Havering Council Meeting: 4th September 2024 (part two)

Library Closure Debate (Begins at 56 minutes)^1,2

This was the best debate in recent years. Thoughtful and insightful points were made in an ultra-positive environment. Great stuff.

Martin Goode (56mins) set the tone. Firstly, placing libraries in the community and then forensically analysing the financial actualité. A lot of the savings is staffing. However, Havering has a no redundancy policy so there is an over-statement of savings.

Two councillors³ explained the importance of libraries to their, and every body’s, childhood. Dilip Patel (1:25) quoted Woodford Green library as an example of creative regeneration. This set the scene for ‘thinking outside the box’, a point approvingly made by Ray Morgon (2:16) to Keith Prince’s (2:19) surprise. The consultation didn’t offer alternatives to closure.

Philip Ruck (1:31) favours morally correct decisions. James Glass (1:49) is refreshingly optimistic unlike HRA, which embraces ‘victimhood’. Chris Wilkins (1:22) exemplifies victimhood: he’s wedded to ‘Loans and Savings’. He’s oblivious to the £1.5m that a 1% council tax increase offers, an option “that dare not speak its name”.⁴

Graham Williamson (1:44) stunned councillors by saying that libraries are ‘subsidised’. They’re a public service, which might surprise him, as he implies they’re failing businesses. Gillian Ford was outraged that Prince wanted to conclude the debate even if it went on beyond 10:30 (2:00).⁵ He said HRA are led by officers. Council officers, as a group, have reductionist attitudes: ‘You want savings? Here they are!’

Four libraries might close to ‘save’ 0.55% of the deficit.

Best sarcasm: Philip Ruck

Best politics: Brian Eagling (1:28)

Absentee councillors: Nine, which is outrageous.

Notes

1 Annotator Player (mediasite.com) All times relate to this webcast

2 Motions.pdf (havering.gov.uk) For the wording of the motion and amendments

3 Mandy Anderson and Judith Holt made significant speeches on this point.

4 Havering Council Tax: Is It Too Low? – Politics in Havering

5 A close vote 25:21 casts doubt on this

Havering Council Meeting: 4th September 2024 (part one)

Question Time¹

Question Time is for councillors to quiz cabinet members. It’s limited to 45 minutes. Unlike parliament, where there’s no limit on questions, only 15 questions are allowed. Six more questions should have been posed because the time wasn’t used. Ray Morgon favours scrutiny, so more questions fits his agenda. This inexplicable rule needs revising.

Barry Mugglestone answered eight questions. His world-weary approach is understandable. Question 1: Can the Cabinet Member for Environment confirm that the option of paper visitor parking permits is still available in Havering? [Judith Holt: 19 mins]² The answer was, ‘Yes’, but he was more expansive. After the unpleasantness at the last Council Meeting being gracious was important.³

Mandy Anderson (38 mins) highlighted three unregistered Children’s Homes used by Lambeth and Hampshire Councils. Oscar Ford’s blandness pill grated. Mandy’s ward is Havering’s most deprived and is a ‘dumping ground’. Oscar couldn’t care less. Council’s officers are, “Keeping their eye on it.” If Upminster had three illegal Children’s Homes he’d care a great deal more.

Keith Prince’s question (46 mins) about CCTV was interesting until he promoted facial recognition systems. Neither he or Barry realise facial recognition is racially biased and flawed. Keith is a cheer-leader for HRA. Question 15 (49 mins) to Ray Morgon was classic: Do you agree with me that you’re great?⁴ Ray shyly agreed he was great.

Best humour: Gerry O’Sullivan’s constant mispronunciation of Martin Goode’s name.

Notes

1 Council Questions 4 September 2024.pdf (havering.gov.uk)

2 Annotator Player (mediasite.com) All times relate to this webcast

3 Havering’s Council Meeting 24th July 2024 (part one) – Politics in Havering

4 Not his ‘exact’ words but that’s what they added up to

Havering and the Loxford School Trust

Abbs Cross and Gaynes Academies are owned by Loxford Schools Trust, Ilford. Loxford school is ‘outstanding’. Their Leadership Team believe they can transfer their successful formula. They now own five secondary academies.¹

Academies are government funded businesses with Loxford receiving £50m.² The twelve person leadership team, earn between £100,000 and £250,000. (Their CEO earns £54,000 more than Havering’s chief executive.) Stellar salaries demand consistent stellar performance. Their principal challenge is under-achievement of Disadvantaged Students.³

The Gold Standard: Grade 5 GCSE in English and Mathematics

The national outcome for disadvantaged students is 25.2% Gold Standard successes. For non-disadvantaged students the national outcome is 45.2%. This huge gap must be bridged to be rated excellent. Loxford School is excellent. Their disadvantaged students achieved 56% for the Gold Standard. Loxford’s disadvantaged students beat the national outcome in both categories. An outstanding performance.

