Havering’s Councillors: Value for money?

The Council meeting, 22^nd March 2023, was shocking. The shock didn’t come from what was said or discussed. It was because so many councillors didn’t turn up. Out of 54 councillors only 47 appeared. This an absentee rate of 13%. Or, as HR experts call it: ‘A Red Flag’ event. What’s going on? Councillors aren’t amateurs, they’re paid £200 pw as an allowance. They aren’t contracted to do any specific hours but attend a minimum number of meetings per year. Council meetings are their only obligation.

Provoked by this I researched the three months from 1^st January 2023.²The Council meeting, 18^th January 2023, had two non-appearances.³The all-important budget setting meeting, 1^st March 2023, is a ‘three-line-whip’ event. Seven councillors were absent from the meeting that set Council Tax for the year 2023-4.⁴ That decision affects every resident in Havering. And seven councillors didn’t turn up!

On consecutive Council meetings, seven members were absent. There shouldn’t have been any absentees without exceptional circumstances. But 16 different councillors missed three Council meetings. This is worrying.

They couldn’t all have been taken suddenly ill: Could they?

Notes

1 Agenda for Council on Wednesday, 22nd March, 2023, 7.30 pm | The London Borough Of Havering p1 Absentees were Councillors Osman Dervish, Brian Eagling, Sarah Edwards, James Glass, Linda Hawthorn, Robby Misir and Susan Ospreay.

2 For January go to Monthly meetings calendar – January 2023 | The London Borough Of Havering Follow links for the next two months, or trace backwards for previous months. Research completed on 27^th March 2023

3 Councillors David Godwin and John Wood

4 Councillors Dilip Patel, Robert Benham, Patricia Brown, Christine Vickery, Viddy Persaud, Carol Smith and Joshua Chapman

Havering Council Meeting: 22nd March, 2023

Damian White’s ten-month sulk is over.¹ He’s positioning Conservatives in their new opposition role. Damian is ‘Love-Bombing’ the HRA/Labour administration with helpfulness.

At Question Time there were 15 questions and four resulted in requests for further meetings or, even steering groups to help deal with issues. Paul Middleton (@50)² looked as if he’d been ambushed over the Leisure centre by Damian. Keith Darvill (@54) positively embraced Damian in his Climate Change role. Christine Vickery (1:01) was brushed off by Barry Mugglestone but came back for more over CCTV in Ardleigh Green. Finally, Joshua Chapman (@1:04) had a meeting of minds with Paul McGeary.

Damian’s new ‘Love-Bombing’ policy triumphantly concluded the meeting. Keith Prince (@2:01) accepted an HRA Amendment in its entirety. Keith’s skill-set doesn’t usually include sweetness and light and everyone reeled back. A political earthquake! The CEO was so shocked he took legal advice on what a composite motion meant in this situation. Four minutes later the wrong decision was made.

Judith Holt (@17) hadn’t read Damian’s memo. She presented a petition for anti-ULEZ warriors and read their diatribe even though it’s against Council procedure. The Mayor silenced her and was roundly booed.

‘New Conservativism’ is pleasing but what does Damian really have in mind? Endlessly fascinating.

Notes

1 See Havering Council Meeting, 18th January 2023 – Politics in Havering At this meeting the Conservatives opted out from the normal democratic process

2 Webcast is here Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) Times relate to the webcast. This is 50 minutes

Havering’s Budget: Between a Rock and Hard Place

Havering’s administration is delusional. They refuse to accept that government underfunding of Havering is policy. The government is in perma-turmoil and their policies are too.¹ The administration ignores all the evidence and asks MPs to assist. It’s as if Havering’s MPs are an unknown.²

On consecutive nights, government underfunding was demonstrated.^3,4On the 7^th February, officers used many slides showing the iniquities of Outer London’s funding formula. Havering is hardest hit because of our peculiar demographics.

Gillian Ford is a fan of lobbying despite knowing the funding formula hasn’t changed since 2013.⁵ Oscar Ford focused on demographic changes in Havering with costs associated with increasing the numbers of children.⁶ Lobbying won’t change anything. Paul McGeary said rents only increased by 7% instead of 13.6% because of government intervention. A government decision to reduce rent increases from 13.6% to 7% was for Housing Benefits⁷ reasons not to help tenants during the cost-of-living crisis.

The council should lobby to increase the council tax cap.⁸ An increase to 10% would mean Havering avoiding bankruptcy in 2026. Lobbying to avoid bankruptcy would embarrass the government. It’s high-risk but death by a 1,000 government generated cuts is worse. Government will blame Havering whatever decisions are made. Why not take the battle to the government and pillory them for capricious incompetence?

Notes

1 Three Prime Ministers and four Chancellors of the Exchequer

2 Julia Lopez is a minister and wont bite the hand that feeds her. Andrew Rosindell’s a veteran MP who always supports the government on financial matters.

