Havering Council Meeting, 17th January 2024 (part one)

Keith Prince had a tour de force (1 hour18)¹ His motion was opportunist (see addendum) building on the anger that SEN children’s school transport should be ‘reviewed’. It’s believed this will reduce the quality of the service. (A clue is a possible £1.4m saving over four years.).²

Keith said HRA and Labour amendments were out-of-order. This isn’t a technicality. If they were out-of-order, HRA and Labour would be caught in a cleft stick. They’d have to vote FOR the motion and lose £1.4m. Alternatively, vote AGAINST and show they were ruled by accountants.³

The Monitoring Officer rescued them. In an excruciating passage he wriggled⁴ and produced a ‘solution’. HRA’s amendment was accepted and the review of SEN transport continues its ‘consultation’ period.

Oscar Ford (2:08) kept remarking on ‘cost effective’ transport and Havering’s financial position. Unfortunately, an option is Uber. Robert Benham (2:13) noted Uber allocates drivers randomly and many children need continuity or get distressed. David Taylor (2:28) commented on Uber’s surge pricing mechanism, which makes predictions impossible. Ray Morgon (2:41) quoted a comment from ‘someone’ who said cabbies were making ‘thousands of pounds’ from SEN transport to bolster his argument.⁵ No evidence, no names.

Keith Darvill (2:21) politicised the issue in a telling speech.

Addendum: The Conservative Motion

“This Council calls on the Cabinet not to proceed with the proposed cuts and changes in service, proposed in the Home to School Transport consultation. It further recognises that such cuts would have a detrimental impact on both children and parents, causing them increased stress and anxiety.” (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Council, 17/01/2024 19:30 (havering.gov.uk) p39

Notes

1 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) All times refer to this webcast The item begins at 1 hour 18 minutes and finished at 2:01 hours = 33 minutes of debate.

2 Several councillors noted they’d spoken to protestors outside the Town Hall. Specifically, Cllrs. Persaud, Taylor and Wise who made comments in their speeches

3 Typically this is known as a lose-lose situation

4 Giving a minute-by-minute timeline to ‘explain’ why the cock-up wasn’t his fault. And then discovered an arcane sub-clause ‘rarely’ used to defend the indefensible.

5 This is an example of Confirmation Bias where *evidence* is used to support an argument and countervailing points are ignored or downplayed

Havering’s People Overview and Scrutiny Committee, 5th December 2023

Jason Frost¹ made a convincing speech in December’s council meeting when requesting that his committee be sub-divided because of its overwhelming responsibilities. He was brushed off by Ray Morgon. This 27 minutes meeting² proved Ray correct. Jason’s absence added further substance to Ray’s opinion.³

Frankie Walker chaired the meeting with aplomb.

There was an excellent discussion about the ‘hub’ for autistic adults. It’s in Romford Mall, the lease of which is very expensive and consumes most of its grant. Bryan Vincent (@17)²said only 3.1% of adult autism sufferers use the facility, which means it fails 96.9%. Officers said this challenge will be met by the hub becoming ‘mobile’, using council facilities. Matt Stanton (@22)⁴ made the critical point that autism sufferers had an unemployment rate of 78%. He speculated this was due to poor support from DWP and the council. His insight was confirmed by the director who said that strategies were in place to correct this systemic failure. Matt built on a comment by Darren Wise (@15) about financing and forward visibility so proper planning could take place. The director supported them, describing multi-year contracts.

Gillian Ford (@9) attended the meeting. Neither she nor the chair understood her constitutional role. She entered the scrutiny debate, which is inappropriate. Cabinet members can only answer policy questions at scrutiny committees. The best mechanism for this is an unambiguous Q&A session. There haven’t been Q&A sessions in any Overview and Scrutiny committee and they ought to be introduced.

Notes

1 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) Jason Frost (1:40) Time refers to the webcast See Havering Council Meeting, 22nd November, 2023 (part two) – Politics in Havering

2 Agenda for People Overview & Scrutiny Sub Committee on Tuesday, 5th December, 2023, 7.00 pm | The London Borough Of Havering Times refer to the YouTube webcast available here

3 Along with cllrs Benham and Wilks.

4 Cllr Stanton isn’t on the committee but attended for the scrutiny discussion

Havering’s Half Baked Budget Consultation, 2024-5

“Even with the difficult proposals put forward in this consultation, the Council still has a budget deficit of £12 million.”¹ (my emphasis)

Only half of the savings/revenue increases are available for consultation. Another £12m is floating about. The consultation is farcical. Voters are expected to see half a budget and take the other half on ‘trust’. In other words, agree half a budget and get £12m of cuts sight unseen.

