Yesterday saw another truly successful Southwark Labour Conference - a mixture of speeches, policy making and discussion, and a chance to catch up with friends old and new.
We had great contributions from Tessa Jowell, Harriet Harman, and two of my former Deputy Leaders Susan Elan Jones and Alison McGovern who are both now Labour MPs.
Two workshops discussed the challenge facing us as a Council with our housing stock and next year's budget led by Ian Wingfield and Richard Livingstone.
The packed day concluded with presentations from each of my Cabinet colleagues on their achievements to date and greatest challenge ahead. There was spontaneous applause for Barrie Hargrove when he spoke about his introduction of food waste recycling this year, 5 years ahead of the LibDem's scheduled start date, and the plans to make Burgess Park a truly outstanding park for Southwark's residents. Ian Wingfield gave a terrific and rousing speech to end this part of the day!
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Wednesday, September 01, 2010
Labour's Leadership Election
Ballot papers have been sent out today for Labour's Leadership election. This is an historic election, the first time since 1994 that Labour members will have voted for a new Leader. So it is important that we make the right choice and elect a leader who has the experience and judgement to lead the Labour Party and the country. After some very careful thought my own choice for Leader is David Miliband. I do think he has the edge over the other candidates in terms of his experience and appeal.
All of the other candidates have real merits and qualities. Ed Miliband was a great speaker at our Southwark Borough Conference last year and has the potential to be a great Party Leader. But my view is that his time has not yet arrived.
It does look like it will be a very close contest between David and Ed. I am not sure that they would personally see their campaigns as 'New' versus 'Old' Labour - it is a shame that some of their supporters have portrayed it in this way. Both Milibands are forward-thinking politicians who have served the Labour Party well, and I have no doubt that they will continue to do so in the future. There is no doubt that whatever their differences on strategy and tactics, they both want to see the return of a Labour Government.
But on balance my view is that David has the edge in terms of who is most likely to appeal not only to Labour supporters, but to the wider electorate, and to secure a Labour election victory - whenever that election comes!
All of the other candidates have real merits and qualities. Ed Miliband was a great speaker at our Southwark Borough Conference last year and has the potential to be a great Party Leader. But my view is that his time has not yet arrived.
It does look like it will be a very close contest between David and Ed. I am not sure that they would personally see their campaigns as 'New' versus 'Old' Labour - it is a shame that some of their supporters have portrayed it in this way. Both Milibands are forward-thinking politicians who have served the Labour Party well, and I have no doubt that they will continue to do so in the future. There is no doubt that whatever their differences on strategy and tactics, they both want to see the return of a Labour Government.
But on balance my view is that David has the edge in terms of who is most likely to appeal not only to Labour supporters, but to the wider electorate, and to secure a Labour election victory - whenever that election comes!
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
IFS Slam Coalition Budget
The Institute of Fiscal Studies criticism of the Coalition Government's budget is not good news. It comes on the same day as Anatole Kaletsky heavily criticised the Government's 'macho' attitude towards making spending cuts, which he fears will send us into a disastrous recession next year.
Now pundits and 'think tanks' can be wrong, but it really does seem that people are starting to wake up to the real damage that the Coalition's budget has already done and will do in the coming months and years. The reaction of "Deputy PM" Nick Clegg was typically vacuous - will there come a time when he engages his brain before speaking on any subject?
There is a choice for this Government to make - stop the posturing cuts now and take us back into recovery in a sensible and measured way, as proposed by the last Labour Government. The risks of and actual damage which will be done if the Coalition continues as it is currently doing are simply too great. It is time some Lib Dems with a conscience started to recognise this fact.
Now pundits and 'think tanks' can be wrong, but it really does seem that people are starting to wake up to the real damage that the Coalition's budget has already done and will do in the coming months and years. The reaction of "Deputy PM" Nick Clegg was typically vacuous - will there come a time when he engages his brain before speaking on any subject?
There is a choice for this Government to make - stop the posturing cuts now and take us back into recovery in a sensible and measured way, as proposed by the last Labour Government. The risks of and actual damage which will be done if the Coalition continues as it is currently doing are simply too great. It is time some Lib Dems with a conscience started to recognise this fact.
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Maydew House
Last night the Cabinet took the decision to permanently rehouse the residents of Maydew House in order that 'Decent Homes' works can be carried out. It was not an easy decision and the length of the meeting demonstrated the consideration which we had to give to the issues raised by residents of the block and other external experts employed by the Council.
