Since I last posted a blog here. Apologies to my many readers (Cllr K Humphries of College Ward!).
So what has been going on? Well we had another Council Assembly last week which was interesting for two reasons. Firstly, despite protests from Cllr Richard "Never Surrender" Thomas that East Dulwich would never be designated as 'Urban' for the purposes of Southwark's Unitary Development Plan, every member of Council Assembly (including Cllr Thomas) voted on Wednesday to designate East Dulwich and other areas including Rotherhithe and parts of Nunhead as erm, 'Urban'! It's not as bad as it sounds - Southwark has decided to adopt the Mayor of London's 'London Plan' densities for these areas which means in technical terms that whereas Southwark had been arguing with central government of densities in these "suburban" areas of 200 - 350 habitable rooms per hectare, we will now operate on an "urban" range of 200 to 450. In fact, this compromise will mean lower densities for certain areas.
This is a perfectly sensible way forward, and could have been adopted since last May. My colleague Cllr Gordon Nardell proposed such a solution a month ago, only to be told by Cllr Thomas that it was impossible. I just think that for the sake of trying to rubbish the Government and create an atmosphere of fear amongst his constituents, Cllr Thomas has ended up looking rather foolish.
Secondly, clear cracks began to appear in the LibDem group, with one member abstaining on a vote concerning additional changing facilities on Peckham Rye for the Carrib Football Club. Carrib have up to 12 teams of young people from right across Southwark playing football on Peckham Rye each weekend. But the changing facilties the Council currently provides are lamentable, and additonal temporary facilities are required. Local councillors had worked hard with officers to reach a compromise, only to have the carpet pulled out from under their feet by the Executive member for Culture and Sport, Cllr Lorraine Zuleta. At the meeting, following a brilliant deputation from several young Carrib FC players, Cllr Zuleta proposed a motion which required Nunhead and Peckham Rye to find the funding for the changing facilities. This completely misses the point that the club is serving the whole of Southwark, and that giving young people such valuable out-of-school activity meets so many of the targets which the Council should have for tackling crime and anti-social behaviour! And whereas Southwark has an overall budget of over £1 billion, Nunhead & Peckham Rye councillors administer just over £250,000 per year in their over-subscribed Cleaner, Greener and Safer budget.
Cllr Zuleta completely misjudged this issue, and it is no surprise to hear that she may be banished to the backbenches in May.
In any event, Nunhead and Peckham Rye councillors have risen to the challenge and agreed to meet the costs of the changing facilities from their very limited Cleaner, Greener and Safer budget. Together with my colleagues, Cllrs Smith and Friary, I have written to the Chairs of all the other Community Councils asking for them to make a contribution. So far we have received positive responses from five Community Council Chairs, including one Liberal Democrat. This just proves that when it is so glaringly obvious that a problem should be solved, backbench councillors will find a way, even if the highly paid Executive will not.
Monday, April 02, 2007
Thursday, February 22, 2007
Tories and LibDems Vote for Inflation-Busting Council Tax Increase!
Last night's Council Assembly setting the budget for the coming financial year resulted in an inflation-busting 3.9% increase in council tax for Southwark residents. The Tories and Liberals both voted for the rise, which breaks the Tories pre-election promise to keep any increase in council tax below inflation. The Tory Leader and gimmick-master in chief, Kim Humphreys, justified his broken promise on the basis that 3.9% was the current rate of inflation for something somewhere! The rate which is used by the Bank of England when considering interest rates and even Southwark Council itself when setting wage increases is the Consumer Price Index (CPI) which is currently running at 2.7%. But who needs to worry about details like that when you are in power?!
In line with our election pledge last year the Labour Group proposed a budget amendment which would have resulted in an increase of....2.7%. We were also able to pledge free swimming for under-16s in Southwark; funding for 50 new Police Community Support Officers; an extra £150,000 for our community nurseries and an extra £100,000 for youth services. All worthwhile programmes we believe, but rejected by the Tory/LibDem coalition.
Council Assemblies are truly becoming lessons in arrogance by the chaotic coalition of Tories and LibDems. On at least 2 occasions last night they seemed to get bored and irritated that Labour wanted to debate important issues facing the borough and moved procedural motions to bring all debate to an end. Perhaps the most amazing and self-defeating move by Cllrs Humphreys and Stanton came as we moved to appoint a Chair and Vice-Chair of the newly established Audit Committee. This Committee will have an important scrutiny-type function, and the Labour Group thought that it would be sensible for it to be chaired by an opposition councillor. This view was rejected by the Tories and LibDems who appointed Cllr James Gurling to the post.
