Category: Finance

Keith Prince’s Aspirations for Havering, 2026-2040

This glossy well-produced document1 is aspirational and strategic. It’s short on detail but outlines things Keith thinks will make Havering a better place. It’s incremental. If you read the booklet looking for firm commitments, you will be disappointed. It is refreshing to read a political document which isn’t devoted to ‘quick-fixes.’

Keith sub-divides the document into a number of headings2,

Our Values

We will put Havering residents first for new homes we build as a Council, for new schools and new jobs. We will put Havering businesses first for new opportunities.

Keith says the Council will use their influence to put Havering residents first. Obviously he can’t insist that businesses employ people from Havering as that is illegal discrimination. But the direction of travel is clear and has implications for employment by the Council itself.

Build Havering

We will deliver the homes (primarily family houses) for Havering families…

Housing is controversial. The key challenge is: what is a ‘family house?’  Keith’s previous statements suggest he means 3-bed semi-detached houses. This conflicts with the need for social housing, which requires high density estates. Social housing is critical in resolving endemic homelessness in Havering.

Grow Havering

Havering is established as one of London’s leading business locations particularly for growth sectors including Data and Digital Services, AI, Robotics, Life Sciences and Logistics.

This aspiration implies a challenge to the sanctity of the Green Belt. Reform’s planning committee will make strategic decisions about the proposed Data Centre site at north Ockendon. This is hinted at but there is already an organised pressure group focused on this issue. The Data Centre is political dynamite.

Improve Havering

We will protect and upgrade our parks and public green areas

Keith is safe with this one. Who will propose ‘unprotected and degraded parks and green areas?’ Absolutely no-one.

Flagship Projects

Financial Recovery

Two words! But a nightmare. Keith could be thwarted by the consequences of the financial destruction of Havering by George Osborne, 2010-16.3 Havering’s government borrowing debt is crippling and may scupper his aspirations. Unless Andy Burnham reconfigures the debt burden, Havering will have Government Commissioners in place by 2028. They don’t do aspirationsavering is likely to have Government Commui

.

They are grimly utilitarian.

Notes

1 The Havering Plan 2024

2 This blog takes a few of the headings and quotes from them to build a critique

3 Osborne’s ‘Age of Austerity’ was a mindless attack on local government by a Conservative extremist. Ten years later everything is worse with additional statutory pressures wrecking Havering’s finances.

School Ties and the Cost-of-Living Crisis

Introduction

Drapers: tie compulsory £4.50 ~ Drapers’ Academy – Smarty Pants Schoolwear

Harris Academy, Rainham: tie compulsory for boys (not girls) £7:95 ~ Harris Academy Rainham – Khalsa Schoolwear

Sacred Heart Of Mary: tie compulsory £10 ~ Sacred Heart of Mary Girls’ School – SchoolSports4U

Discussion

Making school ties compulsory emphasises their necessity. ‘Compulsory’ school ties, implies there are no circumstances when they stop being essential.

Two of Havering’s academies don’t understand this. Harris Academy Rainham has a school tie policy, which makes them compulsory for male students.1 Obviously this means female students, in the same classrooms and following the same learning activities, are treated significantly differently. The benefits bestowed by a school tie are non-essential for females because they’re females.

At Sacred Heart of Mary’s Academy, which is all female, ties are compulsory but only for six months of the year. During the hotter months ties are not worn. How the Academy discovered that weather decides when a tie is essential to education, or discipline, or the school ethos is fascinating. Just how did they do it? What scientific experiment was followed? Will they publish the data?

Does it matter? It matters a great deal because compulsory school uniform is a tax/entry fee.2 Ties must be bought yet the policies underpinning that tax/entry fee is arbitrary and inconsistent. These two schools have policies which are absurd and indefensible. Students can, and are, excluded from classrooms for ‘improper’ school uniform. The policy is ridiculous. Ridiculing it by students is a disciplinary breach and is fiercely punished. Academies are trapped in an historic time-warp.

School attendance is compulsory and wearing school uniform is a necessary part of attendance. Obeying the law obliges parents/guardians to buy the designated uniform. Many items have to be bought from a specified shop (see Introduction). The cost of school uniforms is controversial.2 As can be seen from the introduction, there are considerable differences in cost on even basic items like the school tie. The Drapers’ Academy tie is less than half that of the Sacred Heart of Mary3 with the Harris Academy Rainham at a sort-of midpoint.

Conclusion

Harris Academy Rainham relies on gender to make sense of its school tie policy. On the other hand, Sacred Heart of Mary relies on the weather. Both are indefensible. And parents/guardians have to pay. Given that Academies are places of learning you might think that policies would be intelligently reviewed. An immediate outcome would be to reduce the tax/entry fee for compulsory education.

Britain’s new Prime Minister routinely wears T-shirts in public. Andy Burnham is a vivid illustration that the world has changed and schools should ‘catch-up’. And the House of Lords have just announced that ties are no longer compulsory for male peers.5

Addendum: An overview of appropriate clothing

This is a 3-minute YouTube video I did sometime ago School ties are a tax on learning – YouTube

Notes

1 Our Uniform – Harris Academy Rainham

2 It might not be a tax as not everyone pays e.g. girls at Harris Academy Rainham

3 According to information provided by parents, the new uniform includes a £34 blazer, a £24 branded skirt, purple check shirts costing £30 for two, plain purple shirts at £28 for two and an £8.25 tie. Frances Bardsley Parents Question Rising Uniform Costs as School Defends New Uniform Under 2026 Government Rules. – The Havering Daily

4 120 students entered this school in September 2026. Parents/guardians therefore spent £1200 on ties, which are used for six months pf the years.