At the end of the day two factors weighed heavily on our decision. Firstly, we could not contemplate any resident or visitor to the block coming into contact with asbestos fibres displaced during the duration of the works and secondly we could not risk leaving residents living on a building site for up to two years, including losing basic services for lengthy periods during those works. However much thought and consideration goes into the project management of works such as this there are inevitably things that go wrong, and with the added difficulties which already existed in this project those further problems would make life unbearable for anyone still resident in the block.
We would not have chosen to make this decision at this time, but the previous LibDem / Tory administration had thrown the future of the block into doubt and created a level of uncertainty which was unfair on the majority of residents and needed resolution sooner rather than later.
Absolutely no decision has been made about the longer term future of the block. We want to keep all of our housing stock if possible and last night's decision has no bearing on any wider strategy. So we could see no advantage in further postponing last night's decision, despite being urged by the local MP. The reality is that unlike the local MP, who appears to be in permanent opposition whilst in Government, an Administration has to make decisions on the basis of the facts as they are presented, and not as we would wish them to be.
I know some residents will have been upset and angered by our decision. But I hope that everyone understands that we made the decision for the right reasons of health, safety and the proper living conditions of all Maydew's residents.
At the end of the day two factors weighed heavily on our decision. Firstly, we could not contemplate any resident or visitor to the block coming into contact with asbestos fibres displaced during the duration of the works and secondly we could not risk leaving residents living on a building site for up to two years, including losing basic services for lengthy periods during those works. However much thought and consideration goes into the project management of works such as this there are inevitably things that go wrong, and with the added difficulties which already existed in this project those further problems would make life unbearable for anyone still resident in the block.
We would not have chosen to make this decision at this time, but the previous LibDem / Tory administration had thrown the future of the block into doubt and created a level of uncertainty which was unfair on the majority of residents and needed resolution sooner rather than later.
Absolutely no decision has been made about the longer term future of the block. We want to keep all of our housing stock if possible and last night's decision has no bearing on any wider strategy. So we could see no advantage in further postponing last night's decision, despite being urged by the local MP. The reality is that unlike the local MP, who appears to be in permanent opposition whilst in Government, an Administration has to make decisions on the basis of the facts as they are presented, and not as we would wish them to be.
I know some residents will have been upset and angered by our decision. But I hope that everyone understands that we made the decision for the right reasons of health, safety and the proper living conditions of all Maydew's residents.
Monday, August 09, 2010
Southwark's Democracy Commission
Last week I gave evidence to Southwark's Democracy Commission about how we might improve Council Assembly in future and make it more accessible to the public. Too often our current meetings feel fairly bizarre affairs, with lots of political posturing and not much light thrown on some of the big local issues which affect us in Southwark. With some confidential information being unwisely thrown out during the course of debate by the opposition, our recent discussion of the Elephant and Castle regeneration must have seemed odd, to say the least!
Some of the questions which I posed to the Commission were (a) whether we always had to hold our meetings at Southwark Town Hall on Wednesday evenings? (b) Whether members' questions serve any valuable purpose at the present time? (c) How we make it easier for deputations and members of the public to attend and participate in our meetings? (d) Can meetings be webcast and is there the possibility for interactive questioning and participation?
We also discussed the possibility of returning some decision-making powers to Council Assembly. In opposition we were critical of the last Administration's decision to keep our borough's Housing Strategy as a Cabinet decision. It seems to me that responsibility for our housing policy should better lie with all members of the council. There may be other instances where this could be done.
The Lib Dems have a fairly long shopping-list of areas where they claim we can improve local democracy. Some of their points have a Year Zero feeling to them; it is almost as if they had not been in power for the past 8 years! It is worth remembering that the reason why Labour established the Democracy Commission was because the previous administration did everything they could to make Council Assembly a pointless meeting which they almost treated with disdain. I am confident that everyting that we do as a new administration will reverse that course.
Some of the questions which I posed to the Commission were (a) whether we always had to hold our meetings at Southwark Town Hall on Wednesday evenings? (b) Whether members' questions serve any valuable purpose at the present time? (c) How we make it easier for deputations and members of the public to attend and participate in our meetings? (d) Can meetings be webcast and is there the possibility for interactive questioning and participation?
We also discussed the possibility of returning some decision-making powers to Council Assembly. In opposition we were critical of the last Administration's decision to keep our borough's Housing Strategy as a Cabinet decision. It seems to me that responsibility for our housing policy should better lie with all members of the council. There may be other instances where this could be done.
