Havering Council Meeting, 2nd September 2026 (part two)

Motions1

Introduction

Keith Prince (1 hour 44 minutes) did an accurate and tedious nit-picking dissection of the *RULE BOOK*. He enjoys nit-picking. No-one else does.

Motion A: Everyone agreed that Havering, “limit excessive private profits in children’s residential social care across the UK, in alignment with Scotland.”

Motion B: “This Council agrees not to spend valuable council resources on a referendum to leave London.”

Andrew Rosindell was a dark cloud looming over Reform councillors, keeping them on ‘message’. True Believers affirmed their commitment, though some were more slippery than others – step forward, Bailey Nash-Gardner (1:54), Luke Barry (1:55), and Gary Payne (2:02).

The motion introduced a fierce Gillian Ford (1:51), which was refreshing. Cut-and-thrust is always appreciated when it is done well. Three Reform councillors indulged themselves in jeering, which was really a bullying tactic.

Motion C: “Council recognises that adverse childhood experiences, trauma and other life events can affect a resident’s ability to engage with support services, sustain tenancies, maintain employment and participate fully in community life.”

The Reform Group’s Amendment was insane, “Council calls upon the Executive Leadership Team to support the Cabinet in achieving these outcomes.”  (my emphasis)

The Reform Administration asked the Executive Team to cooperate with the policies of councillors. Asked! Keith Prince’s Administration obviously has a strange relationship with the Executive Leadership Team. Councillors agree policies, which must be implemented by the Executive Leadership Team.

Keith worries that the Executive Leadership Team can refuse councillor policies. The Executive Team must follow instructions. If they refuse, they must resign or demand written, legally binding, instructions. Those instructions act as a legal statement that the Executive Leadership Team were under duress and acting in opposition to their professional advice.

Apart from this insanity, the debate was wonderful. There was cross-party agreement on the importance of the motion. Matt Stanton (2:08), Graham Day (2:11) and Keith Prince (2:17) referenced known experiences which added to the texture of the debate. If there is indeed a ‘joined up response’ and recognition of the ‘ecosystem’ of support following this debate, Council can congratulate itself.

Motion D: “Commends the new Administration for their firm and determined action to tackle the ongoing fires, smoke and pollution from Arnold’s Field, Launder’s Lane, and the impact on residents in Rainham.”

This was Stalinist self-congratulation.

Best Motion: Motion C

Best Speech: Gillian Ford

Note

1 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 02/09/2026 19:00 Motions in full For the webcast Annotator Player All times refer to this site

Havering Council Meeting, 2nd September, 2026 (part one)

Question Time1

Only one cabinet member didn’t have a question to answer, Sue Benjamins, the Finance Tsar. As Havering lurches towards bankruptcy that’s an insight into the priorities of councillors.

Q2: Martynas Cekavicius replying to Brian Eagling (55 minutes): Brian is an excellent councillor and it’s best to agree when he is using local knowledge. Martynas did just that. Very wise. At stake was street cleaning and the claim that Harold Wood had been cleaned 17 times. Brian denied that flat out and offered to demonstrate that to Martynas. He graciously agreed.

Q4: Robert Whitton replying to Stephanie Nunn (1:00): Housing fraud could potentially be costing £2m annually if Havering is ‘average’. Robert was entirely dissatisfied with current anti-fraud procedures. He favoured beefing up the fraud squad. He said this could pay for itself as well as releasing homes to people who had a legitimate need.

Q5: Keith Prince replying to Darren Wise (1:05): The sight of torn, dirty flags on lampposts is a grim reminder of last year’s emotional spasm. But what to do? Just like people who put notices about lost cats and dogs on lampposts they remain awaiting removal. But who pays? Keith was clear – it wouldn’t be the Council. The price of faux patriotism.

Q10: Graham Day replying to Gillian Ford (1:26): Graham is a specialist in waffle, which is irritating. This critical question demanded a detailed reply. Unfortunately, it was ‘pie in the sky’. Significant expenditures depended on future savings (which are probably real but in the meantime?). Graham floundered. If this is indicative of Reform budget analysis Sue Benjamins is in for a hard time.

Best Question: Stephanie Nunn

Best Answer: Robert Whitton

Note

1 Council Questions 2 September 2026.pdf Each question is timed by using this webcast Annotator Player

Havering’s Academies, OFSTED and Attainment 8 scores

Introduction

All 18 of Havering’s secondary academy schools are inspected and graded by OFSTED. The reports are an important source of information for parents.1 This is especially true for parents of Year 6 children transitioning to secondary schools.

This discussion asks whether OFSTED reports are worth the paper they are written on.