The £12 million deficit demands an 8% council tax increase ABOVE what’s proposed.

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

Huge deficits need bold, imaginative transformative options. Avoiding bankruptcy in February 2024, requires brave leadership.²

Instead, the Administration has lost hope.³ The majority of the £11.93m cuts and savings programme is contained within five items, none of which are sufficient for the task in hand.⁴ Financial juggling and increased parking charges, for example, are 49% of the £11.93m. Toxic options, which would solve the challenge, are avoided. Havering waits for government Commissioners to do the unpopular dirty work.⁵

Keith Darvill⁶ said borrowing £12m from the government is “massive.” Massive means: £12m at 7.1% (RPI + 1%) for 20 years = £17m interest.⁷Mortgaging future generations for a year’s deficit. The elephant in the room? 2025-6, 2026-7 and so on.

A genuine consultation should offer a 13% increase in council tax OR brutal cuts in services. Undemocratic play-acting is absolutely unacceptable in a mature democracy.

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

This is a government inspired *perfect storm* for local authorities, not just Havering.

“I don’t believe that there is a conspiracy to destroy local government. But I think we are sleepwalking towards a position where councils just won’t be viable.”

He said that while assets could be sold off in the short term, it would lead to a big transfer of wealth of public assets into private hands.”⁸

I think there is a conspiracy to privatise local authorities and loot their assets.

Notes

1 Havering Budget Consultation 2024 – London Borough of Havering Council – Citizen Space

2 Romford Recorder² headline was: ‘Council could declare bankruptcy in 3 months’. 24^th November 2023 p3 Reporter Josh Mellor

3 The consultation document is here Budget Leaflet.pdf (havering.gov.uk) The summary statement is here 1 APPENDIX A SUMMARY SAVINGS PROPOSALS.pdf (havering.gov.uk)

4 Ibid (Appendix A) The top 5 account for 49% (£5.85m) the other 51% is 35 items the smallest of which is £23K

5 Reducing the library service to two libraries, closing Romford market and ending the 30 minutes free period for parking are obvious starting places.

6 Romford Recorder 24^th November 2023 p3

7 United Kingdom Retail Price Index YoY (tradingeconomics.com) RPI = Retail prices index

8 Jeremy Hunt’s budget cuts spark fears of ‘existential threat’ to English councils (msn.com)

Havering Council Meeting, 22nd November, 2023 (part two)

The principal debate wasn’t about Havering’s impending bankruptcy. Conservatives chose, instead, to discuss Romford Market. This illustrates why Havering is in a mess after 20 years of Conservative rule.

In the 1990s Arthur Latham listened to the traders and spent £1,000s on cobble stones and £1,000s removing them because shoppers hated them. Traders spoke, Latham listened: it was an expensive mistake.

David Taylor (@1:06)¹discussed the survival of the market. Adopting a conspiracy theory, he accused HRA of attacking Romford itself. Graham Williamson (@1:11) pointed out the market was very costly.

Romford Market is in a death spiral. The,

“….number of traders was in long-term decline with 339 traders in 1985, 266 traders in 1995 and 170 traders in 2005. By 2015 the number of regular traders had declined to 90.”² Reducing once more to 60 in 2023 according to Williamson.

Veteran councillor Michael White (@1:29) said blaming Conservatives for doing nothing after 20 years in power was unfair. Timothy Ryan (@1:32) recounted stories about his childhood. Ray Morgon (@1:35) was surprisingly enthusiastic.

Conservatives demanding subsidies for lame ducks is strange. The Administration refused to say that subsidising Romford Market was throwing good money after bad. This is despite the fact that Romford Market has been on life-support for 30 years.

What would Margaret Thatcher do?

Addendum: Margaret Thatcher on lame duck industries

“…her policies had consigned out-dated, lame-duck industries to the nostalgia books…”³Ironically she’s revered by Romford’s Conservatives, especially their MP.

Notes

1 Annotator Player (sonicfoundry.com) Times in brackets indicate when speeches begin and relate to this webcast

2 Romford Market – Wikipedia

3 An economic dawn in the wastelands | The Northern Echo

Havering’s Budget Proposal for 30 Minutes Free Parking

Havering council is facing bankruptcy¹ and has a reckless budget proposal. The maintenance of 30 minutes free parking in Hornchurch and Upminster is expensive² and untenable. Worse, there’s no evidence that it helps shopkeepers, which is, allegedly, the justification for the policy.