The Lib Dems have a fairly long shopping-list of areas where they claim we can improve local democracy. Some of their points have a Year Zero feeling to them; it is almost as if they had not been in power for the past 8 years! It is worth remembering that the reason why Labour established the Democracy Commission was because the previous administration did everything they could to make Council Assembly a pointless meeting which they almost treated with disdain. I am confident that everyting that we do as a new administration will reverse that course.
Monday, August 02, 2010
Curlywurly
A word about my cat, Curlywurly, who had to be put to sleep on Friday. He was only 15 months old, but he had been diagnosed with a horrible and rapid illness. He was a real 'Whiskas' cat, had a wonderful personality and brought a lot of joy in his short life. This photo was taken by my colleague Fiona when she was cat-sitting last year!
Southwark's Town Halls
Southwark has three Town Hall buildings - one in Spa Road, Bermondsey; another on the Walworth Road and the third, Southwark Town Hall, on the Peckham Road. All of them require major capital investment in order to make them user-friendly public buildings. And when that capital of approximately £20 million has been found we need to find a real use and purpose for them, and a revenue stream for maintaining them.
Why is this important? Well, in short we are likely to be facing unprecedented cuts in funding from central government - £76 million over the next 4 years - and unless we look long and hard at everything that we are spending our money on we will be limiting our options for finding the savings which we need.
None of the buildings provide good modern office facilities for our council staff, and so the major capital investment cannot be avoided if we are to continue using them into the future. Nor can we just hand them over for public or community use without investment which is needed to make the buildings DDA compliant.
The argument for maintaining Spa Road has historically been to maintain a council 'presence' in the north of the borough. But with over 2000 council employees now working out of the council's offices at 160 Tooley Street I am not sure that this argument remains. There is certainly a "Council presence" in Bermondsey!
Walworth is a difficult building. The council chamber there is too small for Southwark's 63 member council, and it is not obvious what use we can give to it.
Southwark Town Hall houses our current Council Chamber, but I was interested (and alarmed) to hear that some of the feedback received by our Democracy Commission has already criticised the public gallery as being poor - preventing sight of many of the councillors participating in debate. If we are to meet the aspirations of opening up our local democracy to the public we need to make sure that at least they can witness our meetings! But the Town Hall represents an important presence in Camberwell, and would be sorely missed by the local community.
What is the answer to this financial and democratic conundrum? I'm not sure. But I think we are fast moving to a point where we can no longer ignore these issues or simply indulge a wish to maintain the three Town Halls just because they exist.
This is one of those issues and debates which we are bound to see more of in the next couple of years, as we are faced with increasingly difficult financial options. Let me know if you have any thoughts.
Why is this important? Well, in short we are likely to be facing unprecedented cuts in funding from central government - £76 million over the next 4 years - and unless we look long and hard at everything that we are spending our money on we will be limiting our options for finding the savings which we need.
None of the buildings provide good modern office facilities for our council staff, and so the major capital investment cannot be avoided if we are to continue using them into the future. Nor can we just hand them over for public or community use without investment which is needed to make the buildings DDA compliant.
The argument for maintaining Spa Road has historically been to maintain a council 'presence' in the north of the borough. But with over 2000 council employees now working out of the council's offices at 160 Tooley Street I am not sure that this argument remains. There is certainly a "Council presence" in Bermondsey!
Walworth is a difficult building. The council chamber there is too small for Southwark's 63 member council, and it is not obvious what use we can give to it.
Southwark Town Hall houses our current Council Chamber, but I was interested (and alarmed) to hear that some of the feedback received by our Democracy Commission has already criticised the public gallery as being poor - preventing sight of many of the councillors participating in debate. If we are to meet the aspirations of opening up our local democracy to the public we need to make sure that at least they can witness our meetings! But the Town Hall represents an important presence in Camberwell, and would be sorely missed by the local community.
What is the answer to this financial and democratic conundrum? I'm not sure. But I think we are fast moving to a point where we can no longer ignore these issues or simply indulge a wish to maintain the three Town Halls just because they exist.
This is one of those issues and debates which we are bound to see more of in the next couple of years, as we are faced with increasingly difficult financial options. Let me know if you have any thoughts.
A Progress Report
So we are now 75 days into Southwark's Labour Administration and it is worth taking stock of what we have achieved and what programmes we have started.
