Keith Prince’s First 100 Days: 8th May-16th August 2026

Keith’s Reform Party had a landslide victory on May 7th. This destroyed the Conservative/Resident Association grip on Havering. Political geeks were enthralled by this stunning event. Keith triumphantly announced a ‘100 days of action’ to define the scale of his victory.

What has happened since May 8th?

Keith was national and international news. Farage and Jenrick came to share his glory. Keith said they would ‘Hit the ground running’; they were, ‘New management’ and had ‘a plan’.

Significantly he trashed Andrew Rosindell’s obsession that Havering should leave London. July’s Council meeting had two Reform Motions.1 They opposed the Climate Change Emergency and the ULEZ. Both Motions were nonsense. The Climate Change Emergency policy was impractical and the ULEZ is a ship which has sailed.

Keith uses the media expertly. He has produced many videos giving a running commentary. This use of social media is welcome.

Reform has no policies on core Council activities.2 Government loans continue to balloon with an inevitable(?) bankruptcy looming. Reform needs policies for their ‘New Management’ of the Adult and Children’s services and Homelessness budgets. They are 70% of the total budget.Contaminated land at Launders Lane is intractable but the festering sore of the Waterloo Estate is moving towards a solution.3 Finance is difficult to explain but Reform should have made an effort by now.

Reform hints at a pro-business regeneration policy. This is provocative for Havering’s NIMBY voters.4 Regeneration usually generates outrage. 24 years of Conservative/RA negativity is integral to Havering’s DNA. The electorate want,

Change but everything to stay the same

Notes

1 Motions.pdf For a full critique see Havering Council Meeting, 22nd July 2026 (part two) – Politics in Havering

2 Prince summarises his 100 days plan like this: “[The plan sets] the tone for how we will work: listening to residents, making sensible decisions, reviewing the Council’s finances, strengthening governance and focusing on the everyday issues people care about…” The remainder of the article avoids the financial challenges the borough faces despite the implicit promise.

Source Havering Council Leader Promises Change as First 100 Days Focus on Crime, Fires and Council Finances. – The Havering Daily

3 Both of are part of the poisoned chalice Keith has inherited. Source ROMFORD SET FOR 100+ NEW HOMES: Major Waterloo And Queen Street Project Moves Ahead. – The Havering Daily

4 Most councillors are NIMBY and oppose everything. This is especially the case with housing developments where only 3-bed semis are acceptable seemingly.

Havering’s Council Tax: A Reverse Wealth Tax

Council Tax is based on 1991 property values. The eight bands, ‘A – H’, reflect those valuations, which haven’t been revised for 35 years. One outcome is that band ‘H’ houses pay a lower percentage Council Tax than band ‘A’. Council Tax is a reverse wealth tax.

Havering’s band ‘H’ Council Tax is £4,849.32.1 At the other end of the scale a band ‘B’ house pays £1,885.85.2 Council Tax was meant to be a property tax, which is absolutely not the case now.

There are many houses in Havering priced at £1m+, some of which are not in band ‘H’. Rightmove is advertising a house in Hornchurch for £3.9m.3 It’s in band ‘H’ and the Council Tax is £4,849.32. £4,849,32 is 0.12% of the price. This tiny amount isn’t even a ‘rounding error’. Simultaneously Rightmove is advertising a band ‘B’ property for £190,000.4 Their Council Tax is 0.99% of the value of the property. They pay eight times more than the band ‘H’ house in percentage terms. Council Tax means the poor subsidise the rich.

If the Band ‘B’ 0.99% Council Tax is used as the default, there would be sharp increases for expensive houses. A flat rate percentage Council Tax is a pure property tax. To equalise the Council Tax at 0.99% would level the playing field and end the subsidy that the rich receive from the poor.

Using the two houses that illustrate this blog, the Band ‘B’ house stays the same. This is absolutely not the case for the property valued at £3.9m. Their Council Tax increases from £4,849.32 to £38,610 p.a. This stonking increase is a vivid statement of the grotesque unfairness of the 1991 Council Tax banding system. Can you imagine the cries of horror of those who have this increase inflicted on them? Yet 0.99% is exactly what the poor are paying and it is equally unaffordable for them.

A percentageCouncil Tax is a fair property tax.

