Drapers’ Academy and Disadvantaged Students

[Nationally] 25.2% of disadvantaged pupils and 52.4% of all other pupils got a grade 5 or above [in GCSE English and Maths]¹

Drapers’ Academy should be experts in educating disadvantaged students. In 2024 they entered 89 disadvantaged students for GCSE. They have a critical mass enabling the school to pivot teaching to their needs. Achieving Gold Standard GCSEs, which are Grade 5+ for English and Maths, for the disadvantaged demands robust strategies. Poverty doesn’t cause the under-achievement of disadvantaged children but there’s a correlation.²

Drapers’, in 2024, beat the national average. Their disadvantaged students achieved 28.1% Gold Standard.

Drapers’ Academy is managed by Queen Mary University, London. A university management trust should utilise their research expertise with GCSE results. They’re a diagnostic tool for research. Once data is analysed they can recommend the best strategies for improving outcomes.

St Edward’s Academy, Romford³actively research the achievement of the disadvantaged. (see Addendum two) In 2024 they achieved significantly superior⁴ results to Drapers’. If replicated at Drapers’, seven extra Gold Standard successes would have occurred.

The government’s 2024 Pupil Premium payment for Year 11 at Drapers’ was a minimum of £93,450.⁵ Did that £93K raise standards? Drapers’ are committed to Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of Child Development.⁶ GCSE results in 2024 didn’t endorse its insights.

Drapers’ had 89 students facing significant challenges in 2024. They have huge amounts of Pupil Premium funding, an academic management team and a desire to succeed. If St Edward’s can do it why not Drapers’?

Addendum One: Drapers’ Academy, Chair of Governors

Oliver Everett is a Liveryman of the Drapers’ Company. He is a farmer and a consultant specialising in the link between the private sector and government, working extensively in Africa. Outside work, he is an Entrepreneur Mentor in Residence at London Business School.

Addendum Two: St Edward’s and their access to research

Having Unity Research School as part of Unity Schools Partnership means that Unity’s schools have instant access to evidence-based information which they can use in the classroom to improve outcomes for pupils, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. In an age of over-whelming amounts of pseudo-evidence, Unity Research School provides a solid and trustworthy source of information, proven to work in school settings and can help each school apply the evidence so that it is relevant to their setting and pupils’ needs.⁷

Notes

1 Attainment at age 16 – Social Mobility Commission State of the Nation – GOV.UK

2 https://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/correlation

3 Results by pupil characteristics – St Edward’s Church of England Academy – Compare school and college performance data in England – GOV.UK They aren’t a privileged school. 36% of their students in 2024 were disadvantaged. Coopers Coburn had 5% disadvantaged students who achieved three Gold Standard passes.

4 Seven doesn’t look much but it is 28.5 percentage points greater.

5 The 89 students would have generated several hundred thousand pounds of Pupil Premium funding over their five years at the school

6 Pupil Premium – Drapers’ Academy

7 Unity Research School | Unity Schools Partnership

Back to the Future: learning from history

One proposed approach presented to Cabinet is the development of 18 fully equipped modular home units within the area allocated for the final phase of the Waterloo & Queen Street regeneration scheme, in Romford.¹

The Blitz left thousands of people homeless. In 1942² Churchill’s government began planning for housing the homeless post-war. He chose prefabricated houses because they were quick to erect. They were kitted out with equipment considered luxurious,

For a country used to the rigours of the outside lavatory and tin bath, the bathroom included a flushing toilet and man-sized bath with hot running water. In the kitchen were housed such modern luxuries as a built-in oven, refrigerator and Baxi water heater, which only later became commonplace in all residential accommodating.³

Post-war prefab housing, which was intended to be ‘temporary’.

The war bankrupted Britain and the American Marshall Plan⁴ hadn’t begun.There was a shortfall in building materials making the job harder. Prefab houses were an act of genius. They were built on vacant land. With the destruction of London, there were many sites and further east in Romford.⁵ Notwithstanding the challenges, they pushed forward immediately in 1945-6.

They planned for 300,000 homes with a life expectancy of 10 years but many lasted far longer. Post-war families were given stability for their families.

Havering in 2025 isn’t recovering from war but has a housing crisis. Because of their statutory duty,

“…..the Council was forced to overspend its temporary accommodation budget by £6 million.⁶

In 1942 Churchill decided housing was too important to leave to market forces. The Attlee Labour government fulfilled his programme by building hundreds of thousands of houses. 40 years later Maggie Thatcher destroyed public housing, unleashing a crisis.

Will modular houses begin a new era of social housing?

