Ineos go all in, Unite fold

The best analogy of the deal that was reached over the Grangemouth plants future this morning comes from the world of poker.

Ineos possibly sick of the infighting and continuous threat of strikes from the Unite Union yesterday announced they were shutting down the petrochemical part of the plant and considering the future of refinery. It was the equivalent of putting all your chips unto the table and being prepared to lose everything.

Unite had rejected the 'last chance survival' plan offered by Ineos, but this morning with 800 jobs apparently already gone and 570 others threatened they capitulated. Accepted all the conditions laid down by that plan as they say "warts and all". Equivalent to throwing all your cards away in poker.

This afternoon we also saw the new Secretary of State for Scotland Alistair Carmichael and Scottish Finance Minister John Swinney together in Grangemouth to talk with Ineos this afternoon.

Addressing the press after that meeting Mr Carmichael said:

"We are in a much better place today in relation to the future of the plant than we were yesterday.

"There remains, of course, a great deal to be done."

Mr Swinney added:

"This plant has got a great future, everybody accepts that Grangemouth has got a great future.

"What we need to do is resolve these outstanding issues, get the investment plan implemented and take forward and improve the prospects for the people that that work in this plant."

The past 24 hours has certainly proved to be a long time in the  life of 1,370 highly skilled jobs in Grangemouth and I hope that in the future both sides will sit down and discuss differences in a constructive and respectful manner long, coming to a conclusion long before it escalates to such potentially damaging circumstances.

The wider impact of the loss of Grangemouth peterochemical jobs

Around 800 people across West Lothian and Falkirk are to lose their jobs with the announcement today that Ineos are to shut down the Grangemouth petrochemical plant with immediate effect. The fate of the remaining 570 jobs linked to the refinery on the same site are yet to be determined.

It is one of the biggest loss of jobs in the area following on the the 3,100 lost with the shutting of the Motorola plant at Bathgate in 2001, the same number lost their jobs at NEC, Livingston the same year. More recently 500 lost their jobs with the shutting down of the Bausch and Lomb plant at Livingston.

But the danger of losing jobs in the petrochemical plant is nothing new. Indeed back in May 1992 my some time sparring partner the MP for Linlithgow and East Falkirk mentioned then recent job losses at the plant in his maiden speech:

"The town of Grangemouth is at the centre of Falkirk, East and has been noted for some time as a petrochemical town, boasting substantial production facilities for BP Oil, BP Chemicals, ICI, General-Electric Plastics, and Rhom and Haas (Scotland). My constituents are pleased at the commitment to investment by those companies, notably the £600 million investment by BP Chemicals in an ethylene cracker plant, the process technology labs of ICI and the Rhom and Haas plant upgrade. However, all is not what it once was. Harry Ewing noted the vast expansion of Grangemouth in 1971, but in 1971, when speaking about new employment, he said that the position was rapidly changing. I say without criticism of local management in Grangemouth that, in 1991–92, more than 1,000 job losses were announced in the town. Some 300 jobs have gone at the BP refinery, 250 have gone at ICI and 200 more redundancies are being sought. In addition, there were major job losses in the timber yards, which were made much of in 1971 by my predecessor."

It is sad day for the 800 who have lost their jobs today. However, both sides have been acting like stubborn mules in recent days, if not years. The owners seem to be doing all they can to get what they view as a white elephant off their books, while at the same time the workers are not prepared to take any chance in pay and conditions, fearing their own job without considering that all the jobs in the sector could be gone.

When Ineos came with what they called a survival plan, you would have thought that alarm bells would have been ringing with the workers. The fact that the plant has survived so long without a major change in conditions when others the area have had to accept such adjustments, knowing that if they didn't their job could disappear.

But the Grangemouth plants is almost a fifedom of Unite. The same union that has been at the centre of the Fallkirk Labour Party's election shenanigans. The Union appears to have been promising the workers take a stand and we'll see that everything will be alright, only to have found that Ineos were also not going to budge. it appears that the 570 jobs in the refinery are now also in danger. But with that there is also other jobs in the oil industry and possibly the ability of Scotland to actually process the oil that lies off its shore.

