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

Andrew Rosindell’s Question to Keir Starmer, 29th January 2025

Andrew says,¹

“…the population of this country will rise to 72.5 million by 2032….which is unsustainable.” (my emphasis).

In 1945 the UK’s population was 48 million. When Andrew was born, in 1966, it was 54.6 million.² People living in 1945 couldn’t have comprehended the 2024 British population, which is 44% higher than it was.

Why is another three million unsustainable? “Turkey has…(3,181,222‑ individuals) [immigrants] who have been granted temporary protection status.” Most are from Syria and are the majority of a 4.6 million immigrant population. Turkey is poorer than Britain but accepts its responsibilities.

Keir Starmer’s answer was interesting “…we will bring those numbers down.” Why? British politicians are obliged to be anti-immigrant. Positive, heartwarming stories are buried in anti-immigrant bile.

Rishi Sunak’s parents were born in east Africa. Nassar Hussain, Essex and England cricket captain, was born in India. In literature, T S Eliot was American and became a British Nobel prize winner. Marks and Spencer’s shopping chain is an immigrant success story. And this is a tiny sample of immigrants in Britain building a better wealthier country.^4,5Both the question and answer are disappointing. Asylum seekers should be accepted. Economic immigrants are critical to the well-being of Britain because they’re motivated to succeed. They should be welcomed.

Addendum: Andrew Rosindell’s question with Keir Starmer’s answer

Rosindell The Prime Minister should know that my Romford constituents are shocked, angry and dismayed by the suggestion by the Office for National Statistics that the population of this country will rise to 72.5 million by 2032—that is 500,000 people a year, which is unsustainable. Who voted for that, and will the Government do something to ensure that the population of this country is sustainable going forward? There is no mandate for such a colossal increase in immigration to this country.

Starmer I think the hon. Gentleman should talk to his party leader. Net migration went through the roof under the previous Government—by nearly 1 million; it quadrupled—and who was cheering it on? The Leader of the Opposition. The hon. Gentleman’s constituents are right to be concerned about the loss of control by the previous Government. We are taking control; we will bring those numbers down. But the record is absolutely clear, and it sits right there on the Opposition Benches.Engagements – Hansard – UK Parliament

Addendum: West Ham United

The WHU squad, 2024-5 has 15 nationalities represented. Only ten of the 27 man squad are English. West Ham United FC Squad Information 2024/2025 | Premier League

Notes

1 Engagements – Hansard – UK Parliament PMQ’s 29^th January 2025

2 https://www.populationpyramid.net/united-kingdom/1966/ In1966 it was 54.6 million Demographics of the United Kingdom – Wikipedia

3 number of immigrants in trukey – Search

4 Grooming gangs and ethnicity: What does the evidence say? – BBC News Focusing on criminals is a demonisation concealing the facts of the case.

5 Boris Johnson was born in the USA and could have stood for president. Nigel Farage had a German wife and his children presumably have dual nationality.

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

Havering’s Cabinet Meeting, 9th October 2024

The meeting dealt with awarding contracts. Every officer recommendation was agreed. Scrutiny was provided by Keith Prince who did a manly job. This was especially the case with the award of a Housing IT contract, Item 8.¹

Keith (1:04)² focused on the price range,

“Indicative Market Comparison Costs……Based on the extensive market assessment across eight suppliers it is estimated that the total value of the contract will be within a range of c.£970,000 to £2.4m for the potential seven year life cycle of the software …..(results of market assessment across eight suppliers)”³

There is a 147% range between lowest and highest. Keith found this curious. Just how could there be such an enormous variation for the same performance? The complex story took an interesting turn when the director of finance said she could vary these prices by a further half million pounds under delegated powers. Taking the lowest indicative price, that was a further 51%. Reading the cabinet’s ‘body language’, it was obvious they didn’t know about her delegated powers. (The papers will be rewritten reflecting this insight.)

Keith did an excellent job at this meeting.

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………

Ray Morgon’s attempt to suppress the Institutional Racism report hit another road block⁴ when the appeal against the Freedom of Information Tribunal judgment failed,

A judge ruled that the council’s grounds for trying to cover up the 400-page dossier were “inarguable” and had “no realistic prospect of success”. ⁵ (my emphasis)

He’s a sucker for punishment and might appeal against this judgement. The lawyers are loving it. Havering’s library users are less happy.

Notes

1 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Cabinet, 09/10/2024 19:30 p97

2 Time is based on the webcast

3 loc.cit. p99

4 Institutional Racism and Havering Council – Politics in Havering

5 Information Tribunal rejects Havering Council racism dossier appeal | This Is Local London

Havering’s Bankruptcy and Margaret Thatcher

Thatcherite economics in 1979 was straight-forward. Income tax was reduced and capital assets lightly taxed to reward Conservative voters.¹ Lost revenue was replaced with massive increases in regressive taxes like VAT. George Osborne, a Thatcherite without the brains, introduced The Age of Austerity, 2010-24. His freezing of Council Tax ultimately made Havering bankrupt because lost revenue wasn’t replaced.

Ray Morgon borrowed £52m, at 7%, from the government to replace the lost revenue in 2024. This is like using credit cards for day-to-day spending, which is obviously insane. Worse, the council is selling capital assets to fill the hole Osborne made. (Bankrupt aristocrats call this, ‘selling the family silver.’) It’s a futile tactic to buy time.

In a full year, 2% of council tax will be needed to pay the interest on the loan.