However, in a move which can only be described as an arrogant stunt, Cllr Humphreys proceeded to nominate his colleague Cllr Lewis Robinson as Vice Chair. The ever obedient Cllr Stanton seconded the nomination. Both had failed to consult the hapless Cllr Robinson who, having been elected, felt obliged to withdraw from the post in order to allow Labour's Richard Livingstone to be elected.
The behaviour of Cllrs Humphreys and Stanton led one of my colleagues to describe them as acting like "arrogant public schoolboys". As a Comprehensive schoolboy myself I cannot comment - but for the time being their near silent backbenchers let them get away with it.
Finally it is worth noting that as part of our budget proposals we sought to cut councillors special responsibility allowances by 10%. Unsurprisingly this was rejected - but even if the cut had taken effect Cllr Stanton would have still been receiving nearly £3,000 more than the Labour Leader of Lambeth Council. As it is, he retains a healthy £8,000 cushion over our neighbouring borough's leader. I wonder what his Lambeth LibDem colleagues think about that?!
In line with our election pledge last year the Labour Group proposed a budget amendment which would have resulted in an increase of....2.7%. We were also able to pledge free swimming for under-16s in Southwark; funding for 50 new Police Community Support Officers; an extra £150,000 for our community nurseries and an extra £100,000 for youth services. All worthwhile programmes we believe, but rejected by the Tory/LibDem coalition.
Council Assemblies are truly becoming lessons in arrogance by the chaotic coalition of Tories and LibDems. On at least 2 occasions last night they seemed to get bored and irritated that Labour wanted to debate important issues facing the borough and moved procedural motions to bring all debate to an end. Perhaps the most amazing and self-defeating move by Cllrs Humphreys and Stanton came as we moved to appoint a Chair and Vice-Chair of the newly established Audit Committee. This Committee will have an important scrutiny-type function, and the Labour Group thought that it would be sensible for it to be chaired by an opposition councillor. This view was rejected by the Tories and LibDems who appointed Cllr James Gurling to the post.
However, in a move which can only be described as an arrogant stunt, Cllr Humphreys proceeded to nominate his colleague Cllr Lewis Robinson as Vice Chair. The ever obedient Cllr Stanton seconded the nomination. Both had failed to consult the hapless Cllr Robinson who, having been elected, felt obliged to withdraw from the post in order to allow Labour's Richard Livingstone to be elected.
The behaviour of Cllrs Humphreys and Stanton led one of my colleagues to describe them as acting like "arrogant public schoolboys". As a Comprehensive schoolboy myself I cannot comment - but for the time being their near silent backbenchers let them get away with it.
Finally it is worth noting that as part of our budget proposals we sought to cut councillors special responsibility allowances by 10%. Unsurprisingly this was rejected - but even if the cut had taken effect Cllr Stanton would have still been receiving nearly £3,000 more than the Labour Leader of Lambeth Council. As it is, he retains a healthy £8,000 cushion over our neighbouring borough's leader. I wonder what his Lambeth LibDem colleagues think about that?!
Tuesday, February 13, 2007
Peckham Public Meeting
Last night I attended the Public Meeting which had been called to discuss the 3 recent murders in Peckham including that of 21 year old Javorie Crighton and 15 year old Michael Dosunmu. The meeting room was full to capacity with many people standing outside the building trying to get in. Apart from the many community leaders who attended, including Harriet Harman MP and Malcolm Tillyer the Borough Police Commander, many local residents came to the meeting in order to express their shock, anger and unity in the face of these awful crimes.
Although I had to leave before the meeting had ended, there were several thoughtful contributions from residents who expressed the view that young people needed real support at home from their families - the alternative was getting support within the culture of a gang.
I suppose that in an ideal world every child would find all the support and comfort which they need within a loving family. But we know that for too many young people that support does not exist. So that is why outside bodies - such as schools, or the council, or community groups, must try and step in to provide that support. It is a difficult job, but not impossible.
Others spoke of the need for positive role models for young men in Peckham. Looking around the room last night I could see many positive role models - not just those who have achieved sporting success such as Anton Ferdinand and Lloyd Honeghan, but those other members of our community who work hard in difficult jobs to make their homes and our area a better place.
It was right last night to remember the three recent victims of those horrific crimes and their families - but it is also always right to remember the unreported good news that is going on day in and day out in Peckham and right across Southwark.
Although I had to leave before the meeting had ended, there were several thoughtful contributions from residents who expressed the view that young people needed real support at home from their families - the alternative was getting support within the culture of a gang.
I suppose that in an ideal world every child would find all the support and comfort which they need within a loving family. But we know that for too many young people that support does not exist. So that is why outside bodies - such as schools, or the council, or community groups, must try and step in to provide that support. It is a difficult job, but not impossible.