3 Overview and Scrutiny Board meeting 7^th February 2023 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com)

4 Cabinet meeting 8^th February 2023 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com)

5 Go to 38-43 mins where she cites two organisations, which, allegedly, have influence

6 Go to 45 minutes. He says the government is “incapable”. This implies he knows the government is incompetent insofar as they don’t understand their own policy.

7 At 9 minutes

8 Four bankrupt councils have increased their council tax by 10%+. They were all bankrupted by searching for additional revenue to pay for statutory services through commercial activities. They all failed

Havering’s Academies and Community Governors

Havering’s secondary academies’ policies on school uniform and personal appearance are virtually identical. It’s as if they collaborate in an institutional Group Think. Their decision-making is embedded in collective unchallenged beliefs. No academy has councillors, parents or teachers as governors. School uniform and personal appearance policies don’t enhance educational achievement. This emphasises that the academies’ approach to micro-managing students is bizarre.

In October 2022 this blog discussed coloured shoelaces,¹which are uniformly banned. Wearing coloured shoelaces can result in students being excluded from lessons. Hairstyle conformity is also an important ‘appearance’ policy.² Schools seem unaware some ‘extreme’ hairstyles are legal and can’t be banned because of their racial context.

Race-based hair discrimination has been illegal in the UK since the Equalities Act became law in 2010 but the Halo Collective says it is still a really big problem.

A recent survey said 46% of parents say their children’s school uniform policy penalises afro-hair.³

In 2020 a Hackney student took her school to court because of the enforcement of a hairstyle policy. She won her case.

A pupil who was repeatedly sent home from school because of her afro hair wants to make sure it doesn’t happen to any other UK schoolchild.

Ruby Williams received £8,500 in an out-of-court settlement after her family took legal action against The Urswick School in east London .⁴

Excluding the community alienates the principal stakeholders. It’s difficult to believe legal Afro hairstyles are permitted in Havering’s academies for example.² Community involvement challenges extremist Group Think policies, which have no educational purpose. Academies are in an intellectual cul de sac in relation to school uniform and appearance codes.

Notes

1 Havering’s Academies: School Shoes and Shoe Laces – Politics in Havering

2 This is typical: “It will be for the Headteacher to decide if a hairstyle is “extreme”. It is difficult to definitively set out in advance what will be regarded as an “extreme hairstyle” as styles vary regularly according to fashion. Students are therefore expected to speak to their Head of Year before they alter their hairstyle or dye their hair to obtain confirmation that the proposed new hairstyle will comply with this policy.” Year-7_11_September-2021.pdf (cooperscoborn.org.uk) This can be summarised as, ‘If we don’t like it, you can’t have it.’ Compare Uniform-Expectations-September-2021.pdf (bowerpark.co.uk) And FBA-uniform-policy-June-2020-r-1.pdf (fbaok.co.uk) Frances Bardsley The other 15 Havering academies cluster in the same territory.

3 Halo Code: What is it and how does it protect afro hair? – CBBC Newsround 10^th December 2020
4 Ruby Williams: No child with afro hair should suffer like me – BBC News 10^th February 2020

Havering Council’s Backbenchers: A Plan for Reform

Havering’s backbenchers are deliberately disempowered. This is especially true for administration councillors. Councillors should take part in debate as MPs do in parliament. This is important because the cabinet has identikit members endorsing each other’s biases.

Last week’s council meeting¹ was farcical. Conservative councillors sulked and no motions were proposed.² Twenty-three administration backbenchers were gagged by procedure.

Worse! Councillors who are brushed off, a frequent occurrence, can’t reply. Next question please!

Cabinet makes political choices, which need debate. For example, motorists are pre-eminent in Havering. Any policy limiting their supposed rights is attacked with ferocity. Some claims are uncritically endorsed by cabinet biases.⁴ Alternatively, the children’s lobby is weak, as are groups associated with volunteering and the environment. Policy making based on who shouts loudest is the politics of the playground bully. Transparent debate is the only way good policies emerge.

Reform Propositions

Every cabinet member should attend an hour meeting quarterly with one of the two Scrutiny and Overview committees
Question Time should be open to all councillors like parliament’s
A follow-up question should be permitted with the Mayor’s approval
The Leader should attend a separate committee with both Scrutiny and Overview chairs and deputies along with a further four councillors quarterly.

Notes

1 Havering Council Meeting, 18th January 2023 – Politics in Havering

2 It was ever thus. When the Conservatives were in administration their Overview and Scrutiny committees were an embarrassment

3 Campaign to save Elm Park children’s centre. – The Havering Daily

4 The ULEZ debate is a prime example. In Havering public health is trumped by the right of motorists to pollute with impunity. If readers wish to check their address for levels of pollution go to addresspollution.org – Search (bing.com) The figures relate to WHO statistics.