The last element is going to be of extremely great concern to Alex Salmond because part of the way he was going to fund an independent Scotland was through the production and processing off 'Scottish' oil within Scotland. If the Grangemouth plant were to totally close and be mothballed or decommissioned it could take years if at all to be able to get the processing of oil within Scotland up to the speed that would make it capable of supporting Scotland's economy to the extent that Salmond wants it to. If the oil is going to have to be processes and refined elsewhere that would be extra costs and less value added within Scotland causing a rather big hole in his economic plan.

Local Investment Secured for Town Centres Welcome

Tam Smith has posted a question for me on an older blog entry. He asks:

"Stephen,What do you think of the almost 3 million pounds worth of Town Centre regeneration funding provided by an SNP administration for the constituency we represent.

"We have all been working hard with local groups and our partners in Holyrood to secure such funding thus providing much needed jobs in construction as well as adding a facelift to local shops etc.Where were the Lib Dems when all of this was going on.Come on Stephen let's be positive and work together for the benefit of our local areas.I can assure you it wasn't easy taking part in the bids but it was more worthwhile than critisising [sic] ones web page postings. Tam."

Firstly I welcome the the £2.345 million investment that the SNP administration are earmarking for the town centres of Linlithgow, Bathgate, Armadale and Whitburn. Also for the extra funding that Bathgate's Business Improvement District (BID) Company, Enterprising Bathgate, have also secured from the Scottish Parliament. Although neither of us currently represent any part of the constituency, although very shortly we may both be seeking to do so for all of it.

As for where the Lib Dems have been Tam should ask local business owners just who turned up at their crisis meeting here in Bathgate in June 2005? I'll give you a clue it wasn't any of the local councillors, the MP, MSPs, or 3 of the other parliamentary candidates of the month before. The Lib Dems truly did show they worked for local interests all year round not just at election times. As well as that I've attended meetings about the impact of paid parking to business, residents and others in Linlithgow. As well as meetings that led to Linlithgow becoming a shining beacon of environmentalism in the county.

I've been advocating and been fighting for a fair deal for Whitburn, Armdale, Bathgate, Linlithgow and the other West Lothian town centres that have seemed to suffer in the eight years I have lived here while the Livingston shopping experience grows and increases in size and pull. I've always been there to offer advise and support in their attempts to get a fair deal for themselves, something that the businesses have driven themselves moving forward. I've been working away hard, on the ground, moving things forward for years.

Indeed there are councillors on both side of the council chamber and our independent councillor who know that I already will happily work with them on issues of mutual interest. Tam should have known from our meetings, or from discussion with his colleagues, that I would have been happy to discuss involvement with such an incentive, yet he lays it down as a challenge, almost as if I and the Lib Dems have done nothing.

Sadly knowing as I do the number of businesses that have already disappeared from many of these town centres the investment is too late for some local business owners. But this investment is better late than never.

In March 2008 the Council said it would be matching the BID funding in Bathgate to make a total of £750,000. Though at the start of this year Enterprise Bathgate valued at £990,000 the benefit their funding would bring to the town where I live. Tam, himself, does seem a little confused about the exact benefit of the Enterprising Bathgate portion of the funding, he starts by saying that West Lothian Council and Enterprising Bathgate are investing a further £800,000 into the pot, then later says that it is £935,000 from Enterprising Bathgate topped up with £260,000 from the council. Maybe he would like to clarify which of the three figures is the correct one.

With so many conflicting figures it is hard for the electorate to discern just what level of investment is to be given. The news was too late for this weeks local papers, so I will get the facts straightened when they are available for everyone.

I've borrowed from Tam's website the full list of the projects that will be included:

Armadale

● develop transport and town centre connections by improving access and developing the streetscape, pedestrian walkways and cycle routes.

● refurbish the Goth Tower clock, together with town centre shopfront improvements and signage.

● develop the public realm at The Cross.


