Havering’s Council Meeting, 3rd September 2025 (part two)

Motions for Debate¹

Motions are the lifeblood of council meetings. Policy is discussed and scrutinised.² Havering’s housing crisis is caused by sky high house prices, student debt and massive deposits. Family networks and communities are broken up.

Two motions about housing were interesting. After Paul McGeary’s train crash answer about HMOs,³ the motion became redundant. Social Housing⁴ is sadly neglected. There are low profits for house-builders and politicians seem to dislike poor people. The Conservative motion was a wonderful surprise.

“This Council recommends a revision of the Mercury Land Holdings business plan, to focus the company on delivering much needed social homes and driving down temporary accommodation costs.” Motion B

David Taylor (1:40) made a brilliant speech. He explained the economics of social housing as a win-win for the council and those in need of secure, regulated housing. Additionally, the community benefits of social housing were discussed in compelling detail. David linked the HMO debate by showing social housing is vastly superior and a cheaper option than HMOs. David was supported whole-heartedly by Keith Darvill (1:50) and Frankie Walker (1:58). For Conservatives to get support from Labour is encouraging. It shows councillors aren’t party robots.

Graham Williamson ((1:45) doesn’t understand his brief. He spent five minutes trying to remember what officers had said prior to the council meeting. He failed. Likewise, finance defeats him. Graham doesn’t do his homework or, just doesn’t get it. Ray Morgon (2:01) winged it. He should have done a forensic analysis of David’s speech and responded.

The result? HRA lost the vote (2:07) but will it change policy? Meanwhile…..

3,000 residents languish on council housing waiting lists

Addendum: Singing the National Anthem

The Mayor (2:13) introduced the National Anthem – badly. This prefaced the worst singing I’ve ever heard. It destroyed the dignity of the National Anthem. They should be ashamed of themselves.

Notes

1 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 03/09/2025 19:30 The Motions for debate The webcast is at Annotator Player All times for speeches refer to this webcast

2 Eight councillors were absent or, 14.5%. This is average and still shocks me.

3 HMOs = Housing of multiple occupancy see also Havering’s Council Meeting, 3rd September 2025 – Politics in Havering

4 What is social housing? – Shelter England

Havering’s Council Meeting, 3rd September 2025

Question Time (QT)¹

The 2026 election is fast approaching. QT is designed for councillors to strut their stuff prior to the election. Penetrating questions are asked to embarrass the Administration and make colleagues cheer. There’s a flurry of newsletters, Havering Daily articles and an inner-glow after flaunting their excellence for constituents.

So how did they do?

Two types of questions. The dedicated ward councillor working hard highlighting failures of the Administration. The second type relates to scrutiny of performance. At this meeting the balance was 50:50.

Local Issues

Jane Keane (23 minutes and 33)² asked questions on fly-tipping and air pollution from idling cars. Barry Mugglestone disliked the idea of a ‘Wall of Shame’ for fly-tippers. He was cornered because of its novelty and wasn’t sure how popular it might be. Philip Ruck (17) didn’t appreciate only the police could enforce the 20 mph zones. Darren Wise (26) was brushed off about recycling bags. Robert Benham (45) was also brushed off by Barry, who had returned to form.

Policy Issues

Questions about policy are embarrassing for HRA because cabinet members are weak. Graham Williamson didn’t know social and affordable housing are different categories in his answer to David Taylor’s (27) question. Likewise, Chris Wilkins. He floundered answering a penetrating question from Martin Goode (15). The question related to LBH’s bankruptcy and his lack of understanding made me flinch.

Paul McGeary plumbed the depths of ignorance. He said *ILLEGAL* HMOs³ weren’t shut down because they added to the homeless figures. Housing can be completely illegal and it doesn’t matter as long as tenants don’t turn up on the council’s doorstep. This was an *answer* to Tim Ryan’s (30) brilliant question. Is it the case that Havering ratifies *ILLEGAL* HMOs to massage the housing figures? Is this policy?

Conclusion

QTs was good for the Opposition parties but will they build on their successes? Probably not.

Notes

1 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 03/09/2025 19:30 The QT questions The webcast is at Annotator Player

2 Times refer to the webcast

3 HMO = houses of multiple occupation

Havering’s Council Tax and the USA’s Alternative

Council tax reflects property values in the 1990s. The promised five yearly value reviews never happened because of political cowardice.