Notes

1 Cabinet approve temporary homes solutions to help tackle housing crisis | London Borough of Havering

2 Prefabs in the United Kingdom – Wikipedia

3 loc.cit. See this site for wonderful insights into prefab houses Prefabs – Palaces for the People

4 Marshall Plan | Summary & Significance | Britannica

5 prefab houses in romford – Search Images

6 Cabinet approve temporary homes solutions to help tackle housing crisis | London Borough of Havering

I’m giving a talk: Are Havering’s secondary schools fit for purpose?

22^nd April 2025 at 8pm at Fairkytes Hall, Hornchurch for the Fabian Society

There will be a Q&A session afterwards

The Consequences of Conservative Extremism, 2010-24

Havering is bankrupt.

Ray Morgon, HRA Leader of Council, is outraged because Havering is a victim. The Conservatives destroyed local government between 2010 and 2024. Ray Morgon and the new Labour government are victims. They’re making decisions they hate and despise.

There has been 51.4% of inflation since 2010.¹ In 2010, Band D Council Tax was £1505.²This increased to £2208 in 2024,³ up 46.7%. Council tax has therefore, more-or-less, increased with general inflation.

Bankruptcy is a direct result of government policy.

In 2010, Havering was centrally funded with £70m annually. In 2024, this had fallen to less than £2m. A 97% decrease. Conservative governments introduced funding based on specific criteria. The baseline for grants was 2010. The world changed but the baseline remained inflexible.

The demography of Havering shows startling changes.⁴ Havering has more young and old people than in 2010. Both groups are heavy consumers of council services. The inflexible baseline has damaging outcomes with Adult and Children’s Services budgets out of control. There isn’t any *control* because they’re demand led and can increase in a moment.

Havering isn’t alone. The spectre of bankruptcy is haunting local authorities. The consequences of Conservative government policies are lethal.⁵ Ray Morgon has an £88m problem. Rachel Reeves’s problem is a gigantic £7.8bn. She has to fill the national funding gap. Her challenges are dominated by the NHS, Education and Defence. The Conservative legacy is catastrophic.

Ray Morgon’s decision to borrow £88m to meet current revenue expenditure was the result of force majeure. Both he and Rachel Reeves are victims of chronic economic mismanagement.

Notes

1 Inflation calculator | Bank of England

2 110209agenda_feb.pdf

3 Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering

4 JSNA Demography Chapter 2023 v0.3A.pdf esp. pp6-7

5 Fair funding review modelling tools | Local Government Association

HRA Teeter On The Brink, 26th February 2025

The budget debate concluded dramatically as HRA were punished for poor political judgement. The Maggie Thatcher approach, ‘There is no alternative,’ nearly cost them power.

Ray Morgon has inherited the wreckage of George Osborne’s Austerity programme. Havering’s borrowing might increase by £88m to pay for adult and children’s social care along with the homelessness crisis. Everyone knows that’s expensive but no-one knows how much because it’s demand led.

The discussion about Havering’s £200m budget pivoted around food waste and libraries. David Taylor (1 hour 47)¹ said HRA made political choices. The choices are to close three libraries or introduce the food waste collection six months earlier than required.

The Conservatives demanded that food waste collection begins on 1^st April 2026. This saves £1.27m.² By not supplying bin liners a further £270,000 is saved. (See addendum) Three libraries could have their closure paused for a year.³

HRA went to public consultation on closure. 83% voted against but HRA’s ‘Maggie Thatcher Tendency’ led them to ignore the consultation. HRA have forgotten they’re in a minority. The vote on Labour’s amendment was a sharp reminder. The vote tied at 24:24 and HRA won on the casting vote of the Mayor.

Seven councillors were absent, including former Conservative Leader Damian White. If he’d turned up HRA would have faced a vote of confidence and possibly lost power.

Philip Ruck (1:08)⁴ taunted HRA with being in the pocket of the officers. And the papers confirm he has a point. The Labour amendment led to this comment from the principal officer,

“Although the saving is financially viable, as the Council’s S151 Officer, I am unable to recommend this.”

Amazing!

S151 officers only advise whether amendments make financial sense. Philip said, “Officers advise and politicians decide.” HRA have neither the confidence or ability to reject officer advice. They tried to defend the politically indefensible.