Linlithgow

● improvement to connections between the town centre/rail station/union canal, focusing on Low Port as a gateway.

● improvements in the Conservation Area to retail and business shop fronts together with improved signage.

● in partnership with Historic Scotland develop better connections between the Town Centre and Linlithgow Palace, including improved event access, signage, heritage conservation and other physical developments.

● re-location of new heritage facility into the Burgh Halls.


Whitburn

● address safer connections at The Cross and links to residential areas, transport sites and car parking sites, including measures to enhance mobility, pedestrian and cycle use.

● improvements in the town centre to retail and business shop fronts together with improved signage and better streetscape layout.

● acquisition of derelict land site in Whitburn Town Centre and restoration for development.

Bathgate

● The creation of a town centre Wi-Fi zone in Bathgate for customers and businesses.

● Develop town centre cycle network linking park and ride/transport interchange/town centre, regal conference/Arts Facility/Lindsay house including cycling provisions at each site along with signage.

● The provision of new and improved signage/retail frontage within core business to in Bathgate.

● The provision of a transport interchange to connect Bathgate and Airdrie including new signage, lighting and public information.

There is also £350,000 for Bo'ness and Grangemouth at the northern end of the Westminster constituency which had been secured in the first tranche of funding earlier this year as part of the BID pilot projects.

UPDATE: I notice that the BBC indicates that the Scottish Parliament is investing £1.7 million in to Armadale, Almondvale (what more!!!) and Broxburn. Now I know Linlithgow have got £94k from the Climate Challenge fund, even if Enterprise Bathgate is a seperate endeavour, I take it then than Council funding is coming for the Whitburn elements.

PS I notice that the criticism of Tam's use of quotes on his webpage was taken on board and was actually praised for doing so last night. I'm hoping for an honest campaign heading into the Westminster election, the people deserve transparency and openness in their Westminster representative when they get to decide on who that should be.

Grangemouth by Rail: A Future Hope

Seeing the work going on at the new Bathgate and Armadale stations and the rest of the work going on to restore the Bathgate to Airdrie rail link is a wonderful sight. The news that a campaign is afoot to connect people in Grangemouth back to the rail network is additional welcome news.

Rail lines still exist from Falkirk to Grangemouth to carry freight so less replacing of infrastructure may be required that the Bathgate to Airdrie scheme. Alex Macaulay, the director of SEStran has said that the issue of reinstating a station at Grangemouth would be considered as part of Scottish Transport Appraisal Guidance (Stag) to assess the future transport needs of the area. The 17,000+ residents of Grangemouth may soon be looking forward to a more rail connection to the rest of the network rather than busing or driving into Falkirk to get on a train.

Relight My Fire

Well having taken a look over a quiet Grangemouth on Sunday from the Bathgate Hills it appears that the day after the dispute ended may have been productive. The company that owns the plant had planned to close the final pension scheme to new employees and phase in a contribution scheme instead.

The talks that were called off well before the eleventh hour last week had a good resumption when they resumed on Tuesday after the 48 hour strike which not only shut down the Grangemouth petrochemical plant but also shut down the Forties pipeline as a consequence. Both Ineos and the union Unite have said they had reached a proposal which they will consider over the next couple of days.

It has been good to see Unite reduce the level of spite in their statement's about Ineos which may well have paved way for this negotiation to get to where it has. However, over the weekend local MP Michael Connarty sadly proved to be anything but a calming influence when he accused Ineos of "telling lies" and "macho management".

First Minister's Answers

Last night I promised another blogger a considered response on Nicol Stephen's performance at Stephen's performance in First Minister's Questions yesterday.

So I watched the full replay on BBC Parliament last night to see what all the brouhaha was about.

Before Nicol even got to ask his question is most be noted that like a true economist Alex Salmond laid out a few assumptions.

"Assuming consumer behaviour is responsible, then there should be limited difficulties, both in terms of inconvenience and disruption."