Havering council’s free car parking policy is gesture politics. It’s claimed that shoppers demand free parking or shopkeepers will suffer along with the borough. The evidence is that the cost of car parking is less important than access to good quality parking. This is especially the case where shopping centres are pedestrianised or where cars have restrictions placed on them,

“Studies from the UK found an increase in trading of up to 40% across a number of pedestrianised sites.”³

Additionally, the other car parking proposals make the policy quixotic. The council intends to create £3 million of additional revenue. There will be charges for Sunday car parking, and increases for on and off-street parking, parking permits and in parks.⁴ Car parking charges in parks is a blow to the principal leisure activity for residents. (It could be halved if the 30 minutes charge was abandoned.)

Does anyone believe this policy will survive the bankruptcy solutions of Government Commissioners?

Notes

1 Havering’s Impending Bankruptcy: The Road to Disaster (part one) – Politics in Havering

2 Council passes Havering budget for 2023/24 | The London Borough Of Havering It cost £650K in lost revenue in 2023-4. This will increase to about £750K in 2024-5.

3 Reclaiming the streets: the increasing trend of pedestrianisation around the world | Rapid Transition Alliance

4 (Public Pack)Agenda Document for Cabinet, 08/11/2023 19:30 (havering.gov.uk)

Havering’s Impending Bankruptcy: The Road to Disaster (part two)

Margaret Thatcher’s prime ministership ended after introducing the Poll Tax for council financing. Every property was charged the same amount. A one-bedroom flat was taxed like a mansion. It provoked riots and she lost support in her party.

Panic-stricken, the Conservative government introduced Council Tax. Eight bands, loosely based on 1991¹ evaluations, remain to this day. These valuation bands are supposed to reflect house prices across the country.

The intention was that bands would be reviewed every five years. This would have captured changes in real time. Political cowardice prevented revaluations happening. Winners are happy and losers scream blue murder with obvious electoral consequences. London’s 73 MPs absolutely opposed re-establishing the link between property values and council tax. London’s house prices had rocketed and they didn’t want council tax to double as a consequence.

In Havering, Band D house prices in Rainham have increased eight times since 1991.²The earliest statement of council tax bands are for 1993-4 when band D was set at £535.³ For 2023-4, Band D is £2,088 – four times more.

Havering’s council tax would double if it was a property tax.

Havering’s road to disaster began in 1991. A panic-stricken Conservative government tried to rescue themselves after Margaret Thatcher. They made disastrous decisions, which have lasted 32 years. Havering’s 2023-4 budget raised £149m from council tax.⁴ This should have been a minimum of £300 million. And more if upward revaluations are included.

Havering is a victim of national politics.

Notes

1 How domestic properties are assessed for Council Tax bands – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

2 House Prices in Guysfield Drive, Rainham, Havering, London, RM13 (rightmove.co.uk)

3 Previous years’ bands | Council Tax bands and bills | The London Borough Of Havering

4 Decision – The 23/24 Council Budget setting report and 2023-2027 Medium Term Financial Strategy | The London Borough Of Havering

Havering’s Impending Bankruptcy: The Road to Disaster (part one)

Havering’s Strategy Director Kathy Freeman stated: “We are very close to issuing a section 114, [bankruptcy] even six months away from this happening. Our average resources cannot meet the financial requirements.¹

In 2010 Conservative chancellor, George Osborne,² (see addendum) began his attack on local government. Without profiling the financial needs of local government, he capped Council Tax increases to zero%.

Instantly, he demonstrated he didn’t understand two fundamental fiscal principles;

The corrosive impact of inflation
The corrosive impact of the compounding of inflation.

Osborne’s decision was based on ‘something for nothing’.⁴ He talked of ‘waste’ and ‘inefficiencies’ to confuse the electorate. Simultaneously, additional duties and responsibilities were imposed on councils.

Since 2010, British inflation has been 46.88%.⁵Havering’s stand still council tax should have increased at the same pace. In 2010-11 a band D was £1,505. This year, 2023-4, it’s £2,088.13. Inflation linked council tax would have brought the figure to £2,210.56. Havering is minus £122.43 per band D house. There are 107,798 houses in Havering and band D is the average. Osborne’s misunderstanding about inflation has cost Havering approximately £14 million annually.

But the Conservative chancellors weren’t finished with their attack on local government. They reduced government funding. In 2010, Havering received £70 million. In 2023-4, it was £2.9 million. A real reduction of £100 million per year.

The cost of Conservative policies, 2010-23, for Havering is £119 million per year. This is why Havering will probably go bankrupt.