Addendum: Labour’s amendment (edited)

Proposal. The Labour Group proposes the following budget amendments: That the saving closing South Hornchurch Library is reversed

That the saving closing Harold Wood Library is reversed

To reduce the Capitalisation Direction

That Gidea Park Library is re-purposed for alternative use

Total costs. This would be financed by: Removal of costs of bin liners from the Food Waste collection £0.270m

Source (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 26/02/2025 19:30 p983

Best Speech: David Taylor

Notes

1 Annotator Player All times relate to this webcast

2 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 26/02/2025 19:30 p981

3 Martin Goode Havering’s Council Tax Meeting, 26th February 2025 (part one) – Politics in Havering At 58 minutes said that these were headline savings and didn’t include decommissioning costs.

4 Annotator Player

Havering’s Council Tax Meeting, 26th February 2025 (part two)

Background

Political groups nominated speakers to set out their propositions¹ and general debate followed. There were 12 speeches² and this gives a flavour of the debate.

General Debate

Michael White (Con) began (1hour 05) with, “He didn’t want to bring politics into the debate.” Michael believes everything is political. He said a pause in introducing the Food Waste collection would save the libraries. This is irrefutable.

Philip Ruck (Cranham RA) said HRA don’t understand their budget as it’s set by officers. He said borrowing £88m to put £5m into reserves is ludicrous. (£1m costs £50K p.a. in interest.)

Keith Prince (Con) said, “Politics don’t matter’. Councillors panicked, wondering who this imposter was. Keith, if it was him, identified savings which earn money like increasing the number of planning officers. He’s a fan of Harold Wood library and likes the police and CCTV.

Ray Morgon (HRA) Defended his budget quite well. He favours lobbying. A triumph of hope over experience.

Barry Mugglestone (HRA) He loves ‘law and order’ policies and liners for caddy bins. His argument for bin liners was feeble.

Gillian Ford (HRA) She got dewy eyed about libraries she’d visited 35 years ago with her children. Everyone wondered if she’d been in one since the 1990s. Apart from saying Gidea Park library was poor in the 1990s, that was it.

Graham Williamson (HRA) He should write his speeches to prevent confusion to himself and his audience. He tried, and failed, to trash Opposition amendments by saying the Finance Director was against them. He was, of course, wrong.

(Four HRA cabinet members spoke consecutively.)

Martin Goode (East Havering RAs) As soon as he spoke about Harold Wood library he was interrupted by Gillian. He failed to make a good point.

Brian Eagling (East Havering RAs) He denounced increased charges on football pitches. He was shouted down by Gillian and Barry. His good point wasn’t made.

(HRA really, really don’t like East Havering RAs and don’t conceal it.)

Robert Benham (Con) denounced the lack of ambition in the budget. He found it unbelievable HRA were borrowing their way ‘out’ of debt with £200m by 2026.

Jane Keane (Labour) Agreed with Keith Darvill’s tour d’horizon, which was compelling and depressing in equal measure.

Judith Holt (Con) She dislikes misery and feels councillors should recognise that Havering is attractive for people from other parts of London.

James Glass (HRA) He made an honest assessment of the budget. He showed how HRA councillors are tortured by decisions like closing libraries.

Best Speech: James Glass

Best Havering patriot: Judith Holt

Notes

1 Havering’s Council Tax Meeting, 26th February 2025 (part one) – Politics in Havering

2 Annotator Player This is in speech order beginning with White and ending with Glass.

Havering’s Council Tax Meeting, 26th February 2025 (part one)

Background

Havering is bankrupt. A legal ‘budget’ was set by borrowing a maximum of £88m from the government. The interest will, catastrophically, be added to the debt.

Principal Speeches

Chris Wilkins (Cabinet Member, Finance)

Chris’s (12 minutes)¹ new tactic is a seminar presentation. There were constant references to slides (invisible to users of the webcast). It reeked of officer speak.

He spent 13 minutes whining. His attack on the Conservatives was ineffective.²Chris failed to convince on the expensive urgency of the ‘food waste project’. He’s going to lobby the government for more grant finance. Good luck with that!

John Tyler (Cranham RAs)

John was a revelation (26). He offered a critique of choices and said government loans will cost £5m in interest. His propositions were adding seven posts to increase efficiency, pausing the Harold Wood library closure and a reduction in carparking fees. His one saving proposition was not borrowing a £1m and saving £50k interest.

Dilip Patel (Conservative)

His speech (34) provoked a stand-off between the Mayor and the Conservatives. They displayed posters which the Mayor didn’t like. It’s procedurally OK but the Mayor demanded they be removed and the Tories backed down. (If they’d been serious they’d have challenged the chair and had a ding-dong.)

Dilip’s amendments were more police, more CCTV and keep open Harold Wood library. This all paid for by not having the food waste scheme. Good knockabout stuff.