We have signed two major regeneration deals which had been progressing at a snails-pace under the last administration. At the Elephant and Castle we will see the major redevelopment of an area of Central London, and at Potters Field next to Tower Bridge we will see the completion of the regeneration of this part of our riverside.
We have cut Councillors allowances by over £70,000 - reversing the increases which the previous administration introduced over the past 4 years.
We have saved the green spaces at Nursery Row Park and Brayard's Green, which had been under threat from developers and the last administration.
And we have made it harder for the Council to employ external consultants - just last year Southwark spent over £12 million on consultants. We simply cannot afford to do that at a time when we are facing huge budget cuts from central government.
We are already looking at options to introduce our Free Healthy School Meals policy and in order to meet our pledge to make every council home warm, dry and safe. There is still a long way to go, but we are pushing ahead with our Labour programme to bring a fairer future for all in Southwark.
We have signed two major regeneration deals which had been progressing at a snails-pace under the last administration. At the Elephant and Castle we will see the major redevelopment of an area of Central London, and at Potters Field next to Tower Bridge we will see the completion of the regeneration of this part of our riverside.
We have cut Councillors allowances by over £70,000 - reversing the increases which the previous administration introduced over the past 4 years.
We have saved the green spaces at Nursery Row Park and Brayard's Green, which had been under threat from developers and the last administration.
And we have made it harder for the Council to employ external consultants - just last year Southwark spent over £12 million on consultants. We simply cannot afford to do that at a time when we are facing huge budget cuts from central government.
We are already looking at options to introduce our Free Healthy School Meals policy and in order to meet our pledge to make every council home warm, dry and safe. There is still a long way to go, but we are pushing ahead with our Labour programme to bring a fairer future for all in Southwark.
Monday, July 19, 2010
Southwark Trades Union Council
This evening I spoke at a meeting of the Southwark Trades Union Council. It is safe to say that I had a frank exchange of views with some of those present at the meeting who appeared to have mistaken me for George Osborne! But I suppose that some may argue that being harangued and heckled by Ted Knight is a sign of political arrival.
With absolute justification many of those present at the meeting are worried about the budget cuts which are coming - and the impact they will have on their jobs, homes, health and aspirations. We have already seen the loss of the Building Schools for the Future budget in most local authorities, and there is worse to come.
Although there are strong arguments to be made against these budget cuts I have to be realistic about the decisions which I make as Council Leader. I don't have the luxury of dealing with imaginary and non- existent budgets and will have to deal with the reality of the sums passed to us by the Coalition Government. So I say to those who oppose any cuts and choose not to accept any reality whatever it may be - I will oppose and argue against any cuts unless and until they come, but I will do nothing which jeopardises the council's ability to provide the best services which it can to those who are most reliant upon those services.
With absolute justification many of those present at the meeting are worried about the budget cuts which are coming - and the impact they will have on their jobs, homes, health and aspirations. We have already seen the loss of the Building Schools for the Future budget in most local authorities, and there is worse to come.
Although there are strong arguments to be made against these budget cuts I have to be realistic about the decisions which I make as Council Leader. I don't have the luxury of dealing with imaginary and non- existent budgets and will have to deal with the reality of the sums passed to us by the Coalition Government. So I say to those who oppose any cuts and choose not to accept any reality whatever it may be - I will oppose and argue against any cuts unless and until they come, but I will do nothing which jeopardises the council's ability to provide the best services which it can to those who are most reliant upon those services.
Monday, July 12, 2010
A Deal on the Elephant and Castle
Last Wednesday Southwark's Cabinet took the decision to enter into a Regeneration Agreement with Lend Lease to redevelop the Elephant and Castle - a £1.5 billion 15 year project which will transform this part of South London.
In November the previous administration had entered into a Heads of Terms with Lend Lease, but those failed to include any mention of affordable housing, the shopping centre or any leisure facilities. In the 8 weeks since we took office all of these issues have been addressed. We now have a minimum guarantee of at least 25% affordable housing on the site; the shopping centre will be the subject of a compulsory purchase order if no deal can be reached between Lend Lease and St Modwens (the shopping centre owner) and there will be a new leisure centre on the site of the current leisure centre.
In obtaining a guarantee on affordable housing we have had to lose some guaranteed profit which would have come to the Council in 15 years time. We thought this was the right choice to make, as it reflects our political priorities for the Elephant and Castle to be a truly mixed community.