Addendum: Conservative chancellors 2010-23 (their university degree in brackets)

George Osborne (History)
Philip Hammond (Philosophy, politics and economics)
Sajid Javid (Economics and politics)
Rishi Sunak (Philosophy, politics and economics)
Nadhim Zahawi (Chemical engineering)
Kwasi Kwartang (Classics and history)
Jeremy Hunt (Philosophy, politics and economics)

Notes

1 Havering Council balancing on the brink of bankruptcy-A ‘114’ could be issued within months. – The Havering Daily

2 Osborne was educated at private schools: George Osborne – Wikipedia

3 Council funding for taxi trips for Havering school children with special needs to cease (taxi-point.co.uk) “….reimbursement for fuel or a trip via ride-hailing service Uber would cost approximately £30 per day….disabled children will experience changes, ‘appropriate measures’ will be taken to ensure their needs are appropriately addressed.” The human cost of bankruptcy. The weakest and most vulnerable suffer first

4 The 2016 Brexit referendum ‘battle-bus’ is identical with the false claim that leaving the EU would ‘free up’ £350m a week for the NHS.

5 Inflation calculator | Bank of England

Havering’s Places Overview and Scrutiny committee, 14th September 2023

Two very contrasting items dominated this meeting. The first was a presentation by an enthusiastic officer who had a good story to tell. Ray Morgon has emphasised good communications with the public and so will be delighted to know that the call centre is putting in a stellar performance with a mere 30 second wait for response.

The perennial problem for councils is the management of voids. Here was a very good report where the housing stock has not been allowed to rot in extended periods of neglect. Mandy Anderson (32 minutes)¹ said that she’d noticed the improvement in housing maintenance in her casework.

The Green Flag Award recognises parks of a high standard. There is a great deal of civic pride involved in having 16 of Havering’s parks acknowledged in this way. The officer said 16 was the limit because of resource constraints. A spokesman for Friends of Raphaels and Lodge Park gave a presentation (51-4 mins). What was said was probably unwelcome. He felt Raphaels Park was unworthy of the honour and they’d nearly written to the Green Flag organisers to say so. For example, the grass had only been cut twice this year in June and September.²

Every councillor who contributed to this meeting spoke well.

Notes

1 Webcast Agenda for Places Overview & Scrutiny Sub Committee on Thursday, 14th September, 2023, 7.00 pm | The London Borough Of Havering All times relate to this webcast

2 David Taylor should find out what the contract for grass-cutting Raphaels park demands and see if this is a management problem or a designed failure.

Absences

Sue Ospreay, Kath Tumilty and Brian Vincent

Contenders for the coveted Damian White ‘Slacker of the Year’ Cup are four Councillors at 50% Philippa Crowder, Sarah Edwards, Robbie Misir and Christine Vickery. Current leaders for the cup are Councillors Robert Benham and Damian White at 43% attendance over six months.

Source Councillors attendance summary, 6 April 2023 – 29 September 2023 | The London Borough Of Havering

Havering’s Council Tax: The Government’s Exemption Policies

Ray Morgon uses apocalyptic language when discussing government funding. In 2010, before the Conservatives’ Age of Austerity, Havering received £70m. This was reduced to £2.9m in 2023. A £100m per year reduction when corrected for inflation.¹Religious buildings are zero rated for business rates and charity shops pay only 20%. Havering’s finances are damaged by these exemptions.

Uncosted exemptions reflect prejudices of by-gone eras.² The government imposes exemptions for religious buildings without compensation for the council.³ Voters haven’t a say as to whether they want to subsidise religions.⁴

“….belief in ‘a god’ in the UK is low. Only a quarter of Britons (27%) say they actually believe in ‘a god’. A further one in six (16%) believe in the existence of ‘a higher spiritual power’, but not ‘a god’.”⁵

As 73% of people aren’t religious, why do tax exemptions exist? It isn’t obvious why churches should get financial support from Havering.

Charities are different. Local charities command general support. St Francis Hospice is a well-loved charity in Havering. Their shops provide funds beyond normal charitable giving. Their accounts don’t acknowledge the value of the 80% business rate reduction. However, their reserves of £19.44m are helped by those reductions.⁶

Havering has had massive reductions in annual funding but can’t maximise its tax base. Government decisions about religion and charities are paid for by Havering’s taxpayers.

Notes

1 Inflation calculator | Bank of England

2 There are 110 Christian buildings in Havering which don’t pay business rates. Havering’s flagship church is St Edward’s, Romford. Its financial statement reveals the building is worth £16.24m and they have reserves of £318,000 de5291_4413260d7c764342a5681c27d3be80a8.pdf (stedwardsromford.com)

3 There are 7 charity shops on Hornchurch High Street charity shops in hornchurch – Search (bing.com) They don’t pay VAT and so have further commercial advantages. See VAT for charities: Overview – GOV.UK (www.gov.uk)

4 See Havering Council and Religious Diversity – Politics in Havering

5 How religious are British people? | YouGov

6 388190336.pdf (sfh.org.uk) See also do charities pay business rates uk – Search (bing.com)