A Tale of Three Towns: What Denbigh can learn

In recent posts, I have chosen to focus on the current status of the high street where I live. I may be deluding myself, but the responses to the existing discussion strongly suggest that a core nucleus of people care passionately about our town. That is as good a starting point as any.

I received a really well worded response from someone this morning citing the strengths and weaknesses of the existing high street. The respondent made the point that high streets such as the one in Denbigh will ultimately become venues for local services such as cafes, hairdressers, nail salons, bookies etc. It was also pointed out how valuable it can be to have a local butcher. Instead of having to buy your meat pre-packed in the weight dictated by the large supermarket, the local butcher can supply your exact need. If you are part of a couple or living alone, this can be a massive difference. So, instead of buying 500g of minced beef in a plastic container, your local butcher can supply you with a lesser amount with far less packaging. In most of the arguments I've heard so far bemoaning the future of our high street, many people seem to overlook the mind boggling amount of plastic packaging foisted upon us by the large supermarkets. I detest it and also worry about it's impact on our environment. It takes up to a thousand years to degrade in some instances so sustaining such an approach is actually irresponsible.

Today, I intend to focus on two towns of comparable size to illustrate that the high street in Denbigh is faced with an opportunity rather than a threat. I will describe the first town to you. In 2001, it had a population of 9,458. This is very similar to that of Denbigh. It has a famous castle just like Denbigh. It has a well known supermarket on the periphery of the town centre just like Denbigh. It has limited car parking in the centre of the town just like Denbigh. It has a healthy quota of pubs just like Denbigh. It has a fair smattering of charity shops being run by a willing army of volunteers just like Denbigh. It has a small theatre just like Denbigh. It also has a predominance of independent shops which are extremely well supported by the local community. Like Denbigh it also has an area which has not had the rub of the green when it comes to jobs and opportunity. The town I refer to here is Ludlow.

On a recent placement which lasted for 15 weeks, I had the opportunity to observe Ludlow at close quarters. A number of aspects were immediately noteworthy. The first thing to note was the absence of empty shop premises on the main high street. The second was the large number of local shoppers on foot. They were enabled by large pedestrian areas in the town centre. It was very pleasing to see such a high ration of independent shops to multi national chains. There was no doubt that the former were in the ascendency in Ludlow. Aside form their impressive variety, their service to the public was wonderful to see. They did have a moderate sized Tesco but you always got the feeling that the Tesco remained secondary to the town centre. That was because planning for the Tesco was only granted with the town centre in mind. The local planners did not make life easy for the Tesco and have restricted the extent to which it can impact on their high street. They got the important bit right - they recognised the absolute importance of a vibrant high street with respect to the local economy which they serve. Their castle is of a similar age to the one in Denbigh but is utilised far more. It is the centre piece of most of their festivals and is situated right next to their highly prized daily street market which they have fought so hard to maintain. It is to their credit that they have done so because they now boast a thriving high street as a result. In other words, they have resisted too much change for the sake of change and sought to retain the character and strength of their high street.

Moving a little closer to home, the second town which I would like to highlight is also notable for it's thriving street market. At the time of writing, it too boasts a healthy high street with very few empty retail premises. Until recently, it has only allowed a moderate sized Tesco on the periphery in such a way as to maintain the integral strength of it's high street. Mold is down the road in Flintshire and the local council charged with the responsibility of sustaining the vibrant high street look as though they are now going to grant planning to a large Sainsburys as well. That aside, the town has held it's own even with the added threat of Tesco. The market is held twice weekly and is well supported and attended. As with Ludlow, the variety and quality of the independent shops is excellent even if the ratio of multi national chains is slightly higher.

It should not be too difficult for Denbigh to observe the towns I have highlighted and seek to emulate some of their more sensible strategies. Just because our high street has sported empty shops recently doesn't mean they can't be filled provided the will exists to support them and the shops themselves seek to offer all that is good about the independent sector; great quality and service. The re-introduction of a street market shouldn't even be open to debate in Denbigh and I would strongly advocate more pedestrian zones in the town centre. I would finally play the trump card all day long - Mold doesn't have a castle like Denbigh. Ludlow does and uses it for all it's worth. Denbigh should be doing likewise because many other towns would give anything to have such an obvious asset.

The forthcoming St. David's Day festival will be great for Denbigh and I'm really looking forward to going along to support the town. But the town needs this sort of event to be the norm - not the exception.

Lies, damn lies and statistics

The recent decision by my local Council to cease funding for Rhyl Sun Centre has provoked a great deal of criticism. How much of that is fair remains to be seen.

Seeking to defend their decision, the local Council cited the inability of the appointed (not for profit) management organisation to contend with a 2.8% reduction in it's subsidy. That amounted to £50,000 annually. It is open to conjecture how their proposed £10 million project for an Aquatic Centre now looks given the importance attached to £50,000.

Of course, the real reason for closure of the three sites in Rhyl and Prestatyn is perhaps as barn door obvious as it seems. The smoke screen speaks of ineffective management and infrastructure in need of repair and upgrade. Much has also been made of the "shelf life" of the sites in question. The latter tickles me because even a tent will last for decades if constructed and looked after properly. The former North Wales Hospital was built in 1848. Had it not been for a series of outrageous decisions since it's doors finally closed in 1995, I have no doubt it would be still be standing and ready for another century of public service. I was under the impression that building had progressed since the Victorian era but I stand corrected if that is not the case. Perhaps it is the decision making which has deteriorated since Victorian times rather than the actual construction?

Returning to the closures though, it is obvious that the real motive has been cost saving. For all the rubbish spun out regarding mismanagement and deterioration, closure of the three sites will immediately save the Council millions of pounds per annum when they are being asked to make savings - in common with just about every other council in the UK. To debate whether such cuts is right or wrong is fast becoming academic because they are clearly here to stay. What is not academic is to discuss the most appropriate areas for these cuts to take place. The management structure at my Local Council is mind boggling. When I worked in the Private Sector for the largest wholesale food supplier in the UK, the machine was meaner and infinitely leaner. Every penny spent had to be justified and accounted for and if cuts were made, they were invariably based on past performance. We had nowhere near the number of managers which the local Council employs. The same local Council has this week announced a £250,000 project aimed at attracting tourists to the town of Ruthin.

The same local Council also gave the thumbs up to Tesco a few years back and it's fair to say the effect on the local high street has been significant. So rather than pursuing the attentions of tourists who might only visit sporadically, would it not be more instructive to try and pursue the local residents who appear to have deserted their high street in droves? Or is this not the priority of the council? I can only comment on what I see in front of my eyes and the evidence to suggest that the local Council is serious about high street regeneration is currently a little thin on the ground.

In a mirror image of the situation unfolding in my County, the locals of Ruabon and Plas Madoc are fighting to try and overturn the decision to close Plas Madoc Leisure Centre. As in my home county, the story is depressingly familiar. Two perfectly adequate leisure facilities are being dropped in favour of a new centre. The rationale is doubtless the same - perceived cost savings. A good friend of mine has recently ascertained that the Council making that decision had been paying a staggering £40,000 per annum for the lease of a photocopying machine. That leisure site was being run by the Council - not an outside body. I'm no expert on photocopy machines, but I would suggest that I could buy a reasonably good one for a fraction of that amount!

When any of us seek to justify the money we are spending in our own lives, we usually have to think about the impact of those decisions on our families and loved ones. I would have thought the same principle would hold for the local council?

Time for new blood?

As the local council elections draw closer, I have taken time to reflect on where we are and where we might be five years hence. A cursory glance at the incumbent local councillors reveals one stark reminder as to how far we have to go. The most obvious feature of the current councillors where I live is their age.

While they all undoubtedly have experience of sorts from all walks of life, it is their age which is likely to be least attractive to the one sub section of voters most disenfranchised as I write. When local council elections were last held in Denbigh, just 591 of the 1,583 eligible to vote did so. Much criticism (justified in my opinion) was expressed when the new Police Commissioners were recently elected throughout the UK. The counter argument always follows that democracy is being played out irrespective of the turn out. I counter that it is not healthy to content ourselves with voter turn outs of one in three. Even with a half full glass and brimming with optimism, I know that this falls well short of our democratic aspirations. But why does it?

It does so because the current incumbents of public office have failed to engage with a significant proportion of the total electorate. Maybe people really have given up on the democratic process but maybe they haven't. Maybe it's time for younger candidates to come forward with a voice more sympathetic to the aspirations of their peer group. I would happily vote for a younger candidate if only to inject some balance for the existing cohort of councillors. Experience is a wonderful quality but it also comes with baggage. Experience warns us against risk. Experience urges us to play safe. Experience convinces us we have all the answers.

