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’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 Council Meeting, 20th November 2024 (part two)

Militant trade unionists in the 1970s dragged meetings out to exasperate ‘ordinary’ members who left long before the end of meetings. Extremist motions were then agreed ‘democratically’. Keith Prince has watched the videos with enthusiasm.

Motion B (see addendum one) implies huge expenditure and Havering is bankrupt. Keith Darvill (2:07)¹ said ‘every park is different’, with the main difference being some parks can’t be economically fenced and gated. He cited Upminster Park. Barry Mugglestone (2:04) missed the point at length. The proposer Tim Ryan (2:00) was sincerely misguided. And that was the debate.

Enter Comrade Keith Prince (2:00) and (2:17).

Keith likes procedural points. His speciality is nit-picking. Unlike militant trade unionists, he can’t add two hours to a meeting. Whatever extremist motions he’d dreamt up – the Peoples’ Republic of Romford? – were unheard. Keith was posturing against the clock and a legal officer enjoying the limelight.

Keith had support from Michael White (2:20). Michael mocked the fact that the HRA demanded that their amendment be presented to council. HRA don’t realise THEY ARE the Administration and they don’t need motions presented – to themselves. The HRA motion was piffle.

Jane Keane (2:14) was outraged that the motion to discuss the safety of women was binned (see addendum two). Soothing words were spoken but there was a nasty taste in the mouth.

Best Moment: Dilip Patel’s (15) anecdote about former councillor Pam Craig

Addendum One: Conservative Motion B

Chamber recognises Havering has reached unacceptable levels of antisocial behaviour in our parks. Council calls on the Administration to produce a detailed plan to reduce levels of antisocial behaviour and to resume the overnight locking of parks, and to present this proposal at the meeting of Council.²

Addendum Two: Labour Motion C

This Council condemns violence against women and children and recognises the particular challenges of finding emergency refuge accommodation for mothers with boys over the age of 12 years old. This Council calls upon the Administration to work with refuge organisations to find solutions to the lack of available refuge places.²

Notes

1 Annotator Player All times refer to this webcast

2 Motions (Public Pack)SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA Agenda Supplement for Council, 20/11/2024 19:30

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

Institutional Racism and Havering Council

Several years ago, there were disturbing allegations of Institutional Racism amongst officers of the Council. A report was commissioned to uncover the truth. The report was completed three years ago and it sustained those allegations. The Conservative Administration of Damian White rejected demands for publication. Ray Morgon, the Leader of the Opposition, demanded the report be published. A campaign began led by the Romford Recorder who put in a Freedom of Information request.

For three years the Council resisted that Freedom of Information request.

The Romford Recorder¹ has won a court case demanding publication of the report. The Council won’t publish and it continues to fight the Recorder. Institutional Racism is an insidious ‘Hate Crime’, which rots trust in the workplace and community.

“The council was ordered in August to disclose a 400-page dossier of evidence to the Romford Recorder within 42 days, after we won a legal action on behalf of our readers…Information Tribunal judges ruled that the council was not entitled to suppress the document as its contents were of overwhelming public interest.”² (my emphasis)

HRA’s response is to continue resistance by hiring a King’s Counsel for an appeal.

The appeal is lame. Firstly, it wants to protect other councils, which is a specious justification and a waste of Havering taxpayers’ money.

Secondly, they claim the document is “historic” and therefore misleading. It’s historic because the council have fought tooth and nail to prevent publication.

Thirdly, the document is inflammatory, which “….risks fracturing community cohesion in the borough at a time when the national temperature is heightened.”³ Really?

Assuming the Recorder has faithfully recorded the Chief Executive’s justifications for the appeal, its chances of success are slim, and very expensive.

Council officers oppose publication because they fear reputational damage. However, it is Conservative and HRA politicians who are preventing publication, not officers.

Questions:

1) Are any perpetrators still employed by Havering?

2) Was compensation paid to any victims?

3) Did the council demand No Disclosure Agreements from any employee in relation to the findings of this report?

4) Were any councillors named in the report?

Notes

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

2 loc.cit.

3 loc.cit

Havering Council Meeting: 4th September 2024 (part two)

Library Closure Debate (Begins at 56 minutes)^1,2

This was the best debate in recent years. Thoughtful and insightful points were made in an ultra-positive environment. Great stuff.