Havering is bankrupt because council tax is too low.². Trivial *cuts* like four libraries reduce the deficit by £300,000.³ Havering’s budget is £180M.

What does inflation, 2010-24 tell us?

General inflation: 61%⁴

House price inflation: 100%+⁵

Council tax inflation: 46.7%⁶

The 2024-25 budget deficit is expected to be £32M.⁷This is caused by Council Tax not being inflation linked. Council Tax is a Property Tax.

House price inflation has been at least 100% because of the magic ofThatcherite economics. Wealth in assets is lightly taxed and rises in value. Or, as the Bible says, The rich get richer.⁸ Born-again Thatcherites like Andrew Rosindell probably know this. Meanwhile pot holes are a symptom of bankruptcy.

Ray Morgan and Gillian Ford should beg government for the freedom to set Havering’s Council Tax.

Notes

1 BBC Budget 97 “In his first [1979] Budget he raised VAT from….8% to a single rate of 15%….an increase in prescription charges from 20p to 45p and a major relaxation of exchange controls.” In the same budget higher rate taxation was reduced from 60% to 40%.

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

3 Havering launches new library strategy | London Borough of Havering

4 £1 in 2010 → 2024 | UK Inflation Calculator (in2013dollars.com)

5 House Prices in Hornchurch (rightmove.co.uk) 11 Ravensbourne Crescent, Romford increased 142%. 17 Ravenscourt Grove, Hornchurch increased 117%

6 Previous years’ bands | Council Tax bands and bills | London Borough of Havering Using Band D.

7 Cabinet agrees “toughest budget ever” | London Borough of Havering The actual out-turn won’t be £32M because much expenditure is demand led and not quantifiable accurately.

8 Matthew 25:29

Havering’s Cabinet Meetings: 11th September and 18th September, 2024

Item 6: 11^th September

Assure Havering residents that the Council takes Hate Crime seriously and has robust mechanisms in place to help combat/reduce such behaviour; and · Inform victims and witnesses about the various support options currently available, including how to contact those specialist agencies.^1,2 (my emphasis)

The government requires councils to have *Hate Crime* policies. The policy is for Havering’s housing tenants. Paul McGeary (36 minutes)³, read a statement. He has no enthusiasm, it’s as if it’s an unwelcome chore. Keith Darvill (42) worried about costs. When told there were no additional costs he was still worried, which was surprising.

The schizophrenic cabinet endorsed this policy whilst paying a fortune to a King’s Counsel (KC). The KC will try to sustain the council’s position on the suppression of their report on racism amongst council employees.² Institutional racism, of course, is a hate crime. The report will be uncomfortable and unwelcome. It is, in the words of the Tribunal which decided the Romford Recorder’s Freedom of Information request, “of overwhelming public interest”.⁴ Therefore, it should be published.

Item 10: 25^th September

This item is a Performance Report on the Council. The ‘score card’ categories are as follows:

“· Red = Below target and below the ‘variable tolerance’ of the target

Amber = Below target but within the ‘variable tolerance’ of the target
Green = Above annual target.”⁵

The outcome isn’t flattering, with 41% being RED and a cause for concern.

Interestingly the IT document transmission failed and Opposition leaders only received a summary report. Keith Prince (1:32) believed it should be made public. Reading the Leader’s *Body Language* this is unlikely to happen.

Councillors spent three minutes (from1:31) on this item. Chummy cabinet meetings, with lots of bonhomie, are a tragic wasted opportunity. The public is ill-served when a 41% failure rate is shrugged off without comment.

Notes

1 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Cabinet, 18/09/2024 19:30 (havering.gov.uk) p579

2 Institutional Racism and Havering Council – Politics in Havering

3 Annotator Player (mediasite.com) Times refer to this webcast. There wasn’t any sound until this item. This gelled with the members’ criticisms about the poor Council’s IT interface.

4 Havering Council seeks appeal over racism report ruling | Romford Recorder

5 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Cabinet, 25/09/2024 19:30 (havering.gov.uk) p184

Julia Lopez and Andrew Rosindell ~ Back from the Brink, July 2024

After the catastrophic general election, Julia and Andrew have reacted differently. They both had 82% reductions in their huge majorities.¹ What lessons did they learn from this experience?

Julia’s response is that she’s now a constituency MP. She’s ditching her nickname Invisible. Her new dynamism has been rewarded with many appearances in the Romford Recorder. Dynamic, caring, constituency work is Julia’s five-year project. She hopes to be the darling of Hornchurch and Upminster in 2029.

Andrew’s response is amnesia. Bad things happened during the last 14 years and they’re all Labour’s fault. Andrew admires Robert Jenrick,² who was Immigration Minister in Sunak’s government.

“For too long, mass migration has gone unchecked, placing unbearable strain on housing, schools, the NHS and on all public services.”³

That Andrew supports anti-immigration politics and Jenrick shows the power of amnesia.

He believes Romford needs red-blooded Conservatism and then he’ll be the darling of Romford once more.

Julia and Andrew suffered from a rampant Reform Party. Their actual strategy is to “really, really” pray Farage’s Reform party implodes. Otherwise, the 2029 election could be terminal for Julia and Andrew.

Notes

1 Havering’s Tory MPs Dodge the Bullet, 4th July 2024 – Politics in Havering

2 Romford Recorder 27^th September 2024 p33 Andrew hosted Jenrick at his Romford HQ.

3 loc.cit.

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