Conclusion

It will take enormous political courage, by Andy Burnham, to reform Council Tax. The losers will be the rich who can manufacture ‘outrage’ in the media. Meanwhile councils creak towards oblivion.

Addendum: Reforming Council Tax

There is nothing Keith Prince can do even if he wanted to. The point of this blog is to give a Havering context to the debate about Council Tax reform.

Notes

1 Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering

2 1 bedroom flat for sale in South Street, Papermill House, 363 South Str, Romford, RM1 I tried to find a band A property and couldn’t.

3 8 bedroom detached house for sale in Freeman Way, Emerson Park, Hornchurch, RM11 Accessed 16th July 2026

4 1 bedroom flat for sale in Grenfell Avenue, Hornchurch, RM12 Accessed 16th July 2026

Havering Council Meeting, 22nd July 2026 (part two)

Motion A concerned Hornchurch FC., “…this Council congratulates Hornchurch Football Club on their promotion to the National League.

Unwittingly the Labour group (1 hour 17 minutes)1 revealed Keith Prince’s hypocrisy. The council meeting was moved because of England’s semi-final game. Keith knew seven councillors would be absent but changed the date anyway. Democracy comes second to football in Keith’s world.

Motion B concerned a ‘Faith Champion’. It was drivel (1:24).

Motion C concerned the Climate Emergency (1:28) Reform’s policy was ably set out by Gary Payne. He dislikes tricksy statistical modelling, which is unfortunate because it commands respect in the wider political world. Gary did, however, think for himself and consulted Havering Friends of the Earth before the meeting. I think Reform is Greener than they seem. This was emphasised by Alex Donald’s contribution. (1:38)

Keith’s closing speech was astonishing. (1:45) He challenged the legitimacy of HARA’s amendment. This should have been done prior to the debate. The principal legal officer rose to the occasion, with icy politeness, and rejected Keith’s interpretation. He should have spoken to her in his office to discuss his worries. For Keith to use his position as Leader of the Council to challenge a ruling and lose, is an aberration. Perhaps he realised he’d won the vote but lost the argument?

Motion D concerned ULEZ (1:51) Fundamentally this was idiotic. The information demanded is unavailable because it isn’t collected in the way Reform believes. Trevor McKeever’s speech was a masterful (1:57) destruction of the basic premise. Every Reform/HARA contribution had an unstated opinion that respiratory deaths were a price worth paying.2 It would be nice if they came into the open and said flat out how many deaths are acceptable.

Best Speech: Trevor McKeever

Best Sniggering (joint winners) Martynas Cekavicius and Bailey Nash-Gardner

Notes

1 Motions.pdf All four motions are here For the webcast go here Annotator Player All timings refer to this webcast.

2 Speeches from Khuram Ali (1:51), Gillian Ford (1:55), Luke Barry (2:02) and Keith Prince (2:05)

ULEZ Havering’s ULEZ Data (davidtaylor.online) indicates the number of lives saved and the quality of lives of those not suffering respiratory diseases

Havering Council Meeting, 22nd July 2026 (part one)

Apologies “….have been received from Councillors Kevin Ayres (Reform), Petru Eugen Dinsorean [Reform], Diane Smith, Russell Smith [Reform], Geoff Starns [Reform], John Tyler, Liz Tyler, [RA] Christine Vickery and Tom Vickery [Reform]. This is a 16% absentee rate, a Red Flag for most organisations.

Question Time1

Question Time (QT) was a filibuster. Answers became speeches and it ended with the Mayor pulling the plug. Reform councillors were in heaven with a captive audience.

Q1 Sue Ospreay (26 minutes) asked Keith Prince about Launders Lane. His jot-trot through the history made my heart sink. Needless to relate he said nothing….at length.

Q4 Stephanie Nunn (40) asked Robert Whitton about the Romford Plan. He was silkily elusive and charming. Charm goes a long way and everyone believed in a better tomorrow after he’d finished.

Q7 Gillian Ford(54)asked Keith about housing. He doesn’t like other boroughs buying houses in Havering. Keith is helpless and indignant, which isn’t a good look. Gillian’s killer question about Havering’s export of homeless residents ended Keith’s happiness. He was reduced to a ‘Don’t know’ answer, which is the ultimate cop-out at QT. He should know.