Others spoke of the need for positive role models for young men in Peckham. Looking around the room last night I could see many positive role models - not just those who have achieved sporting success such as Anton Ferdinand and Lloyd Honeghan, but those other members of our community who work hard in difficult jobs to make their homes and our area a better place.
It was right last night to remember the three recent victims of those horrific crimes and their families - but it is also always right to remember the unreported good news that is going on day in and day out in Peckham and right across Southwark.
Monday, February 12, 2007
Champion Hill Estate
Over the weekend Veronica and I visited Champion Hill Estate as part of our Mobile Surgery programme. Some of the problems which have arisen on previous visits seem to have subsided, although some residents of Leconfield House still complained about gangs of youths congregating outside the entrance to their block. Although the youtha may not mean to cause any distress, they can appear to be intimidating to people who walk by. I hope that some intervention by our Safer Neighbourhood Team will sort this problem out.
We took time to visit the playground on the Estate which has been awarded £50,000 from Camberwell's Cleaner Greener Safer budget. It is in real need of an overhaul so I hope that work will start here soon.
And the problems caused by the "too big block" (See June 14th 2006) continue to frustrate residents. The Council complaints system is currently dealing with the various applications by residents - so we await with interest to see what compensation those residents who have been affected by the block receive.
We took time to visit the playground on the Estate which has been awarded £50,000 from Camberwell's Cleaner Greener Safer budget. It is in real need of an overhaul so I hope that work will start here soon.
And the problems caused by the "too big block" (See June 14th 2006) continue to frustrate residents. The Council complaints system is currently dealing with the various applications by residents - so we await with interest to see what compensation those residents who have been affected by the block receive.
Camberwell Leisure Centre
Last year during the local elections campaign I made a pledge on behalf of the Labour Party in Southwark that we would invest the necessary £6 million in Camberwell Leisure Centre. The LibDems attempted to trump this promise by pledging that they would make every leisure centre in the borough fit for the 21st Century and brought their Leader, Menzies Campbell, to Camberwell Leisure Centre to underline their commitment.
On present evidence it looks as if they are certain to break their promise tomorrow and condemn Camberwell Leisure Centre to more years of decay and uncertainty. Out of a capital pot of £12.5 million, just £1 million may go to Camberwell, with £5 million going to Dulwich Baths. £1 million may ensure that Camberwell Leisure Centre meets some basic health and safety requirements, but it will not make the Leisure Centre fit for the 21st Century.
And the reason why Camberwell gets £1 million and uncertainty, and Dulwich gets £5 million? Pure politics. The decision may be dressed up in some argument about the respective "business cases", but at the end of the day Dulwich Baths is in LibDem East Dulwich whilst Camberwell Leisure Centre is in Labour Camberwell Green. As one prominent LibDem backbencher has put it, "There are no votes in Camberwell for us."
Camberwell Leisure Centre serves the 24,000 residents of Camberwell as well as numerous schools in the area, and the argument for better leisure facilities is unarguable. Improved leisure facilities are essential for all sections of the community - particularly the young people of Camberwell who have brought deputations to our Community Council asking for the Lesiure Centre to be brought up-to-date.
It's not too late for the Council's Tory/LibDem Executive to change its mind - they make their final decision tomorrow (13th February) at 7pm at the Town Hall. If you are interested in the future of the Leisure Centre please come along to lobby the Executive.
On present evidence it looks as if they are certain to break their promise tomorrow and condemn Camberwell Leisure Centre to more years of decay and uncertainty. Out of a capital pot of £12.5 million, just £1 million may go to Camberwell, with £5 million going to Dulwich Baths. £1 million may ensure that Camberwell Leisure Centre meets some basic health and safety requirements, but it will not make the Leisure Centre fit for the 21st Century.
And the reason why Camberwell gets £1 million and uncertainty, and Dulwich gets £5 million? Pure politics. The decision may be dressed up in some argument about the respective "business cases", but at the end of the day Dulwich Baths is in LibDem East Dulwich whilst Camberwell Leisure Centre is in Labour Camberwell Green. As one prominent LibDem backbencher has put it, "There are no votes in Camberwell for us."
Camberwell Leisure Centre serves the 24,000 residents of Camberwell as well as numerous schools in the area, and the argument for better leisure facilities is unarguable. Improved leisure facilities are essential for all sections of the community - particularly the young people of Camberwell who have brought deputations to our Community Council asking for the Lesiure Centre to be brought up-to-date.
It's not too late for the Council's Tory/LibDem Executive