Havering Council Meeting, 18th January 2023

Damian ‘Mick Lynch’ White has led the Romford Conservatives out on strike. The ‘Winter of Discontent’ suits his mood.¹ He doesn’t like his loss of allowances and powerlessness. This council meeting, for the first time ever, had no opposition motions. The Mayor was so pleased he nearly did a jig at the end of the meeting.

The Conservatives used Question Time instead of motions.² As is traditional, only innocuous questions are asked. Question One by David Taylor concerned Romford FC. This has appeared every four years since the 1990s and isn’t a Number One question. Subsequently David tried a knockabout on London Mayor Sadiq Khan’s consultation methods but he doesn’t know how to land a glove. (We all missed Keith Prince’s ranting passion.)

Question Four about bin collection was pure Martin Goode gold. Barry Mugglestone was brusque. He pointed out Havering doesn’t revolve round Harold Wood. Question Five from Viddy Persaud became a trick question when Barry explained the difference between standing water and floods. She isn’t quick on her feet and floundered. Question 14 on homelessness was complex. Neither the question nor answer were understandable but Joshua Chapman and Paul McGeary seemed happy: so that’s alright then!

But were Havering’s taxpayers served well? Not at all. It was disgraceful.

Notes

1 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) You can watch the meeting here

2 Council Questions 18th January 2023.pdf (havering.gov.uk) All 14 questions are here

Havering’s Budget and Rishi Sunak: 2023

Havering’s lobbying of government is the triumph of hope over experience. Underfunding is government policy and is non-negotiable. Havering’s Chief Executive said some ministers treated him as if he was a ‘naughty school boy’ (@ 23minutes).¹Naughty like Oliver Twist was ‘naughty’.

Havering’s government grant: 2010 = £70 million

Havering’s government grant: 2023 = £1.9 million

Havering’s outcome:…………….: 2023 = Minus £68.1 million

The Bank of England calculates inflation for 2010-22 at 41.7%²

Therefore 2010’s £70 million in 2022 £££s is £99.18 million

Havering’s real 2023 shortfall is £97.28 million

Rishi’s policies rely on people not understanding maths³

…………………………………………………………………………………………………………..

Cabinet Meeting: 14^th December 2022

The meeting had a budget item. Councillors are listed in speaking order. (Starting @ 14 minutes)

Chris Wilkins: Chris doesn’t understand strategy or analysis. His jog-trot through ‘highlights’ was unhelpful.

Gillian Ford: She injected passion into her speech and cares.

Oscar Ford: He gave a very competent review of an OFSTED report. Unfortunately, the prevailing counsel of despair continued.

Graham Williamson: He was woefully unprepared for a budget meeting.

Keith Darvill: A brief brilliant intervention about the impact of decision-making by the government. His political point was welcome.

Ray Morgon: He’s self-depreciating and as Leader needs to be positive. Cabinet members should be warned about being unacceptably casual.

Paul McGeary, Paul Middleton and Barry Mugglestone: All three were mute.

Notes

1 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com)

2 Inflation calculator | Bank of England

3 So it’s surprising that he’s keen that everyone studies maths until 18 Rishi Sunak wants all pupils to study maths to age 18 – BBC News

Havering’s Million Pound Mistake, 2019-22

Damian White, Havering’s Council Leader in 2019, signed a contract with the MetPolice¹ costing a million pounds over three years. He did this for bragging rights in the ‘fighting’ crime Conservative agenda. The contract paid for Havering to have five additional police officers who clearly couldn’t make a difference. The contract wasn’t just about policing, it was also a PR stunt.

Havering is,

“….among the top 10 safest cities, and the 1,978th most dangerous location out of all towns, cities, and villages.”²

The Conservatives’ fantasy is that only they can be trusted to fight crime. Their posturing will cost taxpayers an additional million pounds to the MetPolice GLA precept.³ Havering’s only significant crime area relates to cars. The five police officers can’t make a difference because they don’t have cars. (Police cars were an optional extra in Damian’s contract.)

The RM13 postcode area had 267 offences for every 10,000 vehicles – more than double the national average of 121.⁴(my emphasis)

The MetPolice contract is flaky and should wither away. Unfortunately, if it isn’t renewed, Ray Morgon’s HRA/Labour administration will be vilified as ‘Soft on crime.’

Notes

1 FINAL Cabinet report MET s92 Police FINAL.pdf (havering.gov.uk) p5 See also my critique Posts ‹ Politics in Havering — WordPress.com
2 Havering Crime and Safety Statistics | CrimeRate
3 md2954_appendices.pdf (london.gov.uk) item2
4 Havering car crime hotspots revealed – Rainham and South Hornchurch ‘worst’ | Romford Recorder Andrew’s constituency, “Romford was next with a rate of 227 in RM1.” This is almost double the national average.