Youth comes with a different set of qualities. Failure is often something yet to be experienced. That is a massive advantage. Youth can see how something can work. Experience can see the pitfalls. Youth has the imagination to see beyond the obstacles. Experience can become too focused on the obstacles. I could go on but I hope my point is made.

If the forthcoming elections were to yield an influx of younger members, I'm sure the town would be the winner. In a recent group I set up exploring what it was that people would like to see on our high street to  make it more attractive and vibrant, I was overwhelmed with the number of responses. Sadly, those responses featured too few of the views and insights of our younger age groups. There is nothing I would love more than to see some of the under 30s become actively involved with THEIR town.

If the next elections are decided by the votes of three quarters of the electorate, we will have a better chance of being represented by a more age diverse subset of councillors. It is not that I have any misgivings about any of the current incumbents - I don't. I know how hard they all work often behind the scenes for little reward. I would just like to see a better spread of our community and witness the youth getting more involved. Those I've spoken to are brimming with fantastic ideas so let's try and engage them to take the next step. The energy of youth is a vital resource which I feel we are currently missing out on.

If we really want to see a vibrant high street in our local town, I feel passionately that we can only do so with the involvement of all age groups and we are currently missing out. In their seminal song "Teach your Children", Crosby, Stills and Nash recognised fully the symbiotic relationship between the old and the young. While the first part of the song urges parents to teach their children well, the second part provides the balance by urging the young to teach their parents well. It cuts both ways.

Hunger in a Civilised World

The decision by our most prominent Church leaders to write an open letter protesting at the growing numbers of people needing food is a long overdue debate. The growth of food banks has been well documented in recent times as many of us have continued to feel the after effects of the recession.

All recessions result in misery and it is sadly the poorest in society who inevitably fare the worst as jobs become more scarce. The debate this morning on the Today programme concentrated on how to solve this problem. While I applaud that approach, I would also urge people to engage in seeking the cause. If the cause is removed, the problem will be addressed more effectively.

As I write, we live in a purportedly civilised society. Food waste has never been so high. In equal measure, the general public and the all conquering supermarkets must both shoulder their share of the blame. I would struggle to think of a more immoral scenario than this one. On the one hand, we have increasing numbers of people going hungry (this is 2014) and increasing levels of food being thrown away. Yes, we have food banks and for some they have literally become a lifeline. As the welfare budget has been cut, those dependent upon it have become ever more squeezed.

Did the new Government in 2010 have the choice to maintain the welfare budget? Sadly, I don't think they did. They have introduced a new system which encourages people to work if they are able to do so but this is not a new system. This is the very system upon which Beveridge built the Welfare State after the war. One of the problems has been the way in which successive Governments have allowed the budget to rise. In so doing, they have perpetuated a culture of dependency upon it. The Welfare State was never designed for such an outcome. I have genuine sympathy for the disabled, carers and those genuinely unable to work. These are the very people for whom the Welfare State was designed. I was a carer for my first wife for over two years and received the princely sum of £11 per week for the privilege. It's not that I wasn't grateful for that money because I most certainly was. It's just that it was patently insufficient and in no way recognised the true worth of the millions of carers who continue to work for their loved ones every day. The money they save the NHS is incalculable.

When a new Government comes to power, it is faced with assessing the state of the nation's finances before it can start making promises about spending money and this Coalition was no different. We can argue about the speed of the cuts but we can't argue about the need to make them. Our country was in a financial mess and they have had the thankless task of addressing that. I do not profess political allegiance to the Coalition but I do recognise that they had to take the decision they took. Whether the deficit was caused by the outgoing Labour party or the Global recession or a combination of the two is frankly irrelevant now.

But the real question remains; why are people going hungry? In truth there are many reasons for this. I find it interesting that religious leaders have entered the fray at a time when religion has seldom seemed less relevant. They deserve great credit for initiating the debate. In the days when our churches were well attended, a man would not stand by and witness his fellow man suffer the indignity of hunger. I certainly wouldn't. The demise of our community spirit has contributed largely to this and has been brought about by a succession of ill advised policies.

I listened to the CEO of British Gas (Centrica ) this morning defending the prices being charged by his company. It is reported that 3% have left in the last year with many more expected to follow. That is one glimmer of good news in that the competition within the energy market is beginning to warm up. If we still had our coal industry, this problem need not be as bad as it is. Still, we are where we are so we must look forwards and not back. Looking forwards, we need to invest in strategies which will reduce the cruel levels of fuel poverty. Having to choose between heating or eating is a tough choice. It is all the more so when you are an elderly person living alone. Again, if our community was functioning as it once did (and as it still should), we would not stand by and tolerate such an outcome.

I have recently highlighted the need to support our local high streets. The main reason why I support this so passionately is that this constitutes the community hub. The church, the pub, the cafe, the grocer, the butcher, the cobbler. The list goes on but these services should be at the centre of our lives - not on the periphery. The supermarkets should be on the periphery but a succession of Governments both national and local have welcomed them with open arms. Had they stopped for one minute to consider the consequences, they might not have been so quick to do so. The effect on local jobs has been catastrophic but the effects on local community has been devastating. A vibrant high street correlates with a vibrant community spirit and if you don't believe me go to towns like Barnsley (overtly Labour), Ludlow (overtly Tory) and others. They demonstrate that you can have a healthy high street in spite of one of the supermarkets. Politics has little to do with it. This is all about people making community choices when they spend their money - if they want to live within a strong community. It is the role of our independent high street shops to be community orientated and distance themselves from the cynical marketing ploys of the share holder driven supermarkets. We pay our money and we take our choice...

I listened yesterday to an interesting programme exploring the recent trend which has seen the big four supermarkets see their takings stagnate while the discounters such as LIDL and Aldi have prospered. An expert was charged with buying the same basket of shopping fro LIDL and Tesco. They were not buying foie gras - just basic food such as bread, milk, eggs, vegetables, fruit, cereal etc. The basket from LIDL costed £17. The equivalent basket from Tesco costed £27. Even with a clubcard, that is an almighty difference for the many millions living on or near the bread line.

But how far have we sunk when supermarkets are throwing food in to skips at the rear of their premises and seeking to prosecute those trying to rescue some of that food for their consumption. How much food are we all throwing away and why are we doing that? What do food banks represent to us? Do we see them as solutions for the needy or do we see them as an indictment of our civilised society?

Mold: A great market town under siege?

In several recent posts I have highlighted some of the challenges facing Denbigh. It is the town where I live so understandably occupies my thoughts more than other towns. I have highlighted the need for the town to reconnect with it's roots and return to the high street. Unlike many similar sized towns, Denbigh has thus far only had to deal with the effect of one of the big four supermarkets. That has been quite enough as evidenced by the depressing numbers of empty shop units currently available. Still, this piece is intended to provide optimism and I still believe passionately that the local community can once more make their high street a vibrant place should they choose to support it in the way their forebears did.

Across the border in Flintshire lies the historic market town of Mold. Despite the presence of a very large Tesco store on the outskirts of their town centre, Mold has arguably maintained it's high street better than Denbigh. Most would agree that the presence of their twice weekly street market has been a vital factor in this. The current street market in Denbigh is a mere shadow of it's predecessors of yesteryear. The market in Mold though continues to punch above it's weight and provides an important focal point for visitors to the town. The way Mold has prospered is an example of what similar sized market towns can achieve if they get the fundamental basics right.

As I write though, Mold is on the verge of another battle. Not content with one large supermarket, the local council is weighing up the prospect of sanctioning another - directly over the road from the existing one! While I admire greatly the way in which Mold has weathered the retail storm up to now, I genuinely fear for the future of their high street should Sainsbury's be granted planning permission. It's hard to see how the decision makers can possibly justify the absurdity of such a move. I could be forgiven for thinking they don't even want a high street in their town centre. Should they choose to look at the high street of just about any town in the UK which has been subjected to this retail onslaught, they will see exactly what I mean. What chance the green grocer, the butcher, the florist, the newsagent, the electrical shop, the cafes? The list just goes on and on because the supermarkets are sustained by corporate greed. They don't want a slice of the cake. They want all of the cake. Their unrivalled buying power means they often get the whole cake while town centre businesses fall over like dominos.

I hope the local council doesn't give the green light to this latest move but if they do, I can predict with near certainty the future for the high street in Mold. At present, local people who frequent the street market catch up with old friends and have a chat. The market is a social hub which sustains community. The supermarket does not do this. People park up, fill their trolley and go home. If that were not true, there would not be a vacant retail unit on the high street in Denbigh. As I write, there are seventeen at the last count. I wonder how much evidence the local council would need to acknowledge the perils of their retail strategy?

