in one at Mahoning Valley Country Club.She is totally blind.

Bad week for   

Rob styles (near left), suspended from Premiership refereeing duty after several howlers during Sunday"s Liverpool-Chelsea game... Paul Robinson, whose own howler in goal for England on Wednesday allowed Germany to equalise... Stefan Langer, son of Bernhard, who carded a 28-over-par 98 in the KLM Open... and Lancashire County Cricket Club, under attack after Old Trafford"s outfield was churned up by two Arctic Monkeys concerts.

Website of the week   

one of The World Golf Hall of Fame"s two inductees this year is Curtis Strange, with 70 per cent of the vote, while Fred Couples managed only 17 per cent. Perhaps voters felt a Strange Couples double ticket might raise guffaws; which, in a link so clunky The Spectator is almost ashamed, is the reaction the wedding notices on view at jibjab.com/view/172390 inspire. Our favourite is the joining together in holy matrimony of Joe Looney and Shelby Warde, but the Poore-Sapp, Crapp-Beer and Hardy-Harr nup- tials run it close. Examples of other sporting pairs who shouldn"t hyphenate their names welcome.

Daily Express: £1bn scandal

By Tom Whitehead Home Affairs Correspondent

Taxpayers foot the bill as red tape robs police of 25,500 bobbies on the beat   

POLICE are wasting hundreds of millions of pounds every year on officer overtime because of the Government's failure to slash red tape and tackle staff shortages.

Forces around the country have spent more than £1billion in the past three years on extra duties in a huge drain on the public purse.

It is enough money to put 25,500 extra police on our streets for a year.   

The waste is revealed in figures released under the Freedom of Information Act and last night rank-and-file police leaders attacked the alarming trend.

They blamed a lack of resources that leaves officers with no choice but to work extra hours just to protect the public.   

Shadow Home Secretary David Davis said: "These alarming figures reflect what we have been saying for years.   

"This Government has tied up the police with red-tape and diktats.   

"Conservatives would put local communities – not Whitehall – in control of policing and get officers back on the beat where the public want to see them." Corin Taylor, of the TaxPayers' Alliance, said: "The police are spending most of their regular working hours on paperwork.   

"So it's not surprising that they have to work overtime to go out on the streets. The enormous cost to taxpayers of police overtime, as well as the tragic events this week, is yet more evidence of the need to cut police bureaucracy." Most forces paid an average of £20million each in overtime in the past three years. The Metropolitan Police spent £422million.

The total national bill for overtime from 35 forces who responded has risen from £360million in 2004/05 to £380million in 2005/06 and £375million in 2006/07. The projected total for all 43 forces in England and Wales is £1.28billion.

Police Federation spokesman PC Nigel Cox: "Our stance has always been that officers should not be required to work overtime and that the appropriate level of resources should be in place to cover all aspects of policing.

"The federation has been saying for a long time that bureaucracy is keeping officers in offices rather than being out on the streets." PC Cox of the federation's Devon and Cornwall branch said the overtime burden fell heavily on frontline officers, CID and major crime investigation teams.

But Bob Pennington, Assistant Chief Constable of Devon and Cornwall, said overtime payments fell in real terms last year, when inflation is taken into account.

He added: "The vast majority of overtime is incurred through having to deal with unanticipated incidents. To have officers available 'just in case' would not be cost effective." A Home Office spokeswoman said: "Record numbers of police officers are on our streets.

"Total police personnel stands at 228,036 and there has been an 11 per cent increase in the number of officers in the last 10 years."

Yorkshire Post: Jayne Dowle: A real life lesson - degrees aren't for everyone

Obsessed as he is with "location, location, location", we haven't yet heard much from the Prime Minister about "education, education, education", the mantra of his predecessor.

Today is the day for GCSE results so it will be on the agenda. When the usual hullabaloo over "Are exams getting too easy?" subsides, I trust that Mr Brown and his Ministers will take some time to think seriously about what happens next.

I hope that they will be brave enough to drop Tony Blair's fixation with pushing 50 per cent of young people into taking a degree by 2010. I know, I know? I know all the figures about how the percentage of British graduates lags behind that of many European countries. I know all about how "upskilling" benefits the local economy - only it doesn't, when all the "upskilling" jobs are in Leeds or Milton Keynes

and graduates move away from their home towns and villages. I taught journalism at university for three years, so I think I might know something of what I'm talking about.

And although there are plenty of former students who stand

out - because of their innate talent or their determination to overcome personal odds or their sheer guts - there are plenty of others who should never have been on a degree course in the first place.

I felt so sorry for those kids, fed such false hopes. They honestly thought that they could take a degree without reading a newspaper, and then walk straight into any job in journalism. It was heartbreaking for them, and frustrating for the teaching staff who worked relentlessly to provide support.

Some of these students could hardly put one word in front of another unless it was in "text speak". I remember in one lesson spending half-an-hour explaining what academic "journals" were, and literally pleading with the class to find the library.

The able students thrived, as they would in any environment. Most of those with the aptitude found, or will find, jobs in journalism and the wider media, armed with a useful modern degree.

But what of the others? The ones who constantly "forgot" to hand assignments in, stomped out of job placements and generally proved that they were not ready for higher academic study. Will they look back at those three years and think "what a waste of time and money" and go off

and get a job with the council anyway?

One girl, actually among the brightest in the class, did. She declared that writing essays was "pointless" and dropped out at the end of her second year. She will probably be running a local government department by the time she is 25. Is that so wrong? The implication that "working" is dishonourable compared to presenting a seminar on semantics suggests a nasty lack of respect.

That girl might decide, as a local government officer I know did, to go back and study for a business degree later.

Rather than concentrating on sucking in the young with flyers in nightclubs, universities should be flexible, and prepared to offer degrees to anybody, at any age.