Havering Council Meeting, 23rd November, 2022: Question Time

Resident Association councillors used to ask questions about potholes and such like. Osman Dervish would smile sweetly, pat them on the head and say, ‘Well done’. Drivel, but everyone felt better. Now the roles are reversed. The question is, ‘How well are Conservatives doing?’

The first question was by Keith Prince.¹ His question (Q1) was about ULEZ.² He knows opening questions are routine with the supplementary question being the killer. Cunning politicians put cabinet members³ in a tough spot and score a triumph. I thought Keith would be classy.

Unfortunately, the blind were leading the blind. Barry Mugglestone hadn’t read the ULEZ proposals and thinks, wrongly, it’s about climate change. Even worse he thinks it’s a tax. Barry was reading a prepared answer from officers, who also haven’t read the proposals, or have, and Barry didn’t accept their answer. It’s beyond stupid to misunderstand ULEZ’s purpose, which is, “To help clean up London’s air…” ⁴

Furthermore “…ULEZ is central to the Mayor of London’s plans to improve Londoners’ health. It will clean up the city’s toxic air, which leads to the early deaths of thousands of people every year.”⁵ (my emphasis)

Keith isn’t guilty of misunderstanding. He’s playing politics. On this occasion he ranted about taxation, which he knows isn’t true.⁶ He then made progress. He said if people driving 18 year old bangers are charged £12.50 a day for destroying people’s health, Havering’s businesses will collapse. Keith doesn’t have a grip on economic realities.

The principal purpose of ULEZ is saving lives in Havering.

Addendum: Question allocation

If the Administration believe that ULEZ is about climate change why wasn’t it given to Climate Change cabinet member Keith Darvill to answer?

Notes

1 Council questions.pdf (havering.gov.uk)

2 Ultra Low Emission Zone – Transport for London (tfl.gov.uk)

3 Barry Mugglestone. Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) Got to 29 minutes in

4 Ultra Low Emission Zone – Transport for London (tfl.gov.uk)

5 Havering, ULEZ and Public Health – Politics in Havering About 3 people a week die in Havering from air pollution

6 Because he knows what taxation means.

‘Keep Taxes Low! Sell the Family Silver!’ The Road To Bankruptcy

Henry VIII looted monasteries because he wanted their wealth for his aspirations by the 17^th century Britain was impoverished once more causing civil wars.¹ Between 1700 and 1900 British vast wealth came from exploiting the Empire. This was spent between 1914-8 and 1939-45 on two world wars. In the 1980s Britain’s wealth came from North Sea oil. Margaret Thatcher squandered this on war and defence spending.^2,3 She followed this by selling national industrial assets, which were sold in, ‘Everything Must Go,’ sales.

Thatcher’s self-serving reason was ‘efficiency’. She included social housing in her off-loading of public assets. This turbo-charged the housing crisis of the 2000s. Her economic policies ended in 2013 with the Royal Mail privatisation.⁴

George Osborne’s fig-leaf was Austerity. By out-sourcing tax increases to local government he maintained the illusion that Conservatives are a Low Taxation party. The current (2023-4) Council tax permissions illustrate this graphically. Havering can increase tax by 3%, for local purposes. This can be increased by two percentage points to help pay for social care.⁵ Social care is a mandatory, demand-led service and very expensive.

Osborne, and successive Conservative Chancellors, out-sourced tax increases to local government to dodge bad publicity. However, the golden goose will die when well-run councils, like Havering, are bankrupted.⁶

Beginning with Henry VIII, Britain has had successive governments believing sound financial management is optional. Boris Johnson’s economic policy was, ‘Having my cake and eating it.’ All very amusing when a child says it but when a prime minister acts on that premise? Britain’s economically illiterate governments continue to impoverish the nation.

Notes

1 a) a parliamentary civil war 1629-40, b) three civil wars 1641-49, c) regime change 1649-60, d) another regime change, 1660-88, e) invasion/civil war 1688, f) yet another regime change 1688-1714. The 17^th century was very unstable.

2 The Ricardian Curse, Margaret Thatcher and North Sea Oil | Odeboyz’s Blog (oedeboyz.com)

3 The British Army’s Global Delusions | Odeboyz’s Blog (oedeboyz.com)

4 Ironically the Royal Mail was established by the Tudors in 1516.

5 This a 67% increase on the basic, government approved council tax figure. 67%!

6 The UK councils facing potential ‘bankruptcy’ as coronavirus pandemic takes huge toll on public finances | National (inyourarea.co.uk) and also Local authority financial sustainability and the section 114 regime – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)