Amazingly the Liberal Democrats have opposed the deal! Despite the fact that they failed to progress the deal during their 8 years in office - 8 years of dither and delay - they now appear to think that it would have been preferable to have no guarantee of affordable housing.
Labour pledged to move forward with the regeneration of the borough, and the Elephant and Castle is crucial to that objective. It is a deal I am proud of and I am confident it will be one of many regeneration projects which we see in Southwark over the next four years.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Busy Times!
So the first month as Leader of the Council has been incredibly busy - nearly every day has meetings starting at 8 and running through to at least 8 in the evening!
But there is a lot to learn about projects which the Council is involved with; and innumerable people who want to speak to myself and the new Cabinet about the role which they might play in taking those projects forward.
Tomorrow we will have our first Cabinet meeting, and one of the first decisions which we will be taking is to agree our 'Vision for Southwark' over the next four years. This is more than just signing off our manifesto commitments, but will also provide us with a narrative about how we want to change Southwark and make the Council a more efficient body.
As well as fostering innovation and imagination, I want us to get to a point where everyone within the the council deals with council money as if it were their own; and with every member of the public as if they were a valued member of the family. If we all operate with these two thoughts in mind I have no doubt that we can deliver more efficient services for our residents.
And in South Camberwell the work goes on! We re-start our mobile surgery programme in a couple of weeks time, and just yesterday Veronica, Stephen and myself welcomed the new floral/plant dog to the top of Dog Kennel Hill! We're hoping that local people might be able to name the dog over the next few weeks. It is a very imaginative creation, and brightens up the planting at the top of the hill as people wait at the traffic lights.
But there is a lot to learn about projects which the Council is involved with; and innumerable people who want to speak to myself and the new Cabinet about the role which they might play in taking those projects forward.
Tomorrow we will have our first Cabinet meeting, and one of the first decisions which we will be taking is to agree our 'Vision for Southwark' over the next four years. This is more than just signing off our manifesto commitments, but will also provide us with a narrative about how we want to change Southwark and make the Council a more efficient body.
As well as fostering innovation and imagination, I want us to get to a point where everyone within the the council deals with council money as if it were their own; and with every member of the public as if they were a valued member of the family. If we all operate with these two thoughts in mind I have no doubt that we can deliver more efficient services for our residents.
And in South Camberwell the work goes on! We re-start our mobile surgery programme in a couple of weeks time, and just yesterday Veronica, Stephen and myself welcomed the new floral/plant dog to the top of Dog Kennel Hill! We're hoping that local people might be able to name the dog over the next few weeks. It is a very imaginative creation, and brightens up the planting at the top of the hill as people wait at the traffic lights.
Friday, May 21, 2010
Leader of the Council
On Wednesday night I was privileged to have been elected as Leader of the Council. On the same night I appointed my Cabinet for the forthcoming year. We have many challenges ahead as we try to implement a positive programme of change for our borough against a background of threatened "savage cuts" to public services from the coalition government.
Some of the immediate challenges which we face include the terms on which we enter into any deal for the regeneration of the Elephant and Castle; making every council home warm, dry and safe, and finding funding so that we can implement our pledge to introduce free healthy school meals for all primary school children in the borough.
You can read more on the Southwark council website at southwark.gov.uk
Some of the immediate challenges which we face include the terms on which we enter into any deal for the regeneration of the Elephant and Castle; making every council home warm, dry and safe, and finding funding so that we can implement our pledge to introduce free healthy school meals for all primary school children in the borough.
You can read more on the Southwark council website at southwark.gov.uk
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
Labour Win Southwark!
Labour won the council elections which took place last Thursday! After 8 years of Lib Dem / Tory rule we picked up 7 seats to end the elections with 35 councillors; the Lib Dems went down to 25 and the Tories were left with just 3.
If you've been reading my blog over the past few months you will know how frustrated I have been with some of the Lib Dem's campaigning - and in particular their deliberate distortions of what we have been saying.
Well it looks as if Labour's very positive message won the day - and the negative campaign of the Lib Dems was rejected.
Why did we win so well? In the north and middle of the borough I believe that voters were passing a judgment on the council and choosing between the competing policies and pledges. Whilst Simon Hughes' vote went up in Bermondsey and Old Southwark, voters chose to vote Labour in the local elections in the same constituency.
In College Ward in the south of the borough it does seem as if the Tories were squeezed by the fact that the local elections were taking place on the same day as the general election.
In South Camberwell our 4 years of work and campaigning paid off and we won all 3 seats. I am delighted that Cllr Stephen Govier will now be joining Veronica and I on the Labour benches in the Town Hall!