Property tax is reviewed annually in the USA, “…The amount of tax is determined annually based on market value of each property on a particular date.”¹ New Jersey has the highest rate at 1.89% and the lowest is Louisiana’s 0.18%.²21 states are above 1% and then the range is between Louisiana and Florida’s 0.97%.

So what?

The benchmark used for this blog is Maryland, whose tax rate is 0.87%. They are at the USA’s mid-point property tax rate. Havering’s average house price is £451,000.³Using Maryland’s 0.87%, the council tax would be £3,923.70 for an average house, instead of Band D’s £2,313.^4,5

Detached houses in Emerson Park average £1,125,079. Their effective council tax is 0.41% or less.⁵ In Havering, high value houses are under-taxed under the American property tax system.

Council tax is a failed property tax, which is political dynamite. Havering’s Band H houses would have a council tax increase from £5,161 to £9,788 if Maryland’s rate was used.⁶ Havering’s financial woes are 30+ years old. The financial crisis was created by Conservatives and maintained by cowardly successive governments.

Council tax is a sick joke benefitting the rich.

Addendum: Louisiana’s 0.18% property tax

Louisiana is *Third World* in many ways. Life expectancy is 72 years⁷ and literacy is 72.9%.⁸ If Louisiana was a country it would be failed state. It is an example of low tax levels destroying society. (A £3m house in Havering has Louisiana levels of property tax rate as a percentage.)

Notes

1 Property tax in the United States – Wikipedia

2 Property Tax Rates By State 2025 – Tax-Rates.org

3 Housing prices in Havering See also Havering Housing Market | Price trends and market breakdown

4 Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering

5 House Prices in Emerson Park Two houses are for sale at £3m+ and several at £2m+, which reduces the percentage that council tax represents.

6 A £3m house would pay £26,100 council tax in Maryland instead of £4,627 in Havering.

7 Louisianans’ life expectancy is lower than national average – Axios New Orleans In Britain it’s 87 years Life expectancy calculator – Office for National Statistics

8 Louisiana Literacy Rates – Studyville Literacy in Britain is 99% Literacy Rate in UK Statistics 2025 | Illiteracy Rate UK – The Global Statistics

Havering’s Council Tax: The Rich get Richer

The Council Tax system isn’t fit for purpose.¹ People living in multimillion pound houses are winners. They pay tiny amounts of council tax as a percentage of the value of their property.²

Anomalies for expensive houses

A four-bedroom house in Gidea Park is for sale at £975,000.³ It’s band G. In Upminster another four-bedroom house is available for £1.25m⁴ council band F, which is £515p.a. less. Meanwhile in Emerson Park a five-bedroom house is available for £2m,⁵ council tax band G. This is twice as expensive as the Gidea Park house and in the same council tax band.

Anomalies for cheap houses

A two-bedroom flat in Rainham is available for £134,000⁶ council tax band C. In Romford a retirement property is on sale for £90,000⁷ also band C. The Romford property is one-third cheaper despite being in the same council tax band.

And it goes on and on and on.

The ultimate anomaly

Converting council tax into percentages reveals why it’s a racket.

A five-bedroom house in Emerson Park is available for £2m⁸ at council tax band H. Its council tax is £4,627. At the other end of the scale is a Park Home⁹ in band A paying £1,542.

The first property pays 0.23% of the value of the house. The second pays 1.71%, a massive percentage difference. If council tax was based on the property valuation as a percentage, the Emerson Park property would pay £34,200 instead of £4,625. This equalises the amounts paid.

Council tax isn’t a property tax. It is a thinly disguised crime against the poor.

Notes

1 Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering

2 For research purposes I surveyed houses for sale until mid-August 2025 on Rightmove and Zoopla. These are headline prices and might increase or decrease but that doesn’t alter the thrust of the discussion.

3 4 bedroom detached house for sale in Main Road, Gidea Park , RM2

4 4 bedroom detached house for sale in The Chase, Upminster, RM14

5 5 bedroom detached house for sale in Woodlands Avenue, Emerson Park, RM11

6 2 bedroom apartment for sale in Blueberry Court, Rainham, RM13 8JY, RM13

7 1 bedroom retirement property for sale in Admiral Lodge, Western Road, Romford, RM1

8 5 bedroom detached house for sale in Ernest Road, Emerson Park, RM11

9 Cummings Hall Lane, Noak Hill… 1 bed park home for sale – £89,995

Havering Council Meeting, 23rd July 2025 (Part Two)

This Council commits to taking back control of development in Havering, through the creation and implementation of Neighbourhood Plans and Social Value shopping lists within the next six months, putting residents and local communities at the heart of planning. Motions.pdf