A toxic partner

My local council has today stumbled on to their latest "strategy" for Rhyl. The once popular seaside town on our coast which entertained the Beatles 50 years ago has recently been subjected to a swathe of council cuts to key services principally in the leisure sector. As the location of choice for thousands of holiday makers for many years, the promenade at Rhyl now stands as evidence for what happens when local government get involved. All the evidence today paints a picture of a local council with no understanding of the sea front at Rhyl. They certainly show no signs of understanding what made Rhyl THE place to be for so many years for so many people.

Having erected the Children's Village in the late 1980s amid a fanfare of optimism, the then council (since renamed) assured everyone that it was money well spent. Even it's location beggared belief. Originally intended to augment the now rotting SkyTower, the new Children's Village was built nearby. It achieved several notable feats. It blocked the view of the sea (which had for decades been what people came to see!). It blocked an important access point to the sea. It has toilets for which visitors have to pay and it must rank as one of the biggest wastes of money in the history of local government in this part of North Wales. It still stands as a somewhat grotesque relic of a previous administration. Defiant to the last, they continue to resist calls for it's demolition. To do so would be to admit failure and so the impasse continues as Rhyl continues to receive a fraction of the visitors it used to enjoy.

Just recently, the now renamed council has just announced the closure of the nearby Sun Centre, Nova Centre and Bowling Centre. They have today hinted strongly that the future of the Pavilion Theatre is now also under threat. The former fun fair was demolished a number of years ago and has stood vacant ever since. It has the appearance of a town which has just been abandoned. In truth, it has.

The council today assures us that the best way forward will be a new Aquatic Centre being run by a combination of private sector and the local council. In all honesty, what kind of company in the private sector would seriously contemplate entering in to a business arrangement with our local council. Their CV in business in Rhyl reads like a car crash. Let's hope they won't be needed to organise any celebrations in the local brewery..

In truth, if the existing monstrosities along the sea front were just demolished, it would be a vast improvement on the current "vista". No matter how curious and forgiving the tourist, there's a limit to how many rusting, rotting dysfunctional buildings you can view. It would also have the added bonus of having even less need for local council involvement. Based on their track record over the last quarter of a century, that might not be such a bad idea.

I know it's radical but I wonder whether they've ever considered seeking the views and opinions of the people who actually live there or the people who visit. Maybe it's time for the people to reclaim their town from the ravages of local government before they build something else. I can but hope.

In the private sector businesses are judged on their performance. Enough said.  

A stroll through Denbigh

Yesterday I went to Denbigh Castle with my wife and six year old son. I had been notified of a story telling session which was taking place in the recently opened £600,000 visitor centre. I saw the notification on facebook courtesy of a very hard working local Councillor. Social media is not all bad it seems.

Being residents of Denbigh, we have permit cards which entitle us to free access to the Castle. These cards are worth their weight in gold so if you're a Denbigh resident, I would urge you to take some identification (with your address on) to the library and get your card. I remember being taken there when I was my son's age and few things in life could fire a young imagination quite like Denbigh Castle. Nothing has changed.

Yesterday was the first rain free day we've had in a while. I was expecting hoards of people to be there but was sadly disappointed. CADW laid on the event and it was absolutely brilliant. Delivered by a lady whose enthusiasm left you feeling weak, we heard stories of Owain Glyndwr and Chirk Castle. My son had the opportunity to try his hand at playing medieval musical instruments. It was tailor-made for inquiring young minds and was therefore all the more sad to see such a disappointing turn out of young people. We also had ample time to take in the breathtaking views of the town and the vale before making our slow descent down Love Lane in to the town.

We are local so know the town well. Had we been visitors to the area - and I noticed quite a few when we were at the castle - we would have wanted to wander around this ancient town perhaps in search of a cup of tea or coffee and maybe even a piece of cake. We would have been very disappointed. Making my way home, I took photographs of the current vacant premises in the town and posted them on the "Not available in Denbigh" facebook group. With over 200 members after just seven days, it seems as though there is an ever expanding nucleus of locals passionate about this great town. I shared the photographs to serve as a graphic reminder of the great possibilities for us all on our own door step. The first rule of business is to open your door and we only encountered Lynn at "Make the most of" just above Cawthrays. If half of the current vacancies were filled, it would give locals and visitors seven more reasons to use our high street. If mnore of the existing businesses opened their doors on a Sunday afternoon, I'm sure it would have an impact. Granted, it might take time but I'm sure it would be worth it for all concerned.

The suggestions for what would bring people back on to the high street continue to appear and I would urge everyone to keep them coming and spread the word. The more people engaged, the clearer the picture will be of what people actually want. That seems a good place to start. Some people have suggested that the name of the facebook group has too negative a connotation. I'm all ears. I think the group will be most relevant if the title and suggestions come from the local community - not me. I'm just somebody passionate about the town. I'm just one person. When a community gets together, anything can happen.

I am certain that the Castle can and should play a pivotal role in bringing people back. When you've visited Denbigh Castle, there's only one way to go - down. That is when the high street will benefit - if it is ready to do so. In one week, the suggestions have been excellent and I've noticed separate little groups emerging of like minded local people with a common vision for a particular business opportunity. How great is that?

Denbigh High Street: A response

I'm pleased to have had so many responses to my last piece. In general, many have expressed agreement with many of the points I made but I also respect the views of those who didn't. I don't pretend for a moment that Denbigh high street will miraculously transmogrify in to a bustling retail centre overnight because it almost certainly won't.

What I am saying is that the present state of affairs represents far more of an opportunity than many people seem to appreciate. I understand that some people working in the public sector will seek alternative employment within the public sector elsewhere when the proposed mergers actually take place. That is up to them and will doubtless be dictated by their existing financial outgoings. But given that all Welsh councils are to be subjected to these cuts, they will presumably have to commute to England to find similar employment - if indeed similar employment is on offer. Whatever our political views of the cuts, the cuts are going to happen and those working in the public sector will be faced with some tough choices. I am merely suggesting that some of those people might forego the prospect of expensive commuting hours in favour of a lifestyle change and choose to stay more local. It will almost certainly mean a cut in their income but will paradoxically result in a better quality of life.

Also, it is difficult to gauge the effect on the local economy of the existing council employees in Denbigh and neighbouring Ruthin. One thing is patently clear. Both sites are housed very close to the two supermarkets who have done so much to exacerbate the prospects of the local high streets. It would be entirely logical and reasonable to assume that the real winners with respect to the current numbers of council employees are Tesco and Morrisons - but I would gladly stand corrected.

Citing the plight of the high streets of Denbigh and Ruthin is not nostalgic per se. I see the argument in more pragmatic terms. Why would I want to spend the money on petrol or diesel to go to Broughton (or wherever) or pay a delivery charge for internet shopping if the same item is available locally? I am the first to concede that not all items are available locally but concentrate on those items that are. I would rather pay a little over the odds on the paper for an item which is the same price as the internet or Broughton in real terms. At least that way, I am supporting my local economy with a local person in a local job. I can't see what's wrong with that. It just makes sense because I live here and want the best town possible on my front door step. If more people saw it in these terms, we would gradually see an end to vacant retail units on our high streets. The chances of an item being unavailable locally would become less and less likely and we would live in a thriving economic area. It's just possible that this would also impact on house prices too! Even if it didn't impact on house prices, it would do something far more important; it would give the next generation more reason to stay local rather than pursuing their careers over the border. Given that the size of the public sector is only going to get smaller as the shock waves of the global recession are still being felt, it makes sense to start preparing for that eventuality now. It is not nostalgic to aspire to eat produce which has been reared or grown within the locality either. I'd far sooner eat an apple or carrot or a lamb chop from the Vale of Clwyd for so many reasons. For one thing, growing or rearing it would have sustained local employment. In addition, it would not have had to travel half way around the world to get to my house. It would also take us back to eating produce in season rather than year round because Tesco says we can. If that sounds old fashioned, it probably is now - and more's the pity.

I certainly advocate the emergence of local independent business. With no share holders to pay, independent retailers are frequently very competitive when compared with their multi-national cousins. That is why I'd far sooner see a local independent move in to the former Woolworths site than a national player such as Home Bargains or B and M. The natural site for either of the latter would surely be the site of the former Kwik Save.

Finally, the town centre revolution needed to breathe fire back in to towns like Ruthin and Denbigh has to be achieved with minimal or no council involvement. The purpose of this or any council is to augment local communities. Theirs is not to lead. That is the role of the local community. There must come a point when we begin to realise the absolute limitations of State control be it national or local. Only then will we finally rediscover our old community spirit.