And the victory means that I am now the Leader-elect of the Council! A slightly daunting and humbling prospect, but one which I am really looking forward to, and a role in which I intend to deliver on Labour's manifesto pledges and priorities.
A big thank you to all the residents of South Camberwell who voted Labour on May 6th. We will not let you down!
Thursday, April 29, 2010
Why do the Lib Dems Lie?
Today an advert appears in Southwark News promoting Simon Hughes and his colleagues. In the small print of the advert allegations are made about Labour wanting to move services to Brixton Town Hall and Labour's plans to introduce an Arms Length Management Organisation ('ALMO') to manage Southwark's housing stock.
Both of these allegations are lies. On the first the Lib Dems have chosen to deliberately twist a perfectly reasonable proposal to try and cut waste and back-office costs across two boroughs. As I have said before, the Lib Dems have no positive proposals about how they are going to try and deal with the difficult financial times ahead, but they are happy to attack anyone who has!
On the second, I have no idea where the allegation comes from! It is simply made up. Purely and simply - a lie, an untruth.
Not even Simon Hughes beleives it. On 7th April 2010 in a Parliamentary debate on housing he said this:
"There are currently four parties on the council: there are councillors from the Liberal Democrats, Labour and Conservatives, along with one Green councillor. All those parties in Southwark have always supported the view that the council should retain control of its housing stock and not divest itself of that stock."
That remains the case today. As the Lib Dems well know.
So why does Mr Hughes deliberately try to mislead voters now. It is pathetic politics and he should be ashamed of himself for being party to it.
UPDATE
Peckham Rye candidates report that Lib Dems in that ward are telling Labour voters that there are no Labour candidates standing in the elections - so they have to vote Lib Dem! You make your minds up - does it sound like new 'breaking the mould' politics to you?!
Both of these allegations are lies. On the first the Lib Dems have chosen to deliberately twist a perfectly reasonable proposal to try and cut waste and back-office costs across two boroughs. As I have said before, the Lib Dems have no positive proposals about how they are going to try and deal with the difficult financial times ahead, but they are happy to attack anyone who has!
On the second, I have no idea where the allegation comes from! It is simply made up. Purely and simply - a lie, an untruth.
Not even Simon Hughes beleives it. On 7th April 2010 in a Parliamentary debate on housing he said this:
"There are currently four parties on the council: there are councillors from the Liberal Democrats, Labour and Conservatives, along with one Green councillor. All those parties in Southwark have always supported the view that the council should retain control of its housing stock and not divest itself of that stock."
That remains the case today. As the Lib Dems well know.
So why does Mr Hughes deliberately try to mislead voters now. It is pathetic politics and he should be ashamed of himself for being party to it.
UPDATE
Peckham Rye candidates report that Lib Dems in that ward are telling Labour voters that there are no Labour candidates standing in the elections - so they have to vote Lib Dem! You make your minds up - does it sound like new 'breaking the mould' politics to you?!
"Bigotgate"
I doubt that there is any politician - or even political activist - who hasn't walked away from a door they have just canvassed or a voter that they have tried to persuade and made a wry or dubious comment to a colleague about the voters' true voting intentions or views. And I doubt that there are many people who can honestly say that they have never said anything out of earshot about a friend, family member, colleague or acquaintance which they would not want to say to that person's face!
So just think how horrific it must be if those private words were repeated back to the other person. How would you feel? Horrifed? Embarrassed? And if the words you used were excessive - the horror and embarrassment must be so much greater. And what would you think of the person who had gone back and repeated your words?
So it must have been great fun for the media yesterday to report to Gillian Duffy what Gordon Brown had said about her. I don't suppose for a moment they thought about the hurt they might cause to her - no doubt they were just interested in landing the Prime Minister in a whole load of trouble.
Of course in a perfect world nobody says anything about anybody else behind their back which is disrepectful or hurtful. But we do not live in a perfect world. We live in a world where human beings act in a human way and make mistakes.
So I just think that this is a story about human nature - which has hurt and embarrassed everyone involved.
But does it make me think that Gordon Brown has got the big decisions about the economy wrong over the past 2 years? Or that his knowledge and experience are not the best on offer for the future of our economy as we emerge from this recession? No, not at all. At the end of the day it is the decisions on the big issues which matter. And Gordon Brown has got those right.