5 Is the tie dead? Fashion connoisseurs hope not as House of Lords relaxes rules | House of Lords | The Guardian

Havering Cabinet Meeting, 16th September 2026

Keith Prince (1 hour 10):1 [Havering will be] “A ‘super suburb….” This is Keith’s 2040 Plan, which is full of hyperbole and ignores the perilous financial situation the borough is drowning in.

Bystanders hearing this would, in the normal way of things, give Keith an aspirin and tell him to lie down in a dark room until he felt better. But! This is an insight into his leadership qualities. Later in the meeting Graham Day (31) showed adherence to Keith’s boosterism.

This cabinet meeting was important. Reform councillors aren’t the *New kids on the block* anymore. They’ve been in office for 131 days. They should have command of their departments by now. Alas and alack that wasn’t the case.

Kevin Gill (8) and Terry Brown (23) floundered and dithered and called for help from officers. They hadn’t done their homework and were caught out. Likewise, Robert Whitton (1:04) who made inept political points, which weren’t an introduction to a stellar performance. He relied on officers and was paralysed by the occasion. All three councillors need mentoring. (see Addendum)

Graham Day (31) is garrulous but used his material well and spoke with enthusiasm. His enthusiasm led to over-statements. He denied that Adult Services were flawed in any way and described them as “Superb”. This is Keith’s Havering.

Sue Benjamins (1:24) hadn’t prepared her opening remarks and attempted to speak to the papers. She should have followed Barry Mugglestone’s excellent tactic of thorough preparation. As a consequence, she put an odd ‘gloss’ on the £54.2m government loan facility, saying it reflected an underspend. What she actually meant was that the overspend £11.7m less than anticipated.  This reflects Keith’s delusional economics.

She offered an interesting example of where a capital underspend is a bad thing. The SEND transport budget could be trimmed if the Balgores site was open. And outcomes would improve, which is a double win.

Best Scrutiny: Barry Mugglestone – ably supported by Martin Goode and Matt Stanton

Addendum: Cabinet responsibility

“Council calls upon the Executive Leadership Team to support the Cabinet in achieving these outcomes.” Reform’s amendment to Motion C Council Meeting 2nd September 2026.

I assumed this was an aberration when I wrote the relevant blog2 but after this meeting I’m not sure. It reflects the reality of this Administration’s relationship with Chief Officers, which is subservience.

Notes

1 Annotator Player All times refer to this webcast

2 see Havering Council Meeting, 2nd September 2026 (part two) – Politics in Havering

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 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 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

Havering Council Meeting, 27th May 2026

Keith Prince’s Debut Speech as Leader of the Council

Keith is a veteran politician who’s a GLA member. This heightens expectations. So, when he did a *Memory Lane* about being born in Elm Park, I was puzzled. His jog-trot through Junior and Secondary schools was bizarre. It was as if he was overwhelmed. Keith didn’t tell us about his triumphs as a window monitor or school prefect, which was a relief.

My despair deepened by his claim to friendship with Ray Morgon. Keith said he was *Mayor*.1 Dear, oh dear! Where was all this going? It felt like a train crash.

Keith established that he’s an Essex Boy.2 The unspoken statement was that unlike Andrew Rosindell, Keith was the *Real Thing*.3 Andrew was born after Havering was created and is, therefore, a Londoner. Keith had his political steel toe-capped boots on and promptly began using them. He denounced the ludicrous Hexit obsessions of Andrew who wants Havering to leave London and join Essex. Keith’s Reform council wouldn’t spend any time on this.

Keith went further. He said that Hexit would be a very expensive for the people of Havering. (Did I hear silent regret for the Brexit fiasco?) Keith said he’d be using his political energy working to elect a Reform GLA Mayor. This was sly because Andrew is a failed Mayoral candidate.

Reading between the lines, there was more. Keith doesn’t want Andrew to think that he is calling the shots in the Town Hall. Keith wants to be master in his own domain. And! Keith is in power and Andrew is merely a political influencer. There’s a world of difference between being a ‘mover and shaker’ and someone shouting from the sidelines.

Keith said that he has a 100-day plan in his pocket. I’ll be counting the days and looking for the accomplishments. Or not.

Addendum

Keith might want to consider these trivialities for his 100-days plan:

  1. The Waterloo Estate fiasco
  2. Launders Lane contaminated land and air pollution
  3. The data centre on Green Belt Land
  4. £272M of debt to the government at 6%

OR

  • He could stick with gesture politics, like putting the boot into Gay Pride Month

Notes

1 His speech begins at 1 hour 16 minutes. Go to 1:19:33 in the webcast Annotator Player Morgon was also a ‘friend’ by the way.

2 First mention 1:16:53 A very early signal which I should have picked up.

3 Keith begins putting the boot in at 1:24