We pay our money and we take our choice as the old saying goes. Never has this been more pertinent for the people of Denbigh and Ruthin. We all have a choice. It is up to us which decision we make but we need to remember the consequences if we choose not to support. As Rob Parkes said in his response, "If people make the effort to open shops in the town we either use them or lose them..... that is the fact of the matter, harsh but true".

Getting away with it

The worst kept secret in North Wales was revealed today. Denbighshire county council have hung the three leisure centres in Rhyl and Prestatyn out to dry. Although it is a somewhat crude analogy, it is said that a dog licks it's own bottom because it can. By a similar logic, our local council can pretty well do as it pleases. But think twice if you're considering protesting because a recent change to the law means that they also have the power to curb even a peaceful protest. Democracy?

In short, they have withdrawn funding to the not for profit company charged with running the three sites. They cite mismanagement and refer to the poor state of repair of the facilities. They decline to do anything about it themselves (there used to be a word to describe that sort of decision). Conveniently for the council, specific details of these alleged shortcomings are as yet thin on the ground but the residual £200,000 will be used to promote leisure, tourism and events for the coast. How does that sound to you? I'll be honest. Pending a statement from Clwyd Leisure (the not for profit organisation) on Wednesday, it seems like they've been sold down the river.

That same council has also announced the closure of the primary school in Llanbedr. Despite a previous call to the local community to express their reservations ahead of the forthcoming consultation process (foregone conclusion), they have announced the school will close at the end of August. This decision is odd because the same council has just granted planning permission for 70 new houses in the village. I would have thought the need for a primary school would be greater but perhaps I'm missing something.

The decision to cut Clwyd Leisure loose has been made just days after the council announced their plans for a new £10 million aquatic centre a stone's throw away from the existing sun centre. I wish I had a business which could afford to make decisions like that. I also wish I had a business which could afford to spend money like that with no accountability to anyone.

I know it's a long shot but I hope the Rhyl residents can find a way to come together to save the facility which has served them and countless thousands of holiday makers so well for so long. What galls me the most is the obvious waste of tax payer's money here. At a time when so many are whingeing about cuts, our local council seems happy to spend money like water. It just doesn't make sense and I find it morally wrong. Granted, the council will do as they please regardless of objections but that doesn't make it right. The most troubling aspect is the total lack of accountability. That is the country we now live in and the growth of this and other councils in recent times has created an out of control Frankenstein. A very sad day indeed.

A fait accompli in Rhyl?

The Machiavellian workings of Denbighshire County Council once more reared their ugly head today when plans were announced for a £10 million Aquatic Centre to replace the existing Sun Centre. Clwyd Leisure is the not-for-profit organisation which has been charged with running the Sun Centre with their funding slashed over the the last three years. In Council parlance, this translates to poor management at Clwyd Leisure. Convenient.

Putting aside the obvious hypocrisy of saying on the one hand that the Sun Centre must now make do with less money and then announcing a proposed £10million Aquatic Centre, the plans also include retaining the existing Sky Tower. This encroaches on pure comedy because the Rhyl Sky Tower has a "doughnut" designed to house people who can be elevated to the top of the tower to enjoy the view. That would be great if it actually worked. It is argued that the Sky Tower will augment the skyline for tourists visiting Rhyl. It will certainly generate conversation: "What's that tall structure?". "It's the Sky Tower". "What does it do". "Nothing". "Oh".

Given that the land where the Aquatic Centre is planned was previously subject to flooding, the Council has reached new heights this time. Meanwhile, if we meander along the front toward the Foryd foot bridge built at the small cost of £4.3 million, we find desolation. The site of the previous fun fair remains an eye sore and would be the only logical location for a project such as the Aquatic Centre - if indeed there was the demand. Not content with seeking to demolish the Sun Centre, the Council also aims to shut Rhyl Leisure Centre. If they funded the existing Sun Centre properly in the first place, this wouldn't even be under discussion. But this is now becoming a familiar tune. The Council has a hidden agenda and nothing is going to get in their way.

We saw this recently with their plans to close St. Brigids School in Denbigh. For the time being, the Council has been rebuffed but they will sit and wait for the protestors to simmer down before proceeding as they originally intended. A lion knows that if he waits until his prey is exhausted, the kill will be all the more easy.

I don't hear the Council making suggestions for the Children's Village but then I'm not surprised. The biggest waste of money in my lifetime would make the Council look stupid if they faced the music and closed it down. They don't need anybody's help to make them look stupid and are excelling given today's announcement. In the White Rose Centre, there is no toilet facility. In the Children's Village, you have to pay to use the toilet. The plans today for this wonderful Aquatic Centre make no mention of toilets but then that would be asking too much wouldn't it? How will the provision of toilet's impact on tourism? We all know the answer but the Council seems quite oblivious. If there is a facebook protest group, please send me the details and I'll join immediately. I, for one, will not make it easy for them to operate in this way.  

Max Gerson: Born too soon?

The 250 million obese people in 1980 have now ballooned to 1 billion obese people. By any measure, that is an extraordinary judgement on the world we live in. We have seldom had so many people starving to death wondering if they'll ever get another meal and yet we've never had so many people literally gorging themselves to death. That is quite an indictment on our race. Humanity remains as elusive as ever.

We can derive several conclusions from these revelations. One concerns the evolutionary propensity of a human being. Humans seldom stop eating at the point when they have had enough. That is because these feelings are controlled by hormones over which we have precious little control. Ghrelin instructs us to carry on eating thus overruling the satiety centres in the brain. Leptin has the opposite effect but is over-ruled by the greedy ghrelin.

I had a friend whose dog perfectly illustrated this. The dog once ate an entire bag of dog food on the simple premise that is was there. He was very ill afterwards but went on to repeat this feat several times. No matter how ill he made himself feel, his instinct was to eat whatever was on offer until nothing was available. In many ways, that dog was not dissimilar to most humans.

Most of us eat more from habit than from a need to achieve satiety. Thus, millions of us are eating far more than we need all of the time. These are inescapable facts. Rarely, stories are encountered of humans on the other extreme of this picture. One such story came to my attention this morning. Just after the latest obesity figures had been announced, I heard the story of an Australian couple in their 60s who had just run one marathon every day for the past 366 days. They did so to promote a positive message about being responsible for your own health. Well, they've certainly done that because underpinning this extraordinary feat was a diet which would make most of us run a mile (if you'll pardon the irony).

Janette Murray-Wakelin and her partner are both vegans who only eat uncooked fruit and vegetables. By eating no meat, fish or dairy produce, they have put themselves in to an ever dwindling minority. Their endurance in completing their 366 marathons (not the erstwhile chocolate bars I hasten to add), was supported by a daily regime of fruit and vegetable smoothies and fruit salads. I can only say that the prospect of completing one marathon leaves me feeling weak so I am in awe of them both.

Their regime is not exactly new though. Max Gerson was a German born physician who died in 1959. He had pioneered the Gerson Therapy which still ranks as one of the most reviled regimes outside of mainstream medicine. His regime espouses hourly juices of organic, vegetarian origin. The regime allows the consumption of fruit and vegetables but precludes all fish, meat and dairy produce. A few years ago, I went to London to meet a lady called Beata Bishop. She had been diagnosed with malignant melanoma in the late 1970s and had eschewed the solutions of mainstream medicine for the largely unknown Gerson Therapy. She is still with us and continues to promote the benefits of a meat-free diet rich in fruit and vegetables. I would add that not everybody with cancer has beaten it using the Gerson Therapy. But then, that is not my point.

My point is that the incidence of obesity and the poor health which comes with it would be much lower if more people sought to moderate the amount they ate and, more pertinently, what they ate. We must remember that food manufacturing as we now know it wasn't around before the Industrial Revolution. So what did people eat before that? Well, it certainly wasn't ready meals and meat was something more reserved for celebration days as evidenced by the word carnival. The carnival was the day when people broke their fast and ate meat again. Just imagine that now. Plenty, myself included, forego alcohol in the new year, but not so many would be so eager to forego meat would they?

The counter argument to this states that people had shorter lives before the Industrial Revolution and indeed they did. There were no antibiotics. Surgery was more of a threat than a promise and a whole host of other medical advancements had not yet been thought of. Oh, and there were no cars then. This probably allowed them to live as long as they did because to get anywhere, the majority just had to walk. If that were the case today, the rates of obesity would once more plummet. There is good recent proof to back this up.

Amid the endless comment following the death of Margaret Thatcher, it is widely claimed that she played a significant role in the eventual demise of communism. Of course, such a claim can't yet be made as long as the curious state of North Korea continues in its current rather bizarre format. That said, she did indeed play her part along with Reagan and the Berlin Wall really did come down to the surprise of many in my generation.