So just think how horrific it must be if those private words were repeated back to the other person. How would you feel? Horrifed? Embarrassed? And if the words you used were excessive - the horror and embarrassment must be so much greater. And what would you think of the person who had gone back and repeated your words?
So it must have been great fun for the media yesterday to report to Gillian Duffy what Gordon Brown had said about her. I don't suppose for a moment they thought about the hurt they might cause to her - no doubt they were just interested in landing the Prime Minister in a whole load of trouble.
Of course in a perfect world nobody says anything about anybody else behind their back which is disrepectful or hurtful. But we do not live in a perfect world. We live in a world where human beings act in a human way and make mistakes.
So I just think that this is a story about human nature - which has hurt and embarrassed everyone involved.
But does it make me think that Gordon Brown has got the big decisions about the economy wrong over the past 2 years? Or that his knowledge and experience are not the best on offer for the future of our economy as we emerge from this recession? No, not at all. At the end of the day it is the decisions on the big issues which matter. And Gordon Brown has got those right.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
East Dulwich Estate Hustings Meeting
The East Dulwich Estate Tenants and Residents Association organises a local election Hustings Meeting every four years and invites all parties to send a speaker. Last night I was joined by Oliver Wooler, one of the Tory candiates for South Camberwell, and Jenny Jones, a Green Party candidate, for a good debate on some of the issues and challenges facing us.
It was clear from the questions put to us that people on the East Dulwich Estate are really dissatisfied with the housing management service in Southwark. Labour has already pledged to reintroduce a Strategic Director of Housing and have a clear management structure re-imposed on this failing department.
But I thought it was really telling that despite numerous e-mails to their Group Leader, the Lib Dems chose to send no one to represent them at the Hustings. It just shows how little they care about South Camberwell ward and Camberwell in general.
It was clear from the questions put to us that people on the East Dulwich Estate are really dissatisfied with the housing management service in Southwark. Labour has already pledged to reintroduce a Strategic Director of Housing and have a clear management structure re-imposed on this failing department.
But I thought it was really telling that despite numerous e-mails to their Group Leader, the Lib Dems chose to send no one to represent them at the Hustings. It just shows how little they care about South Camberwell ward and Camberwell in general.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
A Reality Check!
Before anyone gets too carried away with the idea of Saintly Nick Clegg and the Lib Dems providing the answers to all of our political ills, it is worth just remembering a few facts about the Lib Dems record here in Southwark. After all, they have been "breaking the mould" by running things here since 2002!
1. We now have the worst run council in inner-London. That's not just my verdict, it is the verdict of the Audit Commission.
http://oneplace.direct.gov.uk/infobyarea/region/area/localorganisations/organisation/pages/default.aspx?region=51&area=437&orgId=1677
(Southwark is rated as 'adequate' - all other Inner London boroughs judged to be performing 'well' ore 'excellently')
2. We have the 3rd worst council tax collection rate in the country - over £7 million goes uncollected each year. In the rest of the country they would collect at least another £5 million!
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/12641872.xls
3. Our recycling rate is the 6th worst in the country. See the story below!
http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/wastats/archive/mwb200809a.xls
4. Our adult social care service has fallen from an excellent rating to being one of the 8 worst in the country - again, not just my view, but the view of the independent CQC watchdog.
http://www.cqc.org.uk/_db/_documents/southwark_APA_report_2009.pdf
5. Our housing service has been red flagged by the Audit Commission - they don't think the council is capable of bringing our council housing up to an acceptable standard with the plans currently in place. This is a truly damning indictment for the second largest landlord in the country - with 18,000 unfit homes.
http://oneplace.direct.gov.uk/infobyarea/region/area/areaassessment/pages/localpriority.aspx?region=51&area=437&priority=4065
6. We have the highest levels of childhood obesity in England.
http://www.sepho.nhs.uk/NOOe-atlas/childPCTsingle/atlas.html?indicator=i9&date=2008/09
And after 8 years in charge the Lib Dem Council Leader says Southwark should be treated like a country in the developing world! [South London Press - 16th April 2010]
This is not "a new politics". It is a real demonstration that the Lib Dems in charge of Southwark have made things worse and not better.
So don't get drawn in by any media hype or imagine that Mr Clegg and his party offer some politial utopia. We have seen them in charge in Southwark for 8 years - and the reality is terrible!