David Tayor (1hour)¹ embraces Havering’s prejudices. Flats are alien in Havering, blots on the landscape. Preventing the building of them is politically a ‘Good Thing’. His cunning plan is pressure groups, or Neighbourhood Plans. Only Keith Darvill (1:06) said social housing is desirable even though this implies flats (see Addendum). Keith didn’t mention high density flats as a solution for homelessness. Graham Williamson (1:11) speaking for HRA, said he was helpless…as usual. Jane Keane (1:17) worried about ‘taking back control’ but didn’t say why. Jason Frost (1:19) favoured councillors as ‘influencers’. Chris Wilkins (1:21) was unintelligible.

The homeless are collateral damage to Havering’s negativity. Graham Williamson remarked on the harm development meant for residents. Residents are voters in this context. Havering has a problem, the hidden homeless,² many of whom are ‘sofa-surfing’. And then there are adults stranded in the family home at 30 years old. There are many such men and women in Havering. Havering’s housing policies serve only homeowners or, in the case of 16 councillors, owners of buy-to-let houses.³

Havering is heartless for any but the wealthy.⁴

Addendum: Housing density

The most densely populated square kilometre in the country, for example, is London’s neighbourhood of Maida Vale, which hosts around 20,000 people. In contrast, some urban areas in Europe exceed 50,0000 people, peaking at 53,000 in Barcelona. And if we take the number of people living in apartments as an indicator of housing density, this accounts for almost half (48%) of Europe’s population, compared with just 17% in the UK. This suggests that there may be the potential to increase the density of our residential developments, which would enable more homes to be built without expanding the development footprint. Source: Should we increase housing density? | CBRE UK (my emphasis. This would protect the Green Belt)

Best Cynicism: Damian White ~ absent yet again

Notes

1 Annotator Player All timings related to this webcast There was 18% (10/55) absenteeism at this meeting, which is utterly disgraceful.

2 “Hidden” homelessness in the UK: evidence review – Office for National Statistics

3 This debate reflects the councillors that Havering has See Havering’s Councillors: The Democratic Deficit in Action – Politics in Havering

4 JSNA Demography Chapter 2023 v0.3A.pdf p54 HRA opposed housing selling for million plus. See New Homes for Sale | Kings Green, Upminster Development See also The sale of ‘Hall Lane Pitch and Putt’: Conservative Revenge? – Politics in Havering

Havering Council Meeting, 23rd July 2025 (Part One)

Councillors quiz cabinet members at Question Time (QT)¹. Environmental questions dominated, with 8 out of 15. Two critical issues weren’t asked: (1) Green Belt development, and (2) Air pollution.² There was however, a motion about the Launders Lane disaster.³

QT is critical and only 35 minutes were used of the 45 available. This suggests that the 15 questions limit should be scrapped. QT should end when the 45 minutes are complete. This would bring it into line with Parliament’s PMQ.⁴

Discussion

Barry Mugglestone’s interesting style buries questions in a blizzard of legislation references. For supplementary questions he says either councillors or members of the public haven’t kept him informed, so it’s their fault there’s a problem. David Taylor’s question about tree feathering narrowing the pavement outside Mawney school (Q10, 43minutes) was a classic example. He said he’d prioritise this in 2026. Result!

Philip Ruck (31) asked about cabinet members avoiding scrutiny committees. Ray Morgon conceded the point and, in effect, said they’d been ordered to attend. Based on answers by Chris Wilkins (35 and 45), Graham Williamson (53) and Natasha Summers (26) attendance might not mean enlightenment.

Finally, Viddy Persaud (39) raised the important question of the premature collection of Council Tax. Ray Morgon conceded this administrative error, apologised and moved on. It is impossible to avoid the thought that some people might have been thrust into a temporary overdraft. This is costly. Viddy didn’t pursue that point.

Best Question: Philip Ruck

Notes

1 Council Questions 23 July 2025.pdf All times come from this webcast Annotator Player

2 Gallows Corner is shut and perfect for a *Before-After* analysis.

3 Motion C proposed a debate about this issue. Motions.pdf Surprisingly it didn’t demand the reinstatement of the Statutory Nuisance Notice.

4 The weekly Prime Ministers Questions

Havering’s Overview and Scrutiny Board, 3rd July 2025

Introduction

Item 6, concerned sick leave, agency staff and its financial implications.¹ Sick leave levels, “[Have] fallen further to 9.9 days at 30th April 2025.” Appendix 2says this amounts to 20,807 days per year. National statistics say, “There was also a fall in days lost per worker, to 4.4 in 2024…”² Havering’s council is 125% above the national average at a cost of £2m p.a.