It’s a different story in Havering.

Abbs Cross Academy: 23% of their disadvantaged students achieved the Gold Standard.⁴

Gaynes Academy: 33% of their disadvantaged students achieved the Gold Standard.⁵

Neither come close to Loxford’s result. Nor do they come close to the national 45.2% for non-disadvantaged students. Loxford’s Havering schools haven’t closed the Attainment Gap.

Havering, in general, has significant problems with under-achievement by disadvantaged students. Only four schools out of 18 reach 45.2% with their disadvantaged students. Loxford massively exceeded the national outcome with their disadvantaged students.

Conclusion

Loxford Schools Trust have failed. Four of their six secondary academies are below the all-student Gold Standard. Tabor Academy is catastrophically below that standard. They should be humble and recognise their stunning success in inner-city Ilford hasn’t travelled well.

Addendum: Loxford’s other academies and their Gold Standard outcomes

Warren Academy

49% for disadvantaged students, which is above the national outcome for all students. Barking and Dagenham’s non-disadvantaged students achieved 54%. ⁶

Tabor Academy

15% for disadvantaged students. This is catastrophic and demands action from the *stellar* Leadership Team in Ilford. Essex’s non-disadvantaged students achieved 49%. ⁷

Cecil Jones Academy

25% for disadvantaged students, which is the national average. Southend’s non-disadvantaged students achieved a stunning 66%. ⁸

Notes

1 Governance Profiles – Loxford School Trust

2 LOXFORD 2023ACCSWIZ.cvw (loxfordtrust.s3.amazonaws.com) see p71

3 Key stage 4 performance, Academic year 2022/23 – Explore education statistics – GOV.UK (explore-education-statistics.service.gov.uk) Table 8 is an excellent summary

4 Results by pupil characteristics – Abbs Cross Academy and Arts College – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk) See also Havering’s GCSE Attainment Gap, 2023 – Politics in Havering

5 Results by pupil characteristics – Gaynes School – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk)

6 Results by pupil characteristics – The Warren School – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk)

7 Results by pupil characteristics – Tabor Academy – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk)

8 Results by pupil characteristics – Cecil Jones Academy – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK (compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk)

Havering’s 2024 General Election: The battlefield

The 2024 election produced a landslide victory for Labour but not in Havering. Surprisingly the Conservatives weren’t the beneficiaries of Labour relative ‘failure’. An analysis of the results shows the Reform Party spoiled the night for Labour and the Conservatives. Statistical clutter¹ has been deleted to leave the percentage vote for the three principal parties. (The aggregate results, if you want them, have been published by the council.²)

Beam Park

Labour 60.6%; Conservative 13.9%; Reform Party 13.7%

Cranham

Conservative 34%; Reform Party 29.1; Labour 26.7%

Elm Park

Labour 37.7%; Reform Party 27.4%; Conservatives 19.4%

Emerson Park

Conservatives 43.5%; Reform Party 26.1; Labour 21.3%

Gooshays

Labour 34%; Reform Party 28.9%; Conservatives 27.3%

Hacton

Conservative 33.1%; Reform Party 29.6; Labour 22.7%

Harold Wood

Conservative 29.8%; Labour 29%; Reform Party 28.5%

Havering-atte-Bower

Conservative 33%; Labour 31.1%; Reform Party 22.3%

Heaton

Labour 32.6%; Reform Party 28.4%; Conservative 25.9%

Hylands

Conservative 34.9%; Labour 30.4% Reform Party 21.6%

Marshalls Park

Conservative 40.5%; Labour 27.1%; Reform Party 20.2%

Mawneys

Conservative 37.1%; Labour 29.7% Reform Party 22.6%

Rainham

Labour 35.7%; Conservatives 27.6%; Reform Party 24.5%

Rush Green

Labour 35.5%; Conservatives 29.4%; Reform Party 22.2%

St. Albans

Labour 37.4%; Conservative 28%; Reform Party 21.9%

St Andrews

Conservative 32.7%; Reform Party 29%; Labour 26.6%

St Edwards

Labour 34.6%; Conservatives 34%; Reform Party 22.2%

South Hornchurch

Labour 39.9%; Reform Party 26.2%; Conservatives 21.5%

Squirrels Heath

Conservative 38.7%; Labour 29%; Reform Party 21.5%

Upminster

Conservatives 38.2%; Reform Party 27.5%; Labour 22.4%

Notes

1 https://sotn.newstatesman.com/2024/07/the-ultimate-2024-general-election-breakdown Many thanks to David A. for sending me this site