This event was to have unforeseen consequences for an island in the Caribbean. Cuba had famously remained a communist state but had now lost the long support of the Soviet Union. Life was to become very hard indeed for the people of Cuba until about 2005 when the process of capitalism slowly began to creep in.

One of the consequences of this period in Cuban history may be crucial as a pointer for our dear old NHS. Put simply, times in Cuba were so hard that food quickly became a luxury. Over eating was not a choice because there was rarely enough. This resulted in a fall in waist sizes, heart disease, strokes and diabetes. The link between obesity and cardiovascular disease has of course been documented to death. The stark reality of what happens to the strain on healthcare systems has only emerged recently and the results are truly amazing. Cars became too expensive to run so the government was forced to invest in 100,000 bikes so that people could travel from A to B. An average loss of 5Kg per head over a five year period halved the death rate due to diabetes and reduced death due to cardiovascular disease by a third. The average Cuban between 1990 and 1995 expended more calories than they were able to consume. Thus we are provided with a really valuable example of how the global obesity epidemic can be addressed. To all intents and purposes, the Cubans had just adhered to sixteen years of something remarkably similar to the Gerson Therapy.

It is seldom that straightforward though. Even though the Cuban example shows us clearly the way to do it, there is one big snag. The Cubans did not have the choice to eat any more because there wasn't any more to eat. Unfortunately, the Western way of life means that we are often guilty of throwing away more food energy than what we expend through exercise - never mind what we actually eat.The key of course is choice. Choice is a wonderful thing in many ways but when is enough enough?

The haves and the have-nots have always been with us and the works of Dickens are particularly good at portraying them. While I'm quite sure that monetary divisions will continue to feature in our lives, I just can't find the moral argument to defend the fact that millions of children starve while grown men get paid more money than they could feasibly spend for kicking a football. What has become of us? Furthermore, nobody appears to be doing anything about this. Writing this will do nothing to redress this imbalance but it will at least make me feel a bit better.

It was Nietzsche who first predicted the advent of nihilism and his words have been fulfilled to the letter. When I attend my church, it is with a heavy heart that I see the steady progress of its demise. Doubtless in a generation or two, it will become a house, a museum or a community centre and the concept of faith a distant memory. The new God of money and materialism seems to have devotees by the million.

The headline of our local newspaper last week warned "use it or lose it" in reference to community pubs. I was struck immediately by the common thread which the pub and the church share. They have both been places of great importance in the community because they were meeting places for the people. However, they have not been replaced by a new form of meeting place but rather virtual meeting places. Can social networking sites really replace the function served by these two former pillars of our communities? Their proponents would doubtless point to the Arab Spring in which a vast swathe of North Africa was gripped by the need for social change after centuries of oppression. Perhaps this argument carries weight but it is instructive to remember that these countries have thriving churches and although alcohol is forbidden, their elders meet regularly in cafes to discuss their problems. Hence, in spite of the populist view that such countries need to adopt democracy and catch up with the developed world, I am increasingly of the view that the converse could hardly be more true. In such countries, the model of the family predominates society while our model continues to crumble and fragment like a piece of sandstone.

We in the UK have just enjoyed four decades of uninterrupted growth and standards of living which our forebears would not have even imagined.  Yet still we want more. Is there no limit to the extent of our greed. I look around me and never have to look for my next meal. I am never cold and never in need of clothing. I can't even comprehend the lives of most of the people with whom I share this strange planet. Our grandfathers gave their lives in the two world wars so that the next generation would not have to face such horrors. However, I feel that their sacrifice was in vain because if they could see us now, I don't think they'd do it all again - and I for one wouldn't blame them if they didn't.

It is interesting to consider the political ideologies which polarised the world as a consequence of the World Wars. On the one hand Communism espoused equality for all while Capitalism espoused opportunity for all. With only North Korea and Cuba left as the only true Communist nations, it would be fair to conclude that this ideology was fundamentally flawed. However, compared to its Capitalist nemesis, Communism has been a roaring success. Capitalism has been a disaster for millions of us as evidenced by recent developments in Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Iceland and Italy to name but a few. All these countries have been living off overdrafts the magnitude of which they couldn't hope to repay.

Could it be that a third way exists which has not yet been espoused? For the sake of us all, I sincerely hope so because I'm not sure I like what I see around me. Perhaps Dickens was just trying to tell us through the mouthpiece of Mr. Micawber and friends to give us all an insight into what the future could be. Never did he do this to better effect than with the three ghosts who visited Scrooge upon that fateful Christmas Eve. Perhaps like Scrooge we will all wake up and turn over a new leaf. Perhaps we will all start to remember those around us instead of looking after number one. Perhaps a football club winning a trophy might not be so important after all and perhaps we will feel personal responsibility for the plight of our fellow man. Perhaps we won't need to be guided by Public School educated politicians on the payroll of greedy Antipodeans desperate to extract our money from us. Maybe we can all learn to just count our blessings and be truly grateful for what we have rather than what we have not.

But back to Max Gerson. I do not suggest as he did that his Gerson Therapy was a credible cure for cancer. That would be fanciful. His fundamental argument though was sound. We are eating too much food. Too much of what we are eating is the wrong stuff and we are taking far too little exercise. Much as the medical establishment despises Max Gerson, they would do well to consider the basic message of this regime. If they did, the current challenges to world health would be radically cut. Taxing unhealthy food is not the answer. Educating people about the right food will be infinitely more effective. We have a big problem. We have continued to promote a food retail structure which actively promotes most of the very foods which we should be seeking to restrict in our diets. The food retail sector is now massive providing employment for millions. Solving that problem is the key to addressing our existing challenges to health.

Denbighshire: Blame your way out of trouble?

Over the weekend, news broke that the not-for-profit company charged with running three major leisure facilities in Rhyl and Prestatyn had announced the potential loss of 77 jobs. Because Denbighshire county council announced they would issue a press release today, I refrained from writing about this pending their response. I needn't have waited.

Having had their budget cut by £50,000 (the total budget is £275,000!), Clwyd Leisure (the not for profit company involved) announced that it was just not financially viable to continue. Predictably, the council has responded with it's customary strategy of finger pointing. In addressing the announcement by Clwyd Leisure, the council cites the cuts it has had to accomodate elsewhere in it's leisure sector. If Clwyd Leisure goes in to administration, Denbighshire County Council has said it will support the redundancy threatened workers. That is a reassuring response for workers living in one of the unemployment hot spots of North Wales.

There is of course one aspect of this story which the council chose not to address. If the Clwyd Leisure administration is full of so many bad managers as the council would have us believe, why was the running of these facilities not managed by the council themselves? In their statement, the council referred to the great job they are doing with leisure centres elsewhere in Denbighshire. Why then have they selectively chosen not to assume control at the three sites in Rhyl and Prestatyn? Could it be that they knew that these facilities faced unsurmountable financial pressures?

The use of numbers to demonstrate the council arguments do not stand up to scrutiny. They refer to the £400,000 budget to run the other seven facilities within the county as against the colossal £275,000 to run the three sites in Rhyl and Prestatyn. Unless they really do believe us all to be even greener than we are cabbage looking, I feel the need to point out a few technical points. Rhyl and Prestatyn have the highest population in Denbighshire so I'm only surprised their budget has been so low. Rhyl and Prestatyn are also the main tourism draws for Denbighshire. Tourism brings in money to the county. It would be normal to invest more in these areas since they will play the biggest part in regenerating the economy of the county.

The bigger picture here is summed up by the comment of the council employee charged with the running of these facilities. "We do not fund failure" was his response. That comment is worthy of analysis. In truth, the three sites in Rhyl and Prestatyn are failing because they haven't been adequately funded. To say they don't fund failure when they have underfunded to cause the failure is actually laughable. In the private sector, such a response would not see out the day.

It is quite obvious here that the council has been harbouring a hidden agenda. Their counterparts in Wrexham have just announced the closure of two massive leisure facilities. Conveniently, they intend to replace them with one facility. That's fine but it will mean that people living on the Plas Madoc estate will be the losers since they will lose their leisure facility. This is a real shame because like the West End of Rhyl, Plas Madoc boasts one of the most socially deprived areas in the UK. Is there a theme here I wonder?

Rhyl has been systematically let down by the local council for a long time now and so the landscape on the front looks like it can look forward to another great site of dereliction in the near future. With the Rhyl Sky Tower (which can't ever be used again for health and safety reasons), the Sun Centre and Pavilion Theatre look set to augment the eye sore on the front at the West End as planners continue their interminable dithering about what to do.

Let's just stop and consider a really important point here. Why were there so many hotels and guest houses along the front in Rhyl and Prestatyn? Believe it or not, it is because they boast a long tradition of providing holidays for UK tourists. Actually, they still do although the business owners now have to contend with the decisions of the local council as well. Did I forget the Children's Village? Forgive me. If you take your young family there, prepare to be disappointed by the anticlimax and pray that you don't need to use a toilet because the local Council wants you to pay for the privilege. That's sure to have the tourists flooding in.

