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 Cabinet Meeting: 8th November, 2023

Havering is facing bankruptcy because of Conservative government policies. It has off-loaded statutory duties onto Havering without funding them.¹ Consequently, the council taxpayer meets the costs of social care for adults and children. The direction of travel is that the entire budget will be consumed by these items.

Ray Morgon (@2)² led a blistering attack on the incompetence of the Conservative government. He scorned the Austerity programme, 2010-23. Chris Wilkins (@6), denounced the government’s use of the 2011 Census for Havering’s funding formula.

Gillian Ford (@11) said a 102-year-old woman could be evicted to save money. This might suit Boris Johnson but Gillian was outraged. Oscar Ford (@14) identified *hedge funds* as profiteers from children’s services. He prefers the Scottish no-profit system. Keith Darvill (@15) quoted woeful statistics about homelessness, which made him despair.

Paul Middleton (@22) confirmed libraries would be affected. Graham Williamson (@23) said the decline in the planning services continued. Barry Mugglestone (@27) defended his untenable 30 minutes free parking policy. The current financial situation makes this a luxury and there’s no evidence it works.

Keith Prince (@29) got Williamson to admit Havering’s police funding would be paid by ‘someone or other’. Mysterious! Martin Goode (@40) jog-trotted through the proposals. A feral cabinet³ attacked him. They didn’t like his pithy “scrambling in the dark” summary of their efforts.

The CEO (@58) reiterated his passion for lobbying. This is a triumph of hope over experience.

The Conservatives have thrown down the gauntlet to local government.⁴ Local councils should exploit the fact that 2024 is an election year and go into battle!

Notes

1 No solution to ‘broken’ children’s services that are crippling council budgets, MPs warned (msn.com)

2 All times relate to the webcast Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) @2 means 2 minutes into the webcast.

3 Mugglestone, Middleton, G. Ford and Darvill

4 Surrey Council tax rise of 15% scrapped – BBC News As there are 4 cabinet ministers in Surrey it’s widely believed a back stairs deal was done with the government. See also Havering Council Tax: Is It Too Low? – Politics in Havering

Havering’s £50 A Minute Councillors

What the Government Says Havering’s Councillors Should Be Doing

The role that overview and scrutiny can play in holding an authority’s decision-makers to account makes it fundamentally important to the successful functioning of local democracy. Effective scrutiny helps secure the efficient delivery of public services and drives improvements within the authority itself. Conversely, poor scrutiny can be indicative of wider governance, leadership and service failure.¹Ministerial introductory statement (my emphasis)

What Havering’s Councillors Did in the First Six Months of 2021

Health Overview & Scrutiny Sub-Committee

23^rd February………………………………….1 hour 10 minutes

Chair: Nisha Patel……………………………£55.72 a minute

Crime & Disorder Sub- Committee

18^th March…………………………………….1 hour 15 minutes

Chair: Sally Miller……………………………£52.01 a minute

Environment Overview & Scrutiny Sub-Committee

18^th February………………………………….1 hour 15 minutes

Chair: Maggie Themistocli…………………£52.01 a minute

Individuals Overview & Scrutiny Sub-Committee

9^th March; 13^th April…………………………….2 hours 05 minutes (in total)

Chair: Christine Smith……………………….£31.21 a minute

Towns & Communities Overview & Scrutiny Sub- Committee

9^th February……………………………………2 hours 15 minutes

Chair: Ray Best………………………………£28.89 a minute

Children & Learning Overview & Scrutiny Sub-Committee

4^th March……………………………………. 2 hours 25 minutes

Chair: Judith Holt…………………………..£26.90 a minute

Overview & Scrutiny Board

16^th February; 10^th March; 22^nd June…………4 hours 32 minutes (in total)

Chair: Darren Wise………………………….£27.03 a minute

Chair of the Board is paid £14,706 a year sub-committee chairs get £7803. ² There’s no interaction or constructive discussion between Overview and Scrutiny committees and the Cabinet. Worse, on no occasion has a Cabinet member attended an Overview and Scrutiny committee to discuss policy issues.

Chairs are are actively preventing Overview and Scrutiny committees from fulfilling their legal duties and are therefore in breach their crucial role in Havering’s democracy.