Q8 Martin Goode (58) was on top form. A straight-forward question to Sue Benjamins became a meandering speech. Her economic model depends on heroic assumptions. Regeneration and additional business rates are her economic 5th Cavalry coming to rescue Havering. Martin was polite and didn’t spoil her fantasy.

Q9 Graham Day (1:08) was enjoying himself before the Mayor pulled the plug.

Best Question: Martin Goode

Best Answer: Robert Whitton

Note

1 Annotator Player All times noted relate to this webcast. The questions that were tabled are here  Council questions.pdf

School ties are a tax on learning

Education is compulsory and so is school uniform. The making of school uniform compulsory is a matter for each of Havering’s 18 academies. They choose to enforce compulsory uniform; it is not an obligation imposed by the government. One element is the school tie. They can cost anything up to £10 and have no impact on learning. Demanding the students wear a school tie or be banned from school is enforcing a quasi-tax. School ties reflect a by-gone era when they were routinely worn by adults. That era has long gone. Schools should catch up on social reality.

School ties are a tax on learning – YouTube This podcast is 3 minutes long

Keith Prince: His Rendezvous With Reality

May 7th was exhilarating for Keith. Victory made him the darling of the media. He appeared on TV and in most national newspapers. He even appeared on the front page of a prominent French newspaper. Nigal Farage and Robert Jenrick came to share the limelight. Keith proudly said that Havering was under ‘New Management’.

That was May.

Keith is a veteran politician and knows a thing or two. But he was amazed to be mugged by the MetPolice. Havering hires five officers as additional local police. In early June the cost increased to £600,000 a year. That’s a stonking £120,000 per officer per year. Keith ‘tackled’ the Mayor about it and was brushed off. He didn’t even demand evidence from the MetPolice as to how £600,000 was reached.1

On the 3rd July Keith met executives from the Essex and Suffolk Water Company, the ‘baddies’ in the Gallows Corner saga. He emerged defeated. He was helpless in the face of their shifty and evasive ‘explanations’. (see Addendum)

“Sadly, they are still unable to provide a firm completion date, and based on their updates, it looks unlikely that the junction will be fully reopened before October.”2

A gallant effort at populism was a damp squib. Keith banned the flying of the Gay Pride flag. He did it with a flourish via a video podcast outside the Town Hall. Keith was obeying a Farage edict to ban the Gay Pride flag as opposed to doing it because it was suitable for Havering. Farage is using stereotypes to drive policy. Obviously, this is ridiculous for a populist political party with gay members. The policy has failed as can be seen from successive by-elections defeats.

Amazingly there was a reaction. Havering’s Gay Pride Activists were provoked as they were meant to be. What was unexpected was that they broke into the Town Hall and erected the flag anyway.3 Gay Pride forced a score draw.

Thus far Keith has faced relative trivia. But what happens when brutal events occur and he has to upset LOTS of people? Adult and Children’s social services, homelessness, the £100m+ of government debt are menacingly going to spring into action and wreck his policies. Needless to relate Farage has nothing to say about substantive local government issues.

Addendum: Prince’s meeting with the Essex and Suffolk Water Company

“As Leader of the Council and Assembly Member for Havering and Redbridge, I have continued to pile on the pressure. Today [3rd July 2026], I met with Transport for London and Essex and Suffolk Water (ESW) to demand a clear completion date, proper answers, and firm accountability from ESW for the ongoing delays. Residents should not be left in limbo, and businesses should not be expected to keep absorbing the impact without clarity or action.

Sadly, they are still unable to provide a firm completion date, and based on their updates, it looks unlikely that the junction will be fully reopened before October. As both Council Leader and London Assembly Member for the area – I will continue to raise this directly with the Mayor of London, demand regular progress updates from both TfL and ESW, and press for stronger accountability and further compensation and support for those most affected.”