Rhyl and Prestatyn both continue to boast fine weather and fantastic beaches - not that you would know it from the way they are promoted by the local Council. The demise of Rhyl has broadly coincided with my life time. As a child, Rhyl was always packed with holiday makers and a vibrant town centre. The decision by the Council to allow a shopping centre with no toilet facilities just about sums up the decisions taken by the Council.

It is therefore clear that the Council will be quite happy to see the back of the Sun Centre, the Nova, The Pavilion Theatre and the North Wales Bowling Centre. My advice to the residents is to forge ahead without the Machiavellian Council. Use local fund raising. Apply for Big Lottery funding. Do what you have to do but do it without the Council because you will have a much better chance of creating something sustainable and enjoyable. I pray that the communities in these towns get together and react collectively. If they do, they will wonder why they ever came to rely on Council involvement in their affairs.

While this is a very sad day for all involved with the sites it must also be looked upon as a golden opportunity to break away from the Council whose prime function appears to be self preservation and blame.

Food Crime in the UK

The intention to establish a UK food crime agency is an interesting development. The realisation that we have been fobbed off with horse meat in our ready meals has created the mother of knee jerk reactions. In a country which can lay claim to being the ancestral home of the knee jerk reaction, this is quite a story.

The horse meat had been identified in a processed meal the nutritional content of which is probably not too different to the packaging whence it came. I wonder how many of us could honestly hold our hand up to being able to differentiate with any reliability between horse and beef?

A few years ago, I was holidaying with my wife and we decided to sail over to Sardinia for a few weeks. I was rather surprised when I first encountered the meat counter in the butcher's shop because it was more difficult to find meat which wasn't horse. Hence, as stereotypical carnivores, we gorged on horse for a fortnight and jolly nice it was too if a trifle sweet in comparison to beef. In a lasagne though, I would defy anyone to spot the difference.

The late, great Sir Clement Freud who had the most extraordinary of lives, opened a restaurant after the second world war which prospered for a number of years. In the immediate aftermath of the war, things were tight to put it mildly and people made do with what they had. On one of the first nights, one of the diners complimented Clement on the meat and asked what it was. In his trademark laconic style, Clement informed him that the meat was horse. Because everybody always assumed that Clement was joking, the diners roared with laughter and continued with their meal. It was horse.

The saddest part about revelations which show that Tesco has thrown over 30,000 tonnes of food away in the last quarter is that I wasn't even remotely surprised. Certainly I was appalled but I wasn't surprised. The trouble is that this has been allowed to evolve over many years as Tesco has continued its obscene domination of the UK retail sector.

In these posts, I have long advocated the advantages and strengths of localism and this news just adds more weight to my argument. To understand these revelations better though, it is instructive to analyse the details.

We are told that one of the biggest items thrown away is bags of salad. There are two sides to this. Not everybody shops at Tesco so they will always be faced with buying challenges when stocking up their fresh produce offerings. That said, Tesco have Clubcard. Not so much to reward your custom as you may mistakenly believe, but rather to track your buying patterns and seek to supply them accordingly for the maximum profit. Therefore, they can't even predict with accuracy how much stock they need on their shelves even when armed with the buyinf patterns of their customers. They either have a sub-standard buying department or an over ambitious growth forecast.

Aside from the obvious point that we have increasingly become a nation of salad dodgers, the other possibility here is simply that people have seen through the Tesco vision and returned to the riches of localism to be found on their own high streets. Recent market research data would appear to confirm this view.

The Tesco disclosure also asserts that its customers also continue to waste large amounts of the food they purchase. The latter is well known and should be highlighted as a national disgrace. It is immoral that we complain about austerity while throwing so much food away when people in other parts of the world really are starving to death daily. While Tesco are quite right to point to household waste, I would remind them that the latter is made possible by companies such as themselves using every marketing tool in the book to squeeze every last penny out of its Clubcard clutching customers. Just this morning, their Commercial Director of Group Food asserts that Tesco is seeking to reduce the average £700 per annum currently being thrown away by their customers so that they have more money in their pockets - so that they can spend it in Tesco of course! Is it just me or is the strategy of this and its equally nauseous friends at Asda, Morrison's and Sainsbury's barn door obvious. Their entire business models are based on continued expansion to fund even more stores and rest assured, they couldn't care a fig how they do it just as long as they can show a profit to their share holders. Frankly, its a bit rich for a company like Tesco to be pointing to the amount being thrown out by the British consumer. They really should seek to get their own house in order first. They can't have it both ways. They want everybody's custom and to eradicate the competition but woe betide you if you buy an extra bag of salad from them (which they promoted in the first place) which then gets thrown away.

Nationally, our waste of food is morally repugnant. It is utterly inexcusable. If there was a huge snow storm today which meant that everybody was confined to their homes for a couple of weeks, do you think many would starve? Of course, there would be some that would but the majority have freezers and cupboards stocked up to the brim. We all need to just take a step back here and take a look at the people in the world (of whom far too many) who genuinely don't know where their next meal is coming from. Shame on Tesco and shame on us. This problem belongs to all of us. It is immune from Nimbyism and we all have some soul searching to do.

Wherever possible, my family now spends its money on our local high street. This supports local jobs. The local shopkeeper knows me and know him. I don't have a Clubcard but I have a fair price and buy only the food which I need. I also know that much of the food I buy has been reared and produced locally so it hasn't travelled far. The Tesco apples being thrown away have been flown half way around the world and sprayed with sulphur dioxide to give the impression of freshness. My local grocer doesn't need to do that because my local apples are just that - local and fresh. Yesterday, we ate some rocket lettuce which will thankfully never see a plastic bag. We picked it fresh from our garden and it tasted like, well, rocket lettuce - as you would expect. As the saying goes, "you pay your money and you take your choice"....

As for horse consumption, this only came about in the first place because too many people resorted to ready meals instead of buying and cooking their own food from scratch. I am not convinced that anyone's life is so busy or so affluent that they can't do this. As millions throughout the world continue to wake up to another day wondering if another meal might occur, there is something distasteful about this whole story. I think history shows us that during the war, the people of the UK and other countries would have been fighting over the prospect of horse meat. Quite what they fought for is sadly becoming rather less obvious.

Help for our loved ones?

A recent article suggested that people in the UK will vote for the party which promises to help their children and their elderly parents and relatives. I don't doubt the truth of this assertion but question the realism underpinning it.

Would these same people be so keen to cast their vote if they were told the true cost? I suspect not. Of course, from a purely Socialist angle, we should be looking to the State to provide for those in greatest need of help. It is true to suggest that the State has failed successive generations in education. Education of the parents and education of their children. Socially, we have become less socially cohesive as more and more of us have sought to own our homes and seek work away from our families. This has been caused by a variety of factors.

In Wales where I live, the Assembly Government strives for every child to be taught the Welsh language. When they leave school, the majority seek employment in England. If they return, their proficiency in the Welsh language has become eroded. While they have been away, their families have become divided. The parents they leave behind get older and with age comes illness. Illness demands care. Where once the parents might have been cared for by their own children, this is increasingly becoming the ideal rather than the reality. So why is it that there are no longer the jobs in places like Wales. Why is it that the Public Sector has been allowed to become so big while the private sector in Wales has become something of a novelty? There are many reasons for this. The real growth of the former was ushered in by the prudent Chancellor of Tony Blair in 1997. The reason why the private sector has become so negligible is that Wales has become too unattractive for business. With a poor transport infrastructure and more regulations than you could shake a stick at, Wales has effectively been closed for business for a couple of generations now. Take a walk down your local high street if you don't believe me. Take a look at your local farming community because the evidence is there for all to see. We gleefully welcome supermarkets with open arms knowing full well how much of their produce is imported from abroad.

So what about the care of our elderly because the headlines today have revolved around the burgeoning problem of dementia. Dementia is not new. Granted, there is much more of it but that is because people are living longer more than any other reasons. Historically, many would argue that dementia care was better in the past than it is now. Granted the medical side of care is more advanced but I wonder if the same could be claimed for the actual human care? Before it's closure in 1995, the former North Wales Hospital had become a centre for care of the elderly with dementia being a big part of it's work load. Although it had started life as a mental asylum, it had evolved to become a 1700 bed hospital with a large focus on care of the elderly. This had the additional effect of freeing up vital bed space at the local district general hospital. It is not hard to imagine what happened when it closed in 1995. The effect on elderly care in North Wales has been further exacerbated with the closure of a a succession of community hospitals. It seems that in Wales, the State has absolved itself from caring for the elderly. It certainly puts a lot less in to this are than it did 20 or 30 years ago.