2 General Election 2024: Results | London Borough of Havering These are the overall results

Havering’s Council Meeting 24th July, 2024 (part two)

The principal activity of council meetings is debating Motions. These are free-wheeling discussions where any councillor can participate. Motions ought to be important and probing.¹ Motions presented to this meeting were, in general, an insult to the electorate.²

^{…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………}

The first motion by the Conservatives was:

A This council agrees to implement a pairing system for members, to ensure that serious illness does not impact the political balance of the Chamber.

Keith Prince (1 hour 31)³was abysmal. He literally hadn’t worked out the implications of his proposition. Keith Darvill (1:34) told him. Prince acknowledged he’d got it wrong. It was drivel.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The Conservative’s second motion was pivotal. The financial ‘reasons’ for library closures are flakey and legitimately contestable. Perfect territory for intelligent debating:

B Council calls upon Cabinet to maintain the operation of all local libraries, acknowledging the critical social impact of their potential closure, and to encourage the use of financial reserves to ensure their continued funding. (my emphasis)

Keith Prince (1:42) withdrew the motion, which is beyond belief. The Conservatives literally don’t know what an Opposition party should be doing, or, what constructive criticism is.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The Conservative’s third motion was inconsequential:

C Council agrees to amend the Constitution to allow for 2 follow-up questions during full council meetings.

Keith Prince (1:43) continued his poor form. Once more Keith Darvill dissected the motion. He gained support from Stephanie Nunn and Ray Morgon.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

The final motion came from the Labour party:

D This Council adopts the Co-operative Party’s Charter Against Modern Slavery as shown on the attached.

Katharine Tumilty (1:55) made a very good speech about the horrors of modern-day slavery. Dilip Patel (2:08) shared his first-hand experience when he recounted his involvement in rescuing a young woman. Very moving and inspiring for everyone in the chamber. Barry Mugglestone (2:10) outlined his department’s intervention in illegal HMOs.

It was a long wait but councillors, at last, showed their best side.

Best speech: Katharine Tumilty

Notes

1 There are eight council meetings but there are no motions at Annual Council

2 SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA 24th-Jul-2024 19.30 Council.pdf (havering.gov.uk) p11

3 Annotator Player (mediasite.com) All times refer to this webcast

Havering’s Council Meeting 24th July 2024 (part one)

Ray Morgon’s first meeting since trashing the coalition with Labour leaves HRA alone – naked and unashamed. Controversial policies like the Data Centre in Upminster are now totally owned by HRA.

………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Question Time (began at 46 minutes)

Question Time is the Barry Mugglestone Show.¹Barry is a bit of a bruiser. He said unrectified service defects were the fault of ward councillors. If they’d worked harder informing him he’d have resolved problems immediately. Good knockabout stuff. Tim Ryan (1:06) substituting for David Taylor got the treatment. It was unfair but fun.

Paul Middleton was ambushed by Judith Holt (1:27). A straight-forward question about the upkeep of Upminster cemetery became emotionally fraught. She was asking about the maintenance of her family grave. Councillors can’t demand special treatment but Paul should have been gentler.

Some cabinet members were ill-prepared for supplementary questions. Paul McGeary, Natasha Summers and Graham Williamson disappointed.

Gerry O’Sullivan was absent and deputy-Mayor, Sue Ospreay, substituted and displayed her unique style. Calling Nisha Patel ‘My lovely’ (1:10) was a novelty, which we could have done without.

Oscar Ford (1:08) said Havering was helpless in answer to Keith Darvill about flooding at Brookside Academy. The council can’t do anything because it’s an Academy.