Martin Goode (56mins) set the tone. Firstly, placing libraries in the community and then forensically analysing the financial actualité. A lot of the savings is staffing. However, Havering has a no redundancy policy so there is an over-statement of savings.

Two councillors³ explained the importance of libraries to their, and every body’s, childhood. Dilip Patel (1:25) quoted Woodford Green library as an example of creative regeneration. This set the scene for ‘thinking outside the box’, a point approvingly made by Ray Morgon (2:16) to Keith Prince’s (2:19) surprise. The consultation didn’t offer alternatives to closure.

Philip Ruck (1:31) favours morally correct decisions. James Glass (1:49) is refreshingly optimistic unlike HRA, which embraces ‘victimhood’. Chris Wilkins (1:22) exemplifies victimhood: he’s wedded to ‘Loans and Savings’. He’s oblivious to the £1.5m that a 1% council tax increase offers, an option “that dare not speak its name”.⁴

Graham Williamson (1:44) stunned councillors by saying that libraries are ‘subsidised’. They’re a public service, which might surprise him, as he implies they’re failing businesses. Gillian Ford was outraged that Prince wanted to conclude the debate even if it went on beyond 10:30 (2:00).⁵ He said HRA are led by officers. Council officers, as a group, have reductionist attitudes: ‘You want savings? Here they are!’

Four libraries might close to ‘save’ 0.55% of the deficit.

Best sarcasm: Philip Ruck

Best politics: Brian Eagling (1:28)

Absentee councillors: Nine, which is outrageous.

Notes

1 Annotator Player (mediasite.com) All times relate to this webcast

2 Motions.pdf (havering.gov.uk) For the wording of the motion and amendments

3 Mandy Anderson and Judith Holt made significant speeches on this point.

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

5 A close vote 25:21 casts doubt on this

Havering’s Council Meeting 24th July, 2024 (part two)

The principal activity of council meetings is debating Motions. These are free-wheeling discussions where any councillor can participate. Motions ought to be important and probing.¹ Motions presented to this meeting were, in general, an insult to the electorate.²

^{…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………………}

The first motion by the Conservatives was:

A This council agrees to implement a pairing system for members, to ensure that serious illness does not impact the political balance of the Chamber.

Keith Prince (1 hour 31)³was abysmal. He literally hadn’t worked out the implications of his proposition. Keith Darvill (1:34) told him. Prince acknowledged he’d got it wrong. It was drivel.

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

The Conservative’s second motion was pivotal. The financial ‘reasons’ for library closures are flakey and legitimately contestable. Perfect territory for intelligent debating:

B Council calls upon Cabinet to maintain the operation of all local libraries, acknowledging the critical social impact of their potential closure, and to encourage the use of financial reserves to ensure their continued funding. (my emphasis)

Keith Prince (1:42) withdrew the motion, which is beyond belief. The Conservatives literally don’t know what an Opposition party should be doing, or, what constructive criticism is.

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

The Conservative’s third motion was inconsequential:

C Council agrees to amend the Constitution to allow for 2 follow-up questions during full council meetings.

Keith Prince (1:43) continued his poor form. Once more Keith Darvill dissected the motion. He gained support from Stephanie Nunn and Ray Morgon.

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

The final motion came from the Labour party:

D This Council adopts the Co-operative Party’s Charter Against Modern Slavery as shown on the attached.

Katharine Tumilty (1:55) made a very good speech about the horrors of modern-day slavery. Dilip Patel (2:08) shared his first-hand experience when he recounted his involvement in rescuing a young woman. Very moving and inspiring for everyone in the chamber. Barry Mugglestone (2:10) outlined his department’s intervention in illegal HMOs.

It was a long wait but councillors, at last, showed their best side.

Best speech: Katharine Tumilty

Notes

1 There are eight council meetings but there are no motions at Annual Council

2 SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA 24th-Jul-2024 19.30 Council.pdf (havering.gov.uk) p11

3 Annotator Player (mediasite.com) All times refer to this webcast

Havering’s Council Meeting 24th July 2024 (part one)

Ray Morgon’s first meeting since trashing the coalition with Labour leaves HRA alone – naked and unashamed. Controversial policies like the Data Centre in Upminster are now totally owned by HRA.