The problem now is that for all their headline grabbing promises, none of the political parties have the necessary funds to supply the care of children and the elderly which people are looking for. In the same way, they no longer have the funds to allow people to retire at age 65. Maybe we've got to the point where the State has admitted that it's capacity to help us is limited in spite of the amount we pay in tax. Whoever promises us the earth in 2015 will not be able to deliver it so we would be better served seeking the answers to our problems within. An old saying goes like this, "Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day but teach a man to fish and you feed him for life". That is where the education comes in. It is not the sole responsibility of the State. It is far more the responsibility of the family. In China, an old saying claims that it takes an entire village to bring up a child. We are no different to China. The only difference is that for a variety of reasons we have lost touch with our families and communities. Until we re-connect with the latter, we can call for the Government to help us all we like but the onus will remain firmly with ourselves. I doubt whether this would garner any votes but at least it's a more honest approach than that being drawn up by the political elite.

A Medical Giant.

I've just learned of the sad death of Dr David Glyn Jones. Where do I start? First and foremost, DG was the man who saved my life. He picked up the fact that I was in kidney failure and got me to the right place with the minimum of fuss. For that alone I will always owe him a great debt. He is also the man who has inspired me more than any other to pursue a career in General Practice. Although he was just 62 years old, a life can't be measured in mere years.

After he retired as my GP, he continued to do some locum work and I would periodically bump in to him at my local Lidl. He was completely unpretentious and had time for all wherever he happened to be. He didn't finish work at 5.30pm because I don't believe he ever did finish work until last Friday. his consulting style was very relaxed and I always felt as though he was continually assesing me whenever I went to see him. He was clever at drawing people out and one instictively trusted him. No flash car, no flash clothes, no flash talk. Nothing flash about him. He was straight as a die and one of the most genuine people I've ever encountered. When my daughter died from meningitis, he was distraught because he had actually tried to get to our house before the ambulance came even though she wasn't even registered with him. When I decided to go abroad with Mindy after Thea died, we went with his blessing against medical advice because I hadn't long started immune suppression for my kidney transplant. He knew that there are occasions where medical advice takes second place to humanity. He made sure I had hospitals to go to en route and provided me with essential items which I might need.

His decision to leave General Practice was Denbigh's loss. He left due to the crippling mountain of needless paperwork which continues to dog our GPs as I write. He had little truck with the concept of a ten minute appointment and his mantra might have read, "It'll take as long as it takes but it'll be done properly". The funny thing was that I was never consciously aware of people in the waiting room getting fed up with waiting. Perhaps it was because they knew it would be worth the wait. I'm sure he made mistakes because like it or not, all doctors do. But he was absolutely straight with you and left you in no doubt when you left his consulting room.

I missed him when he left General Practice and feel really sad for his family now that he has gone. Having devoted his medical career to the people of Denbigh and the surrounding area, there seems little justice in his passing away so soon. For me, he will always be the man who allowed me to do what I'm doing today because without him, I wouldn't even be here. May he rest in peace. 

Could JFK save the NHS?

As the world pauses to remember the day President Kennedy was assassinated, I reflect on the speech he made in his inaugural address to the nation.

He famously challenged the American people with the following words: "Ask not what your country can do for you - ask what you can do for your country". It was a brilliant speech and set the tone for a Presidency which would be cut short all too soon. His speech also featured a quotation from the prophet Isaiah. It vwould be difficlult to imagine any current political leader daring to refer so openly to a religious text. That illustrates well the difference between life in 1961 and life in 2013.

But back to those words which I quoted. As our current NHS continues to dominate our headlines for most of the wrong reasons, it seems to me that the majority of oprobium has been directed at healthcare workers. This has not been without some justification as the aftermath of the Francis Report continues to exert itself within hospitals and primary care settings. I certainly don't intend to take issue with Lord Francus because his report was badly needed if only to identify those areas where we neede to improve. There is no room for complacency and even less room in healthcare where people's lives are on the line.

That does not cover the other half of the equation though - patients. Recent statistics revealed that up to 40% of patients presenting to A and E should not be. These patients were identifies to have problems for which A and E is not intended. As has been pointed out recently, the clue is to be found when we dismantle the acronym. Accident and Emergency is supposed to provide assitance for those two eventualities and while it has a role to play in variour locations during out of hours, it is not there to deal with trivia. Sadly, the latter turns up at our A and E departments all too often.

At a time when the NHS seeks new ways to become more efficient with it's limited resources, now would seem a good time to go back to the words of the late American President and remind people that evrybody has their role to play in sustaining the NHS. It does not run on fresh air and every penny counts. There would be no harm (no pun intended) in reminding people of their responsibilities to one of our most vital assets. If that 40% was removed, the benefit to hospitals the length and breadth of the country would be felt by all concerned.

Viva Las Vegas

Founded as recently as 1902 and incorporated as a city just a few year later, the history of Las Vegas (The meadows) is a great example of the challenges facing healthcare.

In a recent training session on life support, the instructors asked us where we thought the best place would be to have a heart attack in terms of a favourable clinical outcome. Putting aside the obvious answers (a hospital or on a football pitch within spitting distance of a cardiologist in the crowd with the nearest specialist cardiac centre being just minutes away), we were rather surprised to learn the answer.

You will have guessed by the title of this piece that Las Vegas is indeed one of the safest places to be when having a heart attack. To be specific though, you would ideally want to be sat in front of a slot machine monotonously feeding it with silver dollars. That is because, each machine is reportedly accompanied by a defibrillator. Assuming this is due to good planning rather than luck, it begs the question, why?

Because the casino owners know that the chances of a heart attack are significantly increased when somebody is going through the stress of gambling, they have provided the very best medical response. Well, nearly. For fear of a sudden outbreak of altruism among the casino owners, their stance is simply to treat the heart attack rather than deter the person from gambling. As vested interests go, this takes some beating. Ergo, if the addiction is making you money, feed the addiction.

Not far from Las Vegas is the town of Shivwits. This is the ancestral home of the Paiute Indians. They, of course, pre-date the gambling havens of Vegas and Reno by centuries. The arrival of the casinos brought prosperity to the Mormons who opened them but health misery to indigenous tribes such as the Pauites. The main concern of the Pauite tribe leader is not alcoholism although that has been an historical problem. No, the one thing which threatens them as a race is type 2 diabetes. They have one of the highest rates in the USA - and that is saying something! The rate of diabetes in under-19s in the USA is three times higher among the indigenous Indian tribes. But why is that?

There are both genetic and lifestyle factors which have contibuted to this anomaly. For the last two centuries, addiction among the North American Indians has been well documented. In the early days, alcohol was the substance of choice but then habits started to mirror those of the wider society springing up around them. Abuse of marijuana, amphetamines, hairspray and crystal met have all been documented. So are these Indian tribes inherently predisposed to substance abuse? Well, maybe they are.

Before Westernisation took hold in the form of Vegas, these tribes were hunter gatherers. The content of carbohydrates in their diet was tiny and thus they evolved as an incredibly efficient race able to cope in the harsh temperatures of the dessert with limited nutrition and water. They ate what they could kill or find and that didn't amount to much. Post Vegas, their lives have been transformed for the worse from a health perspective as they no longer have to hunt or find. Added to this is the fact that their diets have now become awash with carbohydrates as Westernisation has exerted a vice like grip on them.

But just as the Mormons used their religion to build Vegas and therefore become richer, a similar picture has been going on back in the UK for years. Go in to your local supermarket anywhere in the UK for the last couple of months and you will be bombarded with images of a festival to which few people have any allegiance. I speak of course of Christmas. As with Vegas, religion has little to do with profits and the profits made out of Christmas are enormous. The mountains of carbohydrates which now confront us in the name of a festival whose meaning has long since been hijacked by the all conquering retailers are contributing to our own diabetes time bomb. Worst of all, it is completely unregulated and makes no attempt to hide its cynical intentions.

Meanwhile, we are being told daily about what a mess our NHS is in. Standards of care are being questioned. Medical competencies are being questioned. The numbers of nurses are being debated. Community hospitals are being closed down. GPs are being asked to work longer hours to try and relive the strain on the hospitals. All the while though, little if anything is being said about the causes of these problems. I can stuff myself stupid with a diet rich in carbohydrates and fat and do little or no exercise. I can pour alcohol down my throat for fum because it is so ridiculously cheap and I can then smoke myself like a kipper. But after all that I can turn up at my GP surgery or local A and E department safe in the knowledge that someone will give me a pill to make it better. Nobody will judge me because they are not allowed to do that. They will even refrain from referring to my weight for fear of the distress this may cause me. Given all of the above, is it any wonder the NHS is struggling? Also, is it any wonder the supermarkets so utterly dominate our society? Illnesses such as heart disease, diabetes and strokes are the legacy of their strategies. But they don't have to worry about the cost of putting us right because the NHS does that. They are therefore to do as they please and make profit for fun with no recourse to anyone.