Stress, depression and mental health costs the council £610K and Muscular-skeletal costs £506K, both annually.³ These are the two biggest categories.

Councillors are a poor example for staff.⁴ In the six months to 5^th July 2025, 55 councillors were scheduled to attend a total of 460 meetings. They attended 386 – a 16% absentee rate.

The council is rotting from the head down.⁵

Discussion

There were important contributions from David Taylor (1:55).⁶ He said that agency staff were healthier. At (2: 04) he said ‘Millennials’ were very sickly. His best point was (2:19) when he posited causes of muscular-skeletal sick leave (£506K). He suggested one cause might be ‘Working from home’ with poor working conditions. Jane Keane pondered ‘tolerated’ sick leave as a reason for sick leave. She then discussed domestic abuse and sick leave. Other contributions were made by Matt Stanton, Dilip Patel and Martin Goode.

Officers made few substantive replies to councillors with too many ‘getting back’ with emails later.

Conclusion

The committee is a joke. There was 41% councillor absenteeism at this meeting. This ruins institutional memory. The contribution of Phillippa Crowder (2:29) demonstrated the power of that memory. It also destroys any development of forensic debating skills. Scrutiny should be uncompromising but this committee is cosy and nice.

Innovative strategies for bringing Havering’s statistics in line with national levels don’t exist.⁷ Questions about dismissals for poor staff attendance weren’t asked. Likewise, challenging failed strategies was obviously infra dig.

Councillors are complicit in accepting Havering’s sick leave culture.

Notes

1 HR 1 – Report.pdf

2 HR 2 – Appendix 1 and 2 OS Report – Data Dashboard.pdf See also Sickness absence in the UK labour market – Office for National Statistics Havering is trying to achieve 8 days of sick leave, which is, apparently a stretch target.

3 loc.cit Appendix 2b

4 Havering Councillors’ Attendance: 1st August 2023 – 24th January 2024 – Politics in Havering

5 Absentees: cllrs Ruck (he was present via Zoom which counts as an absence), Garrard, Godwin, Vincent and Anderson: 5 out of 12 (41%)

6 Annotator Player Timings refer to this webcast

7 Worse than that: the target set is 8 days sick leave, 3.6 days above the national level.

A tale of two boroughs: Havering and Westminster’s Council Tax

All animals are equal, but some animals are more equal than others. Animal Farm by George Orwell (1945)

Council tax was created by a panics-stricken Conservative government after the Poll Tax riots. Eight bands were created and were meant to be reviewed every five years. George Osborne’s fiscal extremism was the coup de grace for local finance.It destroyed any sense of reality for councillors who have resorted to borrowing to pay current expenditure. The local authority credit cardhas, as it were, been maxed out. Osborne and expanding duties made bankruptcy inevitable with a mountain of debt for future generations. But, as Orwell would have said: not all councils are equal.

The 2025-6 council tax for Westminster is astonishing. Band ‘D’ is the mid-point in the council tax system and they have set the charge at £1,019. 17 miles to the east, and on a different fiscal planet, Havering’s band ‘D’ charge is £2,313.55. This is above band ‘H’ in Westminster.¹

As might be expected, Westminster house prices are very high.² The first house available on Rightmove costs £2.6m. (The second house listed is £80m.) Being immensely rich means Westminster has many more band ‘H’ houses than Havering.³ Many more is a galactic under-statement. Romford constituency has 40 band ‘H’ houses, Hornchurch and Upminster has 320 and Westminster……..15,530!

Obviously their revenue base is huge. Westminster’s band ‘H’ council tax is £2,038. For Havering it is £4,627, which is too low.⁴

Havering has been wrecked by (a) national politicians and their cowardice, (b) Conservative extremism, (c) ever expanding duties for adult services and homelessness and (d) local delusions.

Notes

1 Westminster council tax bands & costs 2025/26

2 Properties For Sale in Westminster | Rightmove

3 d:\Users\Chris\Downloads\CTSOP2_1_adhoc_2015_2024 (1).zip 4 Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering

4 Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering

The Contaminated Land at Launders Lane, Rainham

“…..I am concerned that the LA [local authority] appear to have been very confused about the correct legal approach to this site through the decision-making process.”¹

Background

Havering Residents’ Association (HRA) aren’t leaders. Dithering and avoiding decision-making is a toxic legacy from their petty-minded Residents’ Associations days. Prior to this judgement they were tested by the Institutional Racism report and ULEZ. They failed on both occasions.