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

Question Time (began at 46 minutes)

Question Time is the Barry Mugglestone Show.¹Barry is a bit of a bruiser. He said unrectified service defects were the fault of ward councillors. If they’d worked harder informing him he’d have resolved problems immediately. Good knockabout stuff. Tim Ryan (1:06) substituting for David Taylor got the treatment. It was unfair but fun.

Paul Middleton was ambushed by Judith Holt (1:27). A straight-forward question about the upkeep of Upminster cemetery became emotionally fraught. She was asking about the maintenance of her family grave. Councillors can’t demand special treatment but Paul should have been gentler.

Some cabinet members were ill-prepared for supplementary questions. Paul McGeary, Natasha Summers and Graham Williamson disappointed.

Gerry O’Sullivan was absent and deputy-Mayor, Sue Ospreay, substituted and displayed her unique style. Calling Nisha Patel ‘My lovely’ (1:10) was a novelty, which we could have done without.

Oscar Ford (1:08) said Havering was helpless in answer to Keith Darvill about flooding at Brookside Academy. The council can’t do anything because it’s an Academy.

Best tactician: Barry Mugglestone

Councillor Absence

Twenty percent of councillors were absent. Cllrs Benham, Frost, O’Sullivan, Ruck, Taylor, White D., Walker, Wilkes, Williams and Wise

Note

1 Public reports pack 24th-Jul-2024 19.30 Council.pdf (havering.gov.uk) pp249ff The webcast is here Annotator Player (mediasite.com) All times relate to this webcast

Havering’s Councillors: Their Sick Leave Culture

….U.K. the rate of employee absence has risen to its highest level in a decade…[it] has reached 4% in 2023, with an average of 4.8 days lost per employee per year. (my emphasis) Source: Absence trends in the United Kingdom: Strategies for effective management – WTW (wtwco.com)

The 2009 ‘expenses scandal’ revealed how British MPs ripped off the taxpayer. Some MPs were jailed. Nonetheless, parliamentary rules protected their pensions. (see Addendum One) Havering’s councillors are angels in comparison.

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

Absenteeism amongst councillors is triple the British norm (see Addendum Two). Between 19^th January and 13^th July 2024, councillors were scheduled for 440 attendances at meetings.¹One councillor could have attended 13,² whilst the least number was four.³ (Four meetings equate to one every six and a half weeks.)

Councillors, collectively, missed 58 meetings – equivalent to 13.2%. Non-attendance makes scrutiny of policies weak and toxic policies are sometimes implemented. Absenteeism destroys ‘Institutional Memory’ a crucial factor in good decision-making. Havering’s democracy is weakened by indolence.

Attendance at council meetings is one part of a councillor’s duties. Many councillors are active in their communities.⁴ Obviously this is just one publicly available. Other councillors might be equally assiduous but unavailable for scrutiny.

The principal point is councillors only have a legal duty to attend a meeting every six months. This weakens their commitment.

Addendum One: MPs and their pensions

….former MPs who were jailed in the wake of the parliamentary expenses scandal are also understood to remain entitled to full pension benefits despite their records.

MP pension rules mean there are almost no circumstances under which an MP can be stripped of their pension, with the exception of the most extreme crimes such as treason…. Source MP expenses cheats and sex offenders keep taxpayer-funded pensions (msn.com)

Addendum Two: Council Meeting, 24^th July 2024

The shocking absenteeism amongst councillors reached unbelievable levels at this meeting. Of Havering’s 55 councillors 11 were absent = 20%. This is quadruple the national average.

Source: Agenda for Council on Wednesday, 24th July, 2024, 7.30 pm | London Borough of Havering

Notes

1 Councillors attendance summary, 19 January 2024 – 13 July 2024 | The London Borough Of Havering Legally they must attend one council meeting every six months or they forfeit their seat See also Does Havering have too many councillors? – Politics in Havering

2 Chris Wilkins (He missed two, which is 15% absenteeism.)

3 David Godwin and Christine Vickery (they both had full attendance)

4 ‘The heating and hot water have failed, affecting hundreds of residents. The Council is aware of issues but seems reluctant to fix them.’ – The Havering Daily This report is about the community work of Cllrs McKeever and Stanton in Beam Park