(The Mayor explained what a ‘point of order’ is to Barry Mugglestone.)

Keith Darvill (Labour)

Keith made a very good speech (46). He said the budget is ‘fiction’. And he’s right. Havering’s bankruptcy means government loans balance the books. The debt could reach £200m in 2026-7 with only statutory services provided. He hoped the Fair Funding propositions would rescue Havering but increased defence spending make that unlikely. Next years’ interest charge will be about £10m.

Martin Goode (East Havering RAs)

Martin returned (58) to his normal themes of budgets that over promise and under-achieve. Importantly he highlighted the costs of closing libraries. These costs reduce savings. He thought that Harold Wood’s closure should be paused. A good solid speech. He should provide evidence about under-achievement of savings. Martin relies on assertion, which creates a credibility gap.

Best Speech: John Tyler

Note

1 Annotator Player All times relate to this webcast

Havering Council and the St Francis Hospice Charity

There are an impressive 16 charity shops in Havering.¹ The charity with the greatest number is St Francis Hospice with three shops.

Rated outstanding by the CQC, Saint Francis Hospice [SFH] provides expert care for people in our community with palliative and end of life care needs.²

SFH’s three shops had sales of £2.6m³ in 2023. This success encouraged them to open a ‘superstore’ in Hornchurch. Additionally, there’s the Loughton Boutique, which is their first shop in west Essex.⁴ SFH is a retail operator mixing charity with sound business acumen. It has reserves of £17.3m.⁵ SFH is a significant charity but ‘small’ financially.

Havering Council has tiny reserves,

“£8m of un-earmarked reserves is equivalent to c4% of the Council’s projected 2024/25 net budget of £19.75m [this is an error. It ought to read £197.5m] This is far below the recommended minimum level of reserves and is significantly lower than the average level of un-ring-fenced reserves across London.”⁶ (my explanation)

Havering’s dire financial position is illustrated by the fact that SFH has reserves twice the size of theirs.

Havering is a compulsory supporter of SFH.⁷ SFH pays 20% of the business rates due because of a 1988 decision.⁸ This decision costs Havering tens of thousands of pounds in business rates from the 16 charity shops.⁹

Havering is a ‘victim’ of a decision made 37 years ago forcing them to reduce the business rates for charity shops by 80%. Charity shops are worthy but there is no chance they’d still be getting a reduction if Havering had a choice.

Notes

1 havering’s charity shops – Search This site includes a map

2 Saint Francis Hospice – Home CQC = Care Quality Commission

3 application-pdf p26

4 loc.cit.

5 ibid. p44

6 5-14 Appendix H – Section 25 Statement of Robustness.pdf para 8:1

7 Charity Relief – Businessrates.uk

8 Business rates—charities and not-for-profit organisations | Legal Guidance | LexisNexis

9 This is a heroic estimate.

Havering’s Cabinet Meeting, 5th February: Budget (part two)

“I believe in miracles….” Hot Chocolate (1975)¹

The meeting began with Chris Wilkins, the cabinet member for finance, reading a document which he didn’t appear to have written (1:26).² Very sensibly, HRA don’t use Chris as their main man during financial discussions.

The discussion was brutal.

Ray Morgon set his stall out. The government review of Havering’s finance is vital to his strategy. The Fair Funding Review (1:31) is the miracle which will stave off Havering’s financial catastrophe. The Chief Executive (1:46) said that he wouldn’t consider requesting a council tax increase beyond 4.99% because Havering’s problems weren’t caused by decision-making in Havering. This reflects HRA’s policy.

The director of Finance expressed caution. She was ‘very concerned’ about the long-term sustainability of Havering (1:34). Keith Darvill (1:32) probed forensically, discovering that the interest on the capitalisation programme hasn’t been paid. This means debt accelerates each year through the joys of compound interest. The director said that the conversation will be ‘very different’ in 2028 if nothing changes.

“…if you have debt, compounding of the interest you owe can make it increasingly difficult to pay off.”³

Capitalisation Funding for day-to-day expenditure is insanity.

The Chief Executive (1:31) said after his meeting with the minister there would be no change in government policy concerning debt repayments.

HRA is hoping the government will back down first and won’t enforce the debt. HRA is engaging in a form of “Can’t pay, Won’t pay.”⁴Havering is depending on safety in numbers. They’re hoping that along with the 18 other councils which are being buried alive in debt, they will have to be rescued.