Havering’s Institutional Racism report was suppressed until the campaigning Romford Recorder emerged triumphant in court. Sadiq Khan’s ULEZ propositions were mocked in a campaign tinged with racism. No-one in the HRA leadership team understood that ULEZ was a public healthpolicy.

HRA never apologised for suppressing the Institutional Racism report or opposing ULEZ.²

Arnold’s Field, Launders Lane

Deputy-Leader Gillian Ford is HRA’s spokesperson. She said, “…the site belongs to them [the landowner] and it is their responsibility to make it safe – the ball is in their court and as they well know, we are ready to work with them to solve the problem.”³

Designating land as contaminated means the council controls the situation. Landowners of contaminated land are instructed to remediate their land.⁴ Gillian doesn’t understand that the council can turbo-charge action. The landowner wouldn’t be remediating the land voluntarily; they’d be under a legal obligation.

It is impossible to believe that anyone could look at a site which had 64 fires in a few months,⁵ and not think it was contaminated.

The council decided that the land was the lesser category ‘statutory nuisance’.⁶ This was refuted by the campaigners’ legal team, “The fires arising on this [sic] are clearly caused by the land being in a contaminated state, so it is not accepted that this is a nuisance under the EPA.⁷

The judge was forensically precise in her determination. “…. the LA [local authority] appear to have been very confused about the correct legal approach to this site….”⁸ This is a damning judicial rebuke. Continuous spontaneous combustion couldn’t be anything other than a consequence of toxic contamination.

The designation of Arnold’s Field as a contaminated site should be urgently expedited after years of procrastination.

Notes

1 Clear the Air in Havering, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Havering [2025] EWHC 1492 (Admin) (17 June 2025) para 105

2 See Havering’s Institutional Racism Report – Politics in Havering and also Anti-ULEZ Conservative councillor David Taylor was gracious in his mea culpa Havering’s ULEZ Data (davidtaylor.online)

3 Havering Council’s response to Arnolds Field judicial review | London Borough of Havering

4 Can I Be Prosecuted For The Contamination Of Land? – Stephensons Solicitors LLP

5 Arnolds Field: Illegal dump owners say clean-up plan blocked – BBC News

6 The council continued avoiding any responsibility. The judge noted, “….but also no action is being taken in respect of statutory nuisance.” Clear the Air in Havering, R (On the Application Of) v London Borough of Havering [2025] EWHC 1492 (Admin) (17 June 2025) para 31

7 loc.cit para 29

8 loc.cit para 105

Havering’s Council Tax 2025-6

Havering Council is bankrupt. The usual explanation is the cost of Adult Services and Homelessness. That’s glib. Council Tax was introduced in 1991 by a panic-stricken Conservative government reeling from the Poll Tax riots. They planned valuation reviews every five years, after which council tax would be recalibrated reflecting property price inflation. No reviews have taken place. Areas with massive property price inflation, like Havering, haven’t had council tax adjustments.

Havering’s Council Tax 2025

In 1991 a £320,000+ band ‘H’ house¹ in Havering had a council tax of £1070. This equates to 0.33% of its minimum value.

In 2025 a band ‘H’ property is worth about £2m.³ Council tax for band ‘H’ is £4,627, which is 0.23%. This doesn’t look much but it is a 30% difference.

Council tax has significantly reduced for band ‘H’’ property owners since 1991.

Inflation since 1991

Band ‘H’ houses were valued at £320,000+ in 1991. Using standard inflation, that increased to £733,720 in 2025.⁴ House price inflation is a multiple of standard inflation. A 1991 £320,000+ house is now £2,157,601,⁵ an inflation rate of 574%.

Council Tax is a failure

Political cowardice by governments has bankrupted Havering.⁶ Council tax is a failed mechanism for funding council services.⁷ Continuing to use 1991 valuations is ludicrous.

Correcting 34 years of inertia will take political courage………I’m not holding my breath.

Notes

1 Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering

2 Properties For Sale in Emerson Park | Rightmove

4 Inflation calculator | Bank of England

5 House price index | Nationwide

6 Havering Council Tax: Is It Too Low? – Politics in Havering This was written in 2020 but the analysis is still valid though the examples are historic.

7 George Osborne’s Age of Austerity programme, 2010-16, put the knife to the throat of Havering’s finances and matters more than sub-optimal increases in council tax.