Best tactician: Barry Mugglestone

Councillor Absence

Twenty percent of councillors were absent. Cllrs Benham, Frost, O’Sullivan, Ruck, Taylor, White D., Walker, Wilkes, Williams and Wise

Note

1 Public reports pack 24th-Jul-2024 19.30 Council.pdf (havering.gov.uk) pp249ff The webcast is here Annotator Player (mediasite.com) All times relate to this webcast

Havering’s Councillors: Their Sick Leave Culture

….U.K. the rate of employee absence has risen to its highest level in a decade…[it] has reached 4% in 2023, with an average of 4.8 days lost per employee per year. (my emphasis) Source: Absence trends in the United Kingdom: Strategies for effective management – WTW (wtwco.com)

The 2009 ‘expenses scandal’ revealed how British MPs ripped off the taxpayer. Some MPs were jailed. Nonetheless, parliamentary rules protected their pensions. (see Addendum One) Havering’s councillors are angels in comparison.

……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………….

Absenteeism amongst councillors is triple the British norm (see Addendum Two). Between 19^th January and 13^th July 2024, councillors were scheduled for 440 attendances at meetings.¹One councillor could have attended 13,² whilst the least number was four.³ (Four meetings equate to one every six and a half weeks.)

Councillors, collectively, missed 58 meetings – equivalent to 13.2%. Non-attendance makes scrutiny of policies weak and toxic policies are sometimes implemented. Absenteeism destroys ‘Institutional Memory’ a crucial factor in good decision-making. Havering’s democracy is weakened by indolence.

Attendance at council meetings is one part of a councillor’s duties. Many councillors are active in their communities.⁴ Obviously this is just one publicly available. Other councillors might be equally assiduous but unavailable for scrutiny.

The principal point is councillors only have a legal duty to attend a meeting every six months. This weakens their commitment.

Addendum One: MPs and their pensions

….former MPs who were jailed in the wake of the parliamentary expenses scandal are also understood to remain entitled to full pension benefits despite their records.

MP pension rules mean there are almost no circumstances under which an MP can be stripped of their pension, with the exception of the most extreme crimes such as treason…. Source MP expenses cheats and sex offenders keep taxpayer-funded pensions (msn.com)

Addendum Two: Council Meeting, 24^th July 2024

The shocking absenteeism amongst councillors reached unbelievable levels at this meeting. Of Havering’s 55 councillors 11 were absent = 20%. This is quadruple the national average.

Source: Agenda for Council on Wednesday, 24th July, 2024, 7.30 pm | London Borough of Havering

Notes

1 Councillors attendance summary, 19 January 2024 – 13 July 2024 | The London Borough Of Havering Legally they must attend one council meeting every six months or they forfeit their seat See also Does Havering have too many councillors? – Politics in Havering

2 Chris Wilkins (He missed two, which is 15% absenteeism.)

3 David Godwin and Christine Vickery (they both had full attendance)

4 ‘The heating and hot water have failed, affecting hundreds of residents. The Council is aware of issues but seems reluctant to fix them.’ – The Havering Daily This report is about the community work of Cllrs McKeever and Stanton in Beam Park

Havering’s Councillors: The Democratic Deficit in Action

Havering councillors are mostly male, elderly, wealthy property owners.¹ Their biases are revealed when setting the council’s budget. The classic example is the 30 minutes free parking policy, privileging motorists above other, non-statutory, priorities. It isn’t hard to imagine what a council with a majority of young mothers, would prioritise. Council tax payers are paying for the biases of councillors, which is the price of the democratic deficit.

Home-owners

Havering’s councillors are relatively old, with a third being 60+, which implies they are home-owners.² Home-ownership is revealed by Register of Interests statements.³ Additionally sixteen councillors (29%) own two or more houses, making them very wealthy.⁴

Religion

Inexplicably Council meeting begin with Christian prayers. 30% of British people say they’re atheist, with only half claiming to be Christian.⁵It’s probable most councillors are token Christians, atheist, or, of other faiths. Prayers are said by a priest offering Divine Guidance.

Diversity

A fifth of Havering’s residents weren’t born in Britain.⁶They aren’t represented in the council chamber. Neither are the under 35s or the disabled.

Allowances

Astonishingly councillors receive an ‘allowance,’ which they qualify for by attending one meeting every six months.⁸ Nine cabinet members are paid £35,000, which is just below the average wage of Havering’s residents. Two get more. Five cabinet members work and their £35,000 is for a part-time role.⁹

Discussion

This is the outcome of Havering’s democratic deficit. No-one is to blame.Very low turnout at local elections is grim proof of the deficit. Active politics is a minority ‘sport’ with few willing to participate, even marginally. Democracy is about who can be bothered. Havering’s council accurately reflects the democratic will of the people.

Like it or not.