"we need everyone, and the public's co-operation, to behave sensibly and responsibly, to cut out non-essential trips, to use public transport"

I have to mention these quotes from the First Minister's response to Annabel Goldie as background to what was to follow.

Nicol rose for his first question and asked about profiteering and rationing on petrol station forecourts. Raising the issue of capping these prices.

To give him his dues Alex did in his first response calmly say that "Everyone in this chamber would attack and deprecate profiteering." and stated that the remit for capping was in the remit of the Secretary of State on the Energy Act (1976).

The Herald this morning ostrich-like attacked these claims of profiteering by casting aspirations on if they are true. Don't know about any one else but I have seen petrol prices rise by 3p at the pumps where I most regularly buy petrol since Monday in two jumps 2p during the day on Monday and a further penny yesterday. While this increase is only to 106.9p unleaded there are rural areas of Scotland where that is far higher, having a higher starting base generally to start.

Now if as Alex Salmond says there is adequate supply of fuel, easy economic supply and demand theory would dictate that these prices in Edinburgh wouldn't need to raise. Of course the second assumption that the public would behave sensibly would affect the demand curve sadly forcing prices up.

It is the second question that I guess has got other bloggers so up in arms. Nicol asked had the First Minister pressed up the case for capping these prices. The wording was actually careful following the first answer. It didn't say have you done anything to cap the prices but had he pressed it home to the SoS.

The problem arises in how Alex Salmond starts almost every answer, that is with a gibe and put down. He started by saying the Nicol Stephen clearly hadn't listened to the previous answer, as pointed out I think IMHO the wording indicated that he had, had Mr Salmond listened to the question fully or was he too busy working out and going over his weekly insult for the Lib Dem leader. No wonder the cameras at that point panned to a shocked look on Nicol's face.

So Malc I'll agree it wasn't the greatest performance by Nicol, but sadly while we have a First Minster who chucks out gibes and cheap put downs at every single serious questioning of his administration or himself instead of giving answers to the tough questions it will look like that.

SNP Prioritise Private Over Public Transport in Crisis

It would seem that Edinburgh's public transport could almost grind to a halt on Sunday after the Scottish Government has prioritsed the supply at Grangemouth for petrol station forecourts rather than public transport. Lothian Buses

Today as Alex Salmond pormised the people of Scotland at First Minister's questions that there was "ample and substantial" fuel to cope with the shut down of the Grangemouth petrochemical plant, as a result of strike action, he was away of the problems Lothian Buses was facing. During his answer Mr Salmond actually said:

"Assuming consumer behaviour is responsible, then there should be limited difficulties, both in terms of inconvenience and disruption.

"Clearly, it's a time when we need everyone, and the public's cooperation, to behave sensibly and responsibly, to cut out non-essential trips, to use public transport."

Going to a bit hard for the good, sensible and responsible Burghers of the capital to do that Alex especially to get to work on Monday when there are no buses available to take many of them anywhere. Guess we know how green the Nats are with this prioritisation of resources at a time of crisis.

Update: just love when something like this happens. You click publish post and then find this from Lothian Buses which wasn't there when you started. Make you wonder though has Alex done a Gordon Brownesque U-Turn.

Further Update: The Scottish Government are now claiming there was a misunderstanding by BP regarding where the fuel should be prioritised. Lothian Buses clearly did not have a misunderstanding, they had said the supplier had been told not to supply them.

So the misunderstanding has to come from some communication between the Scottish Government and BP or how BP interpreted that to tell this major wholesale customer that they would not get a delivery which would appear to be enough to see them through about half a week, gauging time scales. Just what did the SNP Government tell BP regarding supply at this time? How could this be misunderstood? Why did this misunderstanding lead to such an escalation in panic? And why was this not sorted out at FMQs? Something is not quite adding up as to this 'misunderstanding'.

Even Further Update: It appears the amount of fuel that Lothian Bueses and many wholesale purchasers of fuel will be recieving is to be only 70% of their long scheduled orders. Now one assumes that 30% has not been stockpiled away in case of shortages and that the 100% is required to operate the full service bus, emergency and transportation services require. Therefore we must hope that the rationing to these wholesale customers can be speedily restored following this weekend's industrial action.