I have a friend who is a deputy director in a NHS Trust hospital. She didn't go to university at 18 because all she wanted was to get a job. She now earns far more than me, with my posh degree, will have a better (make that "a") pension when she retires, and can hold her own in any board meeting. Everybody just assumes that she has a string of letters after

0her name. She is proud

to put them straight and gets respect for it.

Better to be honest then, than to parade a dubious degree as if it was some Nobel-Prize-worthy honour.

It is claimed that "Mickey Mouse" degrees - a description coined by Margaret Hodge when she was Higher Education Minister - are costing the British taxpayer £40m a year.

Researchers for the Taxpayers' Alliance found that more than 400 "lightweight" courses are on offer at 91 educational institutions even though Ministers had vowed to outlaw them. They cited cases such as Aromatherapy and Therapeutic Bodywork at the University of Greenwich, and Martial Arts and Adventure Tourism at the University of Derby, and judged them to be intellectually lacking and inferior to on-the-job training.

The universities under attack have defended their courses, as they would.

There is a degree of academic snobbery, to be sure. And there will be plenty of excellent tutors preparing Power-points and plenty of happy students doing their holiday reading right now.

However, the vocational bent of such programmes raises false hopes that employment will be guaranteed on graduation.

Their existence does nothing to promote respect for "soft" courses such as media or marketing which end up being lumped under the "Mickey Mouse" label. I've sat in tough validation meetings to set up such qualifications, and I can assure you that they are anything but.

Daft degrees distract funding and student numbers from rigorous degree courses such as chemistry and physics, which are closing in worrying numbers.

And ultimately, the existence of "easy" degrees encourages the wrong-headed assumption that there is a degree for everyone, regardless of intellectual inclination or attitude.

The sooner the Prime Minister gets his head around that one, the better for the future of our education system.

Yorkshire Post: Degree subjects of derision - or just an educated choice?

A few years back there was a joke doing the rounds.   

"What do you say to a sociology graduate?"   

"Can I have a burger and fries, please."   

A decade ago a sociology degree was seen by many as a soft option that wasn't worth the paper it was written on.   

Now, it's equestrian psychology and golf management that are being dismissed as "Mickey Mouse" courses.   

Culture Minister Margaret Hodge coined this phrase while she was Higher Education Minister, saying students would not want to pay for worthless degrees once tuition fees were introduced.

But the controversy surrounding these supposedly soft options hasn't gone away.   

The TaxPayers' Alliance, a group campaigning for lower taxes, said in a recent report that more than 400 "non-courses" were costing the public £40m a year.

At the top of its hitlist was outdoor adventure with philosophy, at Marjon, the College of St Mark and St John in Plymouth, while others included fashion buying at Manchester Metropolitan University and golf management at UHI Millennium Institute in Inverness.

A degree was once seen as a passport to a high-flying career that came with a salary to match, showing prospective employers you had attained a certain academic standard.

But with more graduates flooding the marketplace in recent years, there are fears these standards are dropping, and the finger is being pointed at the increasing number of new courses popping up.

Jenny Ungless, director at City Life Coaching, which offers career advice to young professionals, claims the Government's target of getting 50 per cent of young people to university is one of the problems.

"There's a mindset that if you want a successful career you have to go to university, yet quite often the career a student wants doesn't require them to have a degree.

"However, there are a lot of courses which aren't traditional ones, but which equip you for the job you want to do like landscape gardening, or golf management and they are completely legitimate."

But do these kind of vocational courses warrant university degrees?   

"They're fine as long as the courses do what they say on the tin, so if you're training to be a fashion buyer you are equipped to go straight into the job," she says.

"From the point of view of employers there is concern that the quality of applicants is slipping, but this is not because more people are taking softer options but because basic maths and English standards have dropped."

Recent figures show the typical graduate is likely to rack up about £20,000 of debt and Mrs Ungless, a classics graduate from Cambridge University, rejects the idea that some courses are a waste of taxpayers' money.

"There is some cost to the taxpayer but there's a huge cost to the individuals who are planning to go to university," she says.

"Someone can go to Oxford University and study law but if they don't end up being a lawyer you can argue that's a waste of taxpayers' money.

"I think there's a lot of hypocrisy and snobbery surrounding this issue."   

Philip Parkin, general secretary of the Professional Association of Teachers (PAT), believes university degrees are more important than ever.

"We are much more degree orientated now and the number of low-skilled jobs is reducing, which means that degrees are becoming essential," he says.

"There's a question whether some courses do have the academic rigour that is required and some new universities are trying to do eye-catching courses in the hope of increasing their numbers and I think filling places sometimes overrides the academic rigour.

"Do we need as many media studies graduates as we are producing? I suspect we don't."   

He would like to see university courses more closely tailored to Britain's economic needs.   

"New courses need to be developed all the time in areas like electronic communications.   

"But they need to have the required academic rigour and if they don't have that they should be HNDs, because you have to retain the value of having a degree."

There are those who believe a degree from anywhere other than Oxbridge or one of the Russell Group universities is somehow inferior. But they are missing the point. More than 60 per cent of graduate jobs advertised don't require a degree in any particular discipline. Britain's economic needs are changing all the time and it can be said that universities are simply reacting to demand and one person's "Mickey Mouse" course is another person's specialist degree.

Take James Rodgers who studied Computer Animation and Special Effects at Bradford University last year.   

The 21 year-old Rotherham graduate won the Royal Television Society award for the best student animation in Yorkshire and went on to get a job working at Red Star Studios in Sheffield.

Perhaps those who dismiss new-fangled "Mickey Mouse" courses might want to consider that Mickey Mouse was created 80 years ago and is still one of the most recognisable symbols in the world.