There were no meetings of any Overview and Scrutiny Sub-Committee in January or May

Notes

1 Government advice on Overview and Scrutiny couldn’t be any firmer. They place it at the centre of local democracy. Overview and scrutiny: statutory guidance for councils and combined authorities – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk )

2 2020 Members Allowances final.pdf (havering.gov.uk)

I made an error on sub-committee chair allowances which was corrected by Cllrs. Durant and Morgon . Thank you to them. The text is now accurate.

Havering’s 2020 GCSE Results: Part Two

Havering’s schools will be judged this August as never before. GCSE results are dependent on previous performance, regardless of current individual achievement. But do students know what the previous performance is? Three schools opt for a ‘warts and all’ approach. Two schools have a decent half-way house. The other thirteen schools’ results are presented in an opaque manner, or not at all in three cases. Examination Boards will adjust schools’ assessment if they appear too severe or too generous. Adjustments will bring results into line with previous outcomes.

Coopers’ Company and Coburn, Frances Bardsley and Sacred Heart of Mary schools publish GCSE results in full. The 2020 results won’t be a straight ‘read through’ from 2019 but will be used in decision making. Coopers’ 2019 cohort achieved 26 grade 9s in Religious Studies. At Sacred Heart English Language, Mathematics and History all achieved six grade 9s. The same three subjects, in that order, at Frances Bardsley led to 6 grade 9s, five grade 9s and 10 grade 9s. All three schools have less successful subjects, which aren’t hidden.

Gaynes School said, “22% of our students gained Grades 7-9 (equivalent to a Grades A** – A) in five or more subjects.” The statement continued, “a phenomenal personal achievement for our students and incredibly rewarding for us as a non-selective local community school.”* This rather begs the question as to what the other 78% achieved. It shields weaker subjects from scrutiny. But in the Havering context this counts as a transparent statement.

Marshalls Park school says, “2019 saw Marshalls Park Academy students achieving amazing results, some of the best the school has ever had.”*** Their headline statement is, “Grade 5 and above in English and Maths: 46% (2018 = 33%)”. They’ve published a list of subjects with outcomes, which again is welcome whilst not hitting the gold standard of the virtuous three. Redden Court offers a different tactic as they make selected comparisons with national outcomes. Opaque but interesting.

Concealing examination results is reprehensible but that’s Hornchurch High school’s tactic. The head teacher’s introductory video presentation says she wants grammar school status. Looking at the government’s performance comparison site, this is delusional. They aren’t alone. Emerson Park and Sanders school join Hornchurch High in not publishing GCSE results at all, not even in the truncated way Brittons school adopts, “9-4 English and Maths… 49%”.

GCSE results should be published so stakeholders can readily understand the information offered. Transparency is important as a tool for critical analysis. Publishing GCSE results in full is the least that can be reasonably expected in a publicly funded education system.

Addendum: Raphael Independent School

Raphael’s don’t publish meaningful GCSE examination results either. They remark, “In 2019 70% of students obtained 8+ GCSE’s with a 92% pass rate in both English and Maths.” Quite what “a 92% pass rate” means depends on what’s meant by ‘pass’. GCSE grades run from 1-9. Most schools regard 1-3 as a fail even though it isn’t. GCSE’s measure achievement. Raphael’s don’t define ‘pass’ but the working assumption is ‘pass’ means grades 4-9.

Notes

* https://www.gaynesschool.net/gcse-results/

** https://www.cooperscoborn.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/GCSE-results-PUBLICATION2.pdf

*** http://marshallspark.org.uk/exam-results/#:~:text=2019%20saw%20Marshalls%20Park%20Academy,66%25%20(2018%20%3D%2059%25)

Sources

Click to access Summer_2020_grades_for_GCSE_AS_A_level_guidance_for_teachers_students_parents_09062020.pdf

For Coopers’ Coburn 2019 results see https://www.cooperscoborn.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/GCSE-results-PUBLICATION2.pdf

For Frances Bardsley’s 2019 results see https://fbaok.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Parents-Exam-booklet-2019.pdf

For Sacred Heart’s 2019 GCSE results see https://sacredheartofmary.net/wp-content/uploads/Exresult2019-1.pdf

For Gaynes 2019 GCSE results see http://www.gaynesschool.net/gcse-results/

For Redden Court’s 2019 GCSE results see https://www.reddencourtcloud.co.uk/information-for-parents/examination-results

For Marshalls Park 2019 GCSE results see http://marshallspark.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/Subject-breakdown.pdf

For Hornchurch High’s 2019 GCSE results see https://www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/143946/hornchurch-high-school/secondary

For Emerson Park 2019 GCSE results see http://www.emersonparkacademy.org/page/?title=Results&pid=29

For Sanders school see https://www.sandersschool.org.uk/information-for-parents/examination-information

For Brittons 2019 GCSE results see https://www.brittons.havering.sch.uk/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Examination-Results-2019.pdf

Havering’s 2020 GCSE Results: Part One

The government’s Covid-19 education policy depends on Year Eleven teachers grading and ranking students to replace GCSE examinations. This task was completed on 12^th June, 2020.