1. We now have the worst run council in inner-London. That's not just my verdict, it is the verdict of the Audit Commission.
http://oneplace.direct.gov.uk/infobyarea/region/area/localorganisations/organisation/pages/default.aspx?region=51&area=437&orgId=1677
(Southwark is rated as 'adequate' - all other Inner London boroughs judged to be performing 'well' ore 'excellently')
2. We have the 3rd worst council tax collection rate in the country - over £7 million goes uncollected each year. In the rest of the country they would collect at least another £5 million!
http://www.communities.gov.uk/documents/statistics/xls/12641872.xls
3. Our recycling rate is the 6th worst in the country. See the story below!
http://www.defra.gov.uk/evidence/statistics/environment/wastats/archive/mwb200809a.xls
4. Our adult social care service has fallen from an excellent rating to being one of the 8 worst in the country - again, not just my view, but the view of the independent CQC watchdog.
http://www.cqc.org.uk/_db/_documents/southwark_APA_report_2009.pdf
5. Our housing service has been red flagged by the Audit Commission - they don't think the council is capable of bringing our council housing up to an acceptable standard with the plans currently in place. This is a truly damning indictment for the second largest landlord in the country - with 18,000 unfit homes.
http://oneplace.direct.gov.uk/infobyarea/region/area/areaassessment/pages/localpriority.aspx?region=51&area=437&priority=4065
6. We have the highest levels of childhood obesity in England.
http://www.sepho.nhs.uk/NOOe-atlas/childPCTsingle/atlas.html?indicator=i9&date=2008/09
And after 8 years in charge the Lib Dem Council Leader says Southwark should be treated like a country in the developing world! [South London Press - 16th April 2010]
This is not "a new politics". It is a real demonstration that the Lib Dems in charge of Southwark have made things worse and not better.
So don't get drawn in by any media hype or imagine that Mr Clegg and his party offer some politial utopia. We have seen them in charge in Southwark for 8 years - and the reality is terrible!
Monday, April 19, 2010
Southwark Labour's Manifesto
If you haven't already received a hard copy of Southwark Labour's manifesto, you can read it online here
I am really proud of our positive commitments and pledges for the next four years.
Labour's Pledge to Double Recycling
In the local election campaign here in Southwark Labour has pledged to double recycling. The last full year figures showed recycling had reached 21% in Southwark - so our pledge means that we will take it to 42%.
The national average last year was nearly 38%, up from 22.5% four years before. That's an increase of 15.5%. In contrast Southwark has only increased its' recycling rate by less than 10% in the same period. So not only are we far behind the national average, we are not keeping pace with the national rate of improvement.
We can do far more to make recycling easier, by offering food recycling; by recycling tetra-pak; and just by increasing the range of items which can be doorstep recycled. As a flat-dweller I know that it has been difficult to recycle in Southwark - even when you want to.
In contrast to Labour's clear pledge, the ruling Lib Dems are pledging to make the borugh's recycling rate more than ten times the rate achieved under Labour. I'm not sure what that means, but I'm guessing that it's a pledge to increase recycling to between 30% and 40%. In 2006 the Libs promised to increase recycling to 30%, but they have fallen way short. They appear to be apologists for the contractors Veolia, and once again do not demonstrate any leadership or passion on this subject.
They need to understand that in order to make things happen you need to show political leadership, even if that involves making tough decisions. But I know that in Southwark recycling is a clear priority, and a Labour Council will deliver on its' pledge.
The national average last year was nearly 38%, up from 22.5% four years before. That's an increase of 15.5%. In contrast Southwark has only increased its' recycling rate by less than 10% in the same period. So not only are we far behind the national average, we are not keeping pace with the national rate of improvement.
We can do far more to make recycling easier, by offering food recycling; by recycling tetra-pak; and just by increasing the range of items which can be doorstep recycled. As a flat-dweller I know that it has been difficult to recycle in Southwark - even when you want to.
In contrast to Labour's clear pledge, the ruling Lib Dems are pledging to make the borugh's recycling rate more than ten times the rate achieved under Labour. I'm not sure what that means, but I'm guessing that it's a pledge to increase recycling to between 30% and 40%. In 2006 the Libs promised to increase recycling to 30%, but they have fallen way short. They appear to be apologists for the contractors Veolia, and once again do not demonstrate any leadership or passion on this subject.
They need to understand that in order to make things happen you need to show political leadership, even if that involves making tough decisions. But I know that in Southwark recycling is a clear priority, and a Labour Council will deliver on its' pledge.
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
The Road Ahead
I've just been catching up with last night's Labour election broadcast - it's well worth a look here
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