On balance then, I question which is worse. Vegas with its defibrillators behind every slot machine or the UK with its unregulated supermarkets? Both induce ill health but I would argue that Vegas does so with a touch more honesty. I don't agree with them fuelling an addiction but at least they make no bones about it however unpalatable that is. The supermarkets though are a different kettle of fish. They vie with each nother to show who is the cheapest and offer us reward points for coming back. They are therefore charging us more in the first place and rewarding us by selling cheap carbohydrates and alcohol to fuel our addiction. Thus they ensure our custom and make their profits. In any assessment, that is a pretty rotten business plan and yet millions of us are drawn to it daily. They even sell us our petrol now just in case there is an aspect of our spending which they haven't yet sufficiently exploited.

It is not the casino which has made the native Indians obese in Nevada. It is the Western diet which has done that. We in the UK are merely mirroring what has been going on the US and reaping similar rewards. Just this week I saw another proposed supermarket development in the market town of Mold in North Wales. As usual, the justification for such a decision revolves around jobs because apparently this is the best we can do in this country. This is lame excuse to finish off another high street as it surely will. An elderly lady in Aberystwyth faces being evicted for another supermarket to be built. Once agin the local councillors cite jobs as their rationale. If this constitutes the extent of the vision held by those charged with making the big decisions in our locality, Heaven help us all. By comparison to the myopic vision of North Wales councillors, Viva Las Vegas!

Selection for Medical School: how should we do it?

Two months before my fortieth birthday, I embarked on a British medical degree programme. Before medical school, I was a Sales Manager in fast moving consumer goods. As such, my route in to medicine has been the exception rather than the rule. My reason for choosing medicine was influenced by my life experience. I had been the sole carer for my first wife for three years until she died from breast cancer. I had also been a dialysis patient following kidney failure which gave me valuable insight in to the patient experience. That said, I did not have such experience of life at the age of eighteen and wouldn't expect many others to either. What I did have was a diverse experience of life by the time of my Medical School interview.

During our initial weeks at Medical School, my new colleagues and I attended a session in Basic Life Support. At the end of the session, the trainer asked the students if they wanted to divulge the real reason they had chosen a medical degree. To their credit, all the students answered with great honesty. Their answers shocked me. The majority disclosed that money was their biggest motivator for studying medicine.

Current Medical School entry remains biased in favour of privately educated students. Although only 7% of British students benefit from a private education, just over a quarter of medical students are privately educated. State educated students therefore remain disadvantaged under the current regime. Ironically, these are the very students most likely to grow up with the life experiences which will best foster true empathy with their future patients. This elitist disparity does little to address the concerns expressed by Lord Francis. The Francis Report will only effect improvements if it's recommendations are heeded and understood.

Admittedly, it is a long document but the central message is clear. Henceforth, Medical School selection must aspire to indentify those students who best display the attributes of care, compassion and empathy. It is the latter which should underpin the selection process for Medical School. The intellectual capacity of medical students is assumed because interviews are largely reserved for the star pupils anyway. Medical selection remains too resistant to the arts. While nobody disputes the value of a good scientific understanding, artistic subjects will provide us with more rounded individuals.

Much has been written about empathy and for good reason. Understanding the definition of empathy is key to the future selection of medical students. First recognised by Carl Rogers in 1959, empathy has since been sub-divided in to several categories ranging from emotional empathy to cognitive empathy. The Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI) remains the foremost measure of empathy and explores the seven global sub-scales. The problem of course, is that this test can be learned and hence taught. Our Medical Schools need to be seeking a tool which will assess the care, compassion and empathy of potential students on the day of the interview. The tool will need to be designed to avoid easy replication which can easily be coached and taught. That is the big challenge.

The extent to which we can relate to the concerns of the person sitting in front of us is informed by our life experiences beforehand. This may explain why the United States have adopted a post graduate approach. Those extra three or four years of life experience can be vital to the emotional development of that student. If an eighteen year old states that they have worked at a local residential home, it doesn't reveal reveal how well they empathised with patients and neither does it reveal why they chose that experience. While such experience is good, it doesn't necessarily inform the selection panel. The selection day should therefore aim to see how students react when faced with stressful, emotional situations. Unfortunately, such situations can only be contrived using actors on a selection day. That said, I have always found the actors employed by my Medical School to be very realistic.

During my career in Sales Mnagement, we often went away in a large group for outdoor activities to explore our individual and collective strengths and weaknesses in problem solving. I have long advocated the utilisation of such an approach when recruiting medical students. Just being academically able is not enough for those intent on a clinical career. Such days are really useful for identifying our willingness to consider the views and opinions of those around us. They also foster good communication skills and highlight social limitations.

Given that the amount of life experience which an eighteen year old can get is often limited, we need to be exporing all their experiences of caring if we are to continue selecting students straight from school. Many may have had a caring role within their own social circle, be it family or friends. The impact of such experience needs to be expored in terms of how it has changed them.

Thus, an aspect of recruitment which could be improved is the skilled exploration of exactly why that student has chosen medicine. Many are unfortunately coached to say the right thing at the right time but a skilled questioner would recognise such responses and explore them further. By their own admission, many members of my cohort claimed to be motivated by financial rewards. Granted, they were first year students and may have matured since then. Thye may not have matured though, and that ought to be a cause for concern.

Lord Francis urges a culture of compassion, care and empathy. I question whether any of these can be atught. If we want to recruit the best doctors, we might have to accept that they may not always be the ones with the highest examination marks. We would all agree that an ideal candidate will need a baseline capacity to retain and understand key facts and concepts. The challenge is to accept that the attributes of compassion, care and empathy are just as important. The present system of spending two years frantically trying to put your curriculum vitae in the shop window is fundamentally flawed. As laudable as it is to go and help build a village in Africa, the notion of doing so has now become almost de rigeur among potential medical students as they seek to put distance between themselves and the competition. I don't doubt that some such projects will be genuine but question the true motives for many of them.




     

           

            

The fight against sugar

An avalanche of articles have appeared recently proposing higher taxes on food stuffs rich in high glycaemic index sugars. The mayor of New York tried to ban the purchase of large fizzy drinks in a desperate measure to address the growing obesity crisis.

Banning and taxing never actually get to the root of the problem. If they did, there would surely be no smokers left because the price of tobacco is now prohibitive. But not prohibitive enough to address the addiction which drives the habit. This remains the true challenge. Only through effective education will this and similar problems such as addictions to alcohol, tobacco and drugs be properly addressed. I have long advocated a minimum 50p per unit charge on alcohol in the UK simply because such a price structure will have a negligible impact on anyone drinking within national guideline limits. What it will do is to make a drinking habit harder for those whose lives are blighted by alcohol. I'm aware of the counter arguments. People will start to brew and distill their own alcohol. For those who are addicted, this may very well happen but the real issue is education.

The education has to adopt a two pronged approach. We first need to engage with pre-school children in nurseries and pre-school through teachers, nursery nurses and health visitors. Odd as it may seem, we need to be getting the message across early about the dangers of poor diets stacked high in sugary carbohydrates. Sugar is every bit as addictive as alcohol, tobacco and the rest but is always given more of a wide berth for reasons which I don't fully understand. It rots teeth. It is a well trodden path to diabetes in later life. It opens the door to obesity and all the health impacts which go with that. Yet if you go to your local supermarket today, you will doubtless see mounds and mounds of tins of chocolates on sale for the Christmas market. Today is November 1st so you have to wonder about the cynicism of such a tactic by the retailers. With proper education, the majority of people can make an informed choice about the wisdom of buying in to this trap.

Certainly education will cost money to put in to place but it will be money well spent rather than just taxing something for the sake of it with no concrete plan to address the real cause and effect of the problem. If this government is as serious about the NHS as they say they are, the implementation of a national education strategy shouldn't even be optional. That strategy though has to engage with the parents of young children if it is to achieve success. Schools should be on hand to continue the good work which has first been achieved in the home. It is therefore the parents who have the biggest role to play. If the parents themselves are already hooked in to a high sugar diet, this presents another challenge. The only way to address this is with effective public information programmes plastered throughout libraries, sports centres and yes, supermarkets and shops. Tobacco packets and alcohol come with a health warning so sugar should be treated in the same way. This is a price which we simply can't afford not to pay. People talk of health time bombs but this clock is well and truly ticking....