However, if there is "ample fuel" until the middle of May, again the question must be why the 30% reduction in supply Mr Salmond?

Refinery Talks Break Down

The talks at Acas between the Unite union representing 1200 workers at the Grangemouth petrochemical plant and Ineos the owners broke down last night.

The dispute was over the removal the final pension scheme from new employees and to seek contribution from those already in the scheme. Now seeing the number of other employees across the country who have faced these sort of chances hardly the most radical pension changes in these hardening financial times.

However, Unite came away from the talks saying that Ineos had been unwilling to move over their proposals. Ineos on the other hand had said they were prepared to put all the changes on hold for a 3 month discussion period so that strike action and shutting down the plant can be avoided on Sunday and Monday. Sadly we cannot be sure which story is closest to the truth at present as to why after 2 days the talks broke down.

The Automobile Association and the UK Petroleum Industry Association have both said their is no need for Scottish motorists to panic buy full tanks of fuel as sources will be found to keep the pumps operating at normal levels of demand. For the period of the strike this was already available at Grangemouth and while the plant comes back on stream alternative sources to supplement local delivery. The temporary stock outs that have occurred across Scotland have come as a result of the panic paying.

Grangemouth, the Nats and the BBC

Yesterday I posted my feelings about the lack of comments from the Nationalist blogs regarding the impeding Grangemouth refinery strike and it affects across Scotland. So while talks resume today to try and resolve this issue I got to wondering just why do the Nats want to sweep this under the carpet.

To be totally fair there was one Nat, Malc in the Burgh, who approached the Grangemouth story at an amazing tangent and threw blame on all the hype on the way his licence fee was paying for "irresponsible reporting" from the BBC. This led to one rousing hoorah from fellow Nat leaning Jeff of SNP Tactical voting.

Well today there is an in depth look at just where the effects of impending shut down are being felt across Scotland on that same BBC. Of course I can only vouch for this around Bathgate as I witnessed last night in passing but Caron Lindsay has reporting similar things in Livingston, both backing up the BBC reporting.

Of course and independent Scotland might not replace the national broadcaster and rely wholely on private companies providing television so maybe the Nats are prepared to take swipes at something they have not planned on how to replace, instead of looking at an upset to their almighty oil based Scottish economy.

New Move to Avert Grangemouth Strike

As I blogged yesterday Unite had at unwilling to let the arbitration service ACAS get involved in their dispute with Ineos the owners of the Grangemouth oil refinery over their decision to end their final salary pension scheme.

However, with plants at the site already shutting down in preparation for the strike action Unite have agreed to talks in London with the employers at Acas's offices.

What is alarming however is the lack of response from the Cyber-Nats on this issue. Ideas of Civilation mentions it as did my fellow Lib Dems Iain Dale and Caron Lindsay. But nothing from the Nat or Labour leaning bloggers in Scotland. Obviously the Nats want to keep bad news firmly hidden under the carpet even if business is involved.

Grangemouth Shutting Down in Anticipation of Strike

When I posted last week about Falkirk Council seeking to reduce their carbon footprint. I don't think any of us anticipating that the biggest poluuter in the district might end up shutting down operations for a month.

A strike that the Union Unite is calling for the 27th and 28th April has already cause Ineos who run Grangemouth the only oil refinery in Scotland to start a phased shut down of units in anticipation of a full shut down by Friday and may result in disruption for up to a month as a result of safety concerns. As the Grangemouth facilty provides fuel to all of Scotland, Northern Ireland and a great deal of Northern England motorists have started to panic buy fuel. They are both concerned that fuel will be in short supply or that the price may go up even higher as a result of this action.

The dispute is over the removal of the final salary pensions scheme which Ineos say they will maintain for current members of the pension scheme. Unite apparently have not been prepared to involve the conciliation service ACAS in their dispute, which considering the disruption and panic their announcement would have been expected to cause seems rather unfair to the populace at large.