1) Teachers must produce an order of merit for their students

2) Teachers must ‘award’ GCSE grades based on that order of merit within each grade. Therefore every grade 9 student is ranked, likewise grade 8 students and so on.

Heads of Centre must sign a declaration confirming the centre assessment grades and rank order are a true representation of their students’ performance, before checking the data for accuracy, and submitting it to the exam board. p5*

The government is aware that teachers who support their students might subjectively slide into grade inflation, so grades are subject to statistical analysis.

So that the final grades awarded are as fair as possible, exam boards will standardise the judgements for each subject across different centres once they have been submitted, using a statistical methodology developed in conjunction with Ofqual. p4**

The government’s statisticians understand bias and its dangers. This is discussed on pages p10-11*. The ranking order won’t be altered but grades might be,

However, if grading judgements in a subject in some schools and colleges appear to be more severe or generous than others, exam boards will adjust the grades of some or all of those students upwards or downwards accordingly. This means that the centre assessment grades submitted by schools and colleges and the final grade that students receive could be different. It also means that adjustments to centre assessment grades might be different in different subjects. P9*

Using the 2019 GCSE results of Sacred Heart of Mary for example, a prediction that 19 students of Religious Studies should be awarded grade 9, will probably be agreed. Alternatively predicting 19 grade 9 successes in Mathematics would probably be downgraded. This is due to a significant differential between the subject outcomes in previous years.

The government’s advice is this,

If, when compared to the evidence… your judgements in a subject are more generous than would be expected, then the final grades for some or all of your students will be adjusted down. P11**

Teachers, parents and students at Sacred Heart are at a significant advantage to 15 Havering schools, as they publish results subject by subject. It’s the school that’s being graded. Individual students aren’t graded at Examination Board level.

Ofqual…. shows that for the vast majority of schools and colleges any year-on year variation in results for a given subject is quite small. In 2015 and 2016, 90% of centres were classed as having stable outcomes and 8.5% of centres were classed as having ‘unstable results’. Only 0.8% of centres had results that increased by more than the national average change in both 2015 and 2016 and only 0.5% of centres had results that decreased more than the national average change in both 2015 and 2016. p10*

Covid-19 has turned traditional examinations upside down. The historic performance of schools is now all important.*** Teachers have had a heavy burden placed on their shoulders as they adjudicate the GCSE grades of their students during this emergency.

Notes

Sacred Heart’s 2019 GCSE results in detail https://sacredheartofmary.net/wp-content/uploads/Exresult2019-1.pdf

* https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/890811/Summer_2020_grades_for_GCSE_AS_A_level_guidance_for_teachers_students_parents_09062020.pdf When there is quotation from this document there will be page reference and *

** https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/887018/Summer_2020_Awarding_GCSEs_A_levels_-_Info_for_Heads_of_Centre_22MAY2020.pdf When there is quotation from this there will be page reference and **

*** In a fast moving situation this has been modified https://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/coronavirus/gcse-and-a-level-pupils-can-sit-exams-if-they-don-t-like-coursework-grade/ar-BB169yfX?ocid=msedgntp accessed 30^th June 2020

Sources

For the worst performing school in England see https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/breaking-englands-worst-schools-revealed-13899939 The list is, …. based on how teenagers at each of the country’s secondary schools performed in their GCSE exams in 2018, taking into account progress not attainment.Drapers & Brittons feature from Havering.

For the general advice the government is offering see https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/890811/Summer_2020_grades_for_GCSE_AS_A_level_guidance_for_teachers_students_parents_09062020.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/awarding-qualifications-in-summer-2020

For the government’s specific advice to schools see https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/887018/Summer_2020_Awarding_GCSEs_A_levels_-_Info_for_Heads_of_Centre_22MAY2020.pdf