Discussion

Attainment 8 will….be based on a calculation of pupils’ performance across eight qualifications.2 Attainment 8 covers every academic experience of students in schools. It is the key performance indicator for parents and is ignored by OFSTED. Schools are monitored through OFSTED inspections and focus on four main areas, which don’t include academic achievement.3

The best and worst 2025 Attainment 8 scores in Havering were: Coopers Coborn 58.2 and, Bower Park 37.7.4 Havering as a whole slightly outperformed England. Coopers Coborn exceeds both Havering and England. It successfully prepares students for GCSE. The reverse is the case for Bower Park. They are well below the Attainment 8 scores of Coopers Coborn, Havering and England.

Coopers Coborn

The OFSTED report ignores Attainment 8 outcomes. Nothing. There are, however, 12 lines on Safeguarding.6 Safeguarding isn’t more important than academic outcomes. It isn’t controversial to think OFSTED could, and should, celebrate Coopers Coborn’s GCSE successes. The report does comment on teachers,….[who] have strong subject knowledge.

OFSTED rated Coopers Coborn as ‘Good’ in 2022.

Bower Park

OFSTED bizarrely says, The school has high aspirations for pupils’ academic achievement….7 The reality is different. OFSTED damns the quality of teaching and the classroom experience of students. Effectively they say teachers are weak and ineffective at promoting learning and discipline. The report dismisses Safeguarding in a single sentence, “The arrangements for safeguarding are effective. “

The Bower Park OFSTED report is a naked and unashamed whitewash.

OFSTED report says Bower Park is ‘Good’ in 2023

OFSTED

Ofsted exists to raise standards and improve lives for all. We put children and learners who face barriers to their learning and/or well-being at the heart of what we do. This is our mission.8 (my emphasis)

OSFTED fails its ‘mission’. Students in Coopers Coborn had an Attainment 8 score of 58.2 and Bower Park 37.7. It’s a travesty that both schools are rated ‘Good’.

There is a further deficiency. OFSTED’s ‘mission’ states, We put children and learners who face barriers to their learning and/or well-being at the heart of what we do.9 (my emphasis)

Really?

Coopers Coborn achieved a high Attainment 8 score. But this might not be case for the Disadvantaged Students who attend the school. Their achievement in the all-important Gold Standard in English and Maths was 44.4%.10 The disparity with their non-disadvantaged students is 26.4 percentage points, which is statistically significant. GCSE English and Maths grade 5-9 is an essential achievement. OFSTED don’t mention the chasm in achievement inside the same school, with the same teachers and the same resources in their report.

Nor do they comment on the additional £107,000 in Pupil Premium funding Coopers Coborn received for their Disadvantaged Students. This isn’t just a value for money issue. It’s the scandal of missed opportunity for the most vulnerable students attending the school that’s critical.11

Conclusion

OFSTED reports fail their ‘mission statement’. OFSTED protects schools from scrutiny and is in hock to the educational establishment.

OFSTED reports are worthless.

Addendum: New OFSTED policy

I couldn’t find any examples of this style of inspection so I don’t know how they assess the *achievement* element.

  • inclusion
  • curriculum and teaching
  • achievement
  • attendance and behaviour
  • personal development and wellbeing
  • leadership and governance

Source Ofsted report cards: the 8 big changes you need to know  From 2026

Notes

1 ‘Parents’ is shorthand for parents and guardians.

2 Progress 8 and Attainment 8 – an explanation of the proposed improved model Attainment 8 may be introduced in Autumn 2027 p3

3 loc.cit

4 For a statistical presentation go to  The Coopers’ Company and Coborn School – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK same site for Drapers

A Comparison of Havering and Redbridge Secondary Schools, 2025 – Politics in Havering Gold Standard here means Grade 5-9 in English and Maths. It is not the total picture of the effectiveness of a school. It is a ’snapshot’.

5 The Coopers’ Company and Coborn School – Open – Find an Inspection Report – Ofsted

6 loc.cit pp2-3

7 50230969 pp2,3

8 Education inspection framework: for use from November 2025 – GOV.UK

9 loc.cit

10 Havering’s Secondary Academies and their Disadvantaged Students, 2025 – Politics in Havering

11 Does the London Borough of Havering have a Two-Tier School System? | Odeboyz’s Blog

Andrew Rosindell and Nigel Farage

Andrew Rosindell and Nigel Farage are chalk and cheese. Yet in January 2026 Andrew joined Reform. This was probably because of the shock he received in 2024 when his huge majority evaporated. He believes Nigel’s charisma will carry him over the line in 2029. Meanwhile Nigel’s political opportunism and financial wheeling and dealing carry on. They are at odds over everything about political life but need each other.

Andrew and Nigel: An Odd Couple – YouTube This video is 3 minutes long

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