Notes

1 Your Councillors | The London Borough Of Havering Councillors don’t reveal their age but the Register of Interests points to 32% being retired. Five female councillors are retired. Collectively 42% of Havering’s councillors are retired. This isn’t definitive and it’s possible the figure is larger, and very unlikely to be smaller.

2 Chapter7olderpeoplechapter7v21.pdf (haveringdata.net)

3 The Register of Interests is a legal document, which is treated with contempt by some councillors. Classically there is Ray Best’s ‘statement’. mgConvert2PDF.aspx (havering.gov.uk) Most councillors fill in their Register statements diligently

4 Housing prices in Havering (ons.gov.uk)

5 How life has changed in Havering: Census 2021 (ons.gov.uk) see also The Church is losing an entire generation. Here’s what you can do about it | Magazine Features | Premier Christianity The other 20% belong to various non-Christian religious faiths

6 loc.cit

7 *Young* is ambiguous and will become more so when the voting age is reduced to 16 years old.

8 Councillors attendance summary, 15 January 2024 – 9 July 2024 | The London Borough Of Havering

9 For the list of principal allowances which are in addition to the basic £10,412 for all councillors Issue – items at meetings – MEMBERS’ ALLOWANCES SCHEME | The London Borough Of Havering Councillors set the amounts they receive through a vote.

Havering’s Election: An Undemocratic Democracy?

Regardless of the destruction of the Conservative Party, Labour came second in Romford and third in Hornchurch and Upminster. Julia Lopez and Andrew Rosindell were re-elected but were rejected by a majority of the electorate.

Julia Lopez

Julia was trounced by the anti-Conservative vote.¹She won her parliamentary seat with 15,260 votes. The other five candidates had 31,651 votes, which is 16,391 more.
Worse, the abstention rate was 37.65% of the 75,421 electorate. Julia became MP with 15,260 votes out of an electorate of 75,421. She won with 20% of the vote.

A stunning 80% didn’t vote for her.

Andrew Rosindell

The same analysis applies to Andrew. He became MP with 15,339 votes and 27,808 actively opposing him. Turnout was 60%, which is 29,492 voters. Active and passive opposing votes = 57,300 voters and Andrew just reached the magic 20% needed for victory.

A stunning 80% didn’t vote for him.

Discussion

Julia and Andrew are blameless. The British electoral system needs to be changed but won’t be. Change comes when winners cooperate and they like systems that deliver power. Meanwhile Nigel Farage’s Reform Party picked up 4 million votes and five seats. They, like the LibDems and Greens, suffer from the system.

Havering’s local elections are worse, much worse. Turnout was in the range 23.5% to 42.3%, in 2022. No ward achieved a 50% turnout. When do elections stop being democratic? Councillors could be elected with 2% of the vote.

Ludicrous as it seems, this is possible.

Note

1 General Election 2024: Results | The London Borough Of Havering

Havering’s Tory MPs Dodge the Bullet, 4th July 2024

Havering has hard-core Conservatives, as was demonstrated by Susan Hall trouncing Labour in May, 2024. The General Election result¹ was, as the bookies say, ‘a form result’. But was it?

Julia Lopez

In 2019 she had a majority of 23,308. This evaporated to one of 1,943 – a 92% reduction. This is catastrophic but when viewed locally, it accurately reflects the electorate. They vote Conservative and hold their noses. HRA have made the constituency a Tory-free zone. Worse, she is a poor constituency MP with no personal support.

Andrew Rosindell

In 2019 he had a majority of 17,893. This evaporated to one of 1,463 – a 92% reduction. This is catastrophic for a long-standing, hard-working constituency MP. Unlike Hornchurch and Upminster, Andrew’s constituency has a significant number of Conservative councillors. He’s well-known, is an expert campaigner and yet, his result mirrored that of the lack-lustre Julia.

Discussion

Julia and Andrew couldn’t be more different. She’s a political opportunist with a glittering career in the past. He’s an Essex man Tory. Andrew didn’t get a personal vote and Romford had their worst result since 1997.

Havering is changing. In Hornchurch and Upminster, the Reform party, from a standing start, came second. Reform isn’t a political party: They’re a private company owned by Nigel Farage. They’re a PR party tapping into the utter distaste and sense of betrayal that many voters feel about the principal parties. They’re Conservative party ultras who have voters who don’t know what that implies.

HRA are in the same territory. They also reflect the desire for change and have to operate outside their comfort zone. The question is, can they?

Note

1 General Election 2024: Results | The London Borough Of Havering