Source Living in Havering – Friday 3 July – 12hedonic@gmail.com – Gmail

Notes

  1. London Assembly (Mayor’s Question Time) from 12/06/2026 This is the clip of the Q&A Keith had with the Mayor. It’s about three minutes long. It’s hard to understand the £120,000 when you examine police pay scales Pay and benefits | Police staff | Careers | Metropolitan Police
  2. Gallows Corner is a hub junction and has been closed since June 2025. Prince continued his bombastic approach on the 7th July 2026. “Councillor Prince has given TfL until the end of October to complete the works….” Notwithstanding his utter failure at the face-to-face meeting (see above) ‘Enough Is Enough’: Havering’s Leader Councillor Keith Prince Gives TfL End Of October Deadline As Gallows Corner Delays Drag On – The Havering Daily
  3. Havering bans the Gay Pride Flag – Politics in Havering

Havering bans the Gay Pride Flag

Keith Prince banned the flying of the Gay Pride flag. This was a wonderful piece of *gesture* politics. It was free, it got ‘good’ PR and his supporters liked it. Gay Pride activists climbed onto the Town Hall roof and flew the flag anyway. One unexpected consequence is that it reveals serious weaknesses in the supposed protection that CCTV provides.

The podcast is three minutes long Reform 1: Gay Pride 1 – YouTube

Havering Councillors’ Register of Interests, 2026: Part Two

The Reform party is believed to be ‘divisive, fear-mongering and intimidating’. But probably not in Havering. However, until May 2026 many Havering councillors in their Register of Interests statements gave home addresses, employment details and much more.1 Now the Register is a ‘need-to-know’ statement.

There is a legal expectation that councillors list their employment and address. Only a well-founded fear that they will suffer violence or intimidation of them or their family over-rides this obligation. It’s implausible all 55 councillors asked for protection from violence or intimidation of them or their family. It’s so implausible it looks like a coordinated and significant attack on democratic values.

What’s going on?

Here are ten case studies1.

Robert Attree:2 He answered ‘None’ to all 12 questions. Didn’t Keith Prince explain that’s he’s now a public figure.

Malvin Brown: He’s a landlord but replied ‘Withheld’ to Q4 about property owned in Havering. A landlord without property? Is this the equivalent of a pub without beer?

Graham Day: He’s an optometrist but doesn’t say where or who he works for.

George Harwin: He’s employed but it’s a ‘secret’. Does he work for Nigel Farage?

Joe Lock: He owns land ‘outside’ Havering but none inside Havering. Does he live in Havering?

Barry Mugglestone: He’s changed his tune. Prior to May he used to say what buy-to-let property he owned but now it’s withheld. Why?

Alex Sibley: He’s a landlord who doesn’t list his property. Perhaps he’s very rich and wants to conceal it?

Angelica Ola: A young woman who allegedly hasn’t got a job or property. How does she defy economic gravity?

John Tyler: Another councillor with property which is unidentified. “Violence or intimidation” must stalk the mean streets of Cranham.

Robert Whitton: He’s a ‘Master of the Universe’ investor BUT he doesn’t own property in Havering. This is implausible. Perhaps he doesn’t live in Havering?

Discussion

Does it matter? Is it nit-picking?

Havering has 55 councillors. They were elected to work on behalf of the community and it’s very important their biases are understood. Most councillors are male, rich property owners and middle-aged or old. At least eight councillors are landlords and eleven are directors of various businesses. The electorate need this information when reviewing their substantive decisions.

How is it possible that every councillor has deliberately avoided basic questions. Are they all living in fear? Decision-making is coloured by people’s biases. Those biases are influenced by wealth, age, and their lived experiences. Councillors must put aside personal preferences to make good decisions for the community. Havering is hurtling towards bankruptcy and very difficult decisions will be made in the near future.

Councillors who base decisions on the protection of their own ‘sacred cows’ are thoughtlessly reacting. They aren’t reviewing the actuality. Reacting isn’t a policy, it’s a reliance on prejudice. Its only virtue is making powerful councillors happy.

Addendum: The right to not reveal personal details

The sensitive interests’ provisions provide for details about a registered interest to be excluded from versions of the Register of Interests available for public inspection (or published online) where a member and monitoring officer agree that the disclosure of that interest could lead to violence or intimidation of them or their family. They provide for members to disclose that they have an interest but for the details to be withheld from the public register.

Source: Simon Hoare, Letter from ‘Levelling Up, Housing and Communities, 18th March 2024 (my emphasis) This is guidance on Localism Act, 2011, Section 32.

Notes

1 I know of no example of a councillor, who revealed their address or employment details and were then subject to “Violence or intimidation”. 2 Your Councillors | London Borough of Havering You go to the councillor that you want to review and click on *Register of Interests*. This example is given because he’s the first member on the list Councillor details – Councillor Robert Attree | London Borough of Havering