Notes

1 The lyrics aren’t about local government finance. But are great fun. Read them. Relive the 70s! i believe in miracles hot chocolate lyrics – Search

2 Annotator Player All times refer to this webcast

3 The Power of Compound Interest: Calculations and Examples

4 This is a Marxist play, 1974, by the Italian Dario Fo which is a satire on consumer resistance to high prices. Can’t Pay? Won’t Pay! – Wikipedia

Havering Cabinet, 5th February 2025: Budget

Gillian Ford (1minute),¹is Havering’s Maggie Thatcher. Her speech was a version of ‘There is no alternative’. (see addendum). Her conclusions are pure Maggie.

“Without these three [library] closures we cannot cover their costs, we place remaining libraries at risk, and we would not be delivering the improvement and transformation plan agreed at Full Council last July, in accordance with MHCLG’s requirements.”²

Being obvious nonsense, Keith Prince (20) piled in. He evoked shifty and evasive answers before the Chief Executive (23) conceded his point. Library closures are a political choice. Gillian (52) declared, “We have no alternative!” Maggie Rides Again.

The cabinet spent 51 minutes discussing £800K whilst simultaneously negotiating a £70m loan. Chris Wilkins said (1:27) that the gap could be £89m.³ This astonishing 27% variation on the Leader’s statement was treated with levity by Chris. Havering’s government borrowings are a minimum of £102m This is to pay for daily expenditure but not for tangible infrastructure benefits. The loans are a manoeuvre to avoid “…a massive increase in council tax beyond the standard 4.99 per cent.”⁴

Ray Morgon conveniently forgets the £102m are loans, which future Havering councils will have to pay.⁵ He has a heroic belief in government largesse where loans are written off. Is this prudent budget setting? Meanwhile he stands by the £1m free parking gift to his political heartlands in Hornchurch and Upminster.

Addendum: There is no alternative, Margaret Thatcher

“TINA (as characterized by explicit use of ‘there is no alternative’ and declarations of necessity, inevitability, and irrefutability of certain policies) can be considered a political strategy in both democratic and autocratic regimes. Its rhetoric allows politicians to reduce the scope of available policy choices, limiting the expectations of their electorate and avoiding the blame for bad, but ‘unescapable’ policies.” source There is no alternative – Wikipedia

Notes

1 All times refer to the webcast Annotator Player

2 loc.cit. 18 minutes Gillian used MHCLG throughout her speech without saying it’s the Ministry of Housing, Communities and Local Government. Gillian is claiming the Ministry has demanded library closures, which is nonsense. Councillor Taylor says, “….the saving is likely to be around just £161k.” This is after decommissioning costs are factored into the equation. REVEALED: Actual Library Closure Costs Gillian responded Deputy Leader Responds to Library Closure Criticism By Romford Councillor. – The Havering Daily

4 loc.cit. Wilkins speech

4 Havering hosts crime summit, Cabinet agrees next year’s budget, we celebrate LGBT+ History Month – 12hedonic@gmail.com – Gmail [CP1]

5 Presumably not by HRA’s current leadership.

[CP1]

Havering’s Cabinet, 22nd January 2025

The Conservatives have their third leader since 2022. Michael White is a veteran from when the electorate elected Conservatives.

Barry Mugglestone (one minute)¹ introduced the borough’s ‘Food Disposal’ policy.² He had a blizzard of statistics and costings, which were meant to ‘shock and awe’. David Taylor (4minutes) had prepared searching questions. He relished asking them and created a classy debate.

Food Disposal is government policy and Havering is new to it. David wondered if officers had done comparative research to avoid reinventing the wheel. The answer: not much.

Havering’s two year contract for non-obligatory caddy bin liners is £1million. Havering is bankrupt. Barry (9 minutes) wanted to withdraw his proposal but was ignored. Gillian Ford (17 minutes) said bin liners should be provided and stopped later on. Good luck with that!

Natasha Summers (48 minutes) wants to reduce homelessness costs.³ The policy will save £1.8m over ten years. Meanwhile bin liners will cost £1m over two years. Converting a Basildon office building will provide 34 units. Havering residents will be shipped out to Basildon for their housing needs.

Michael White (50 minutes) showed political Leadership. He pursued the implications of the policy for residents and Basildon. He said homeless people are shuffled around and Havering was a victim of inner-London disposal policies. The savings are negligible and it is papering over the cracks.

These discussions implied cabinet members don’t critique their papers. They should be more than spokespersons for officers.

Notes

1 Annotator Player All timings refer to this webcast

1 5.0 amended Cabinet – Food Waste 22.01.2025 1.pdf

3 8.0 Cabinet Paper – Office to residential conversion to accommodate homeless families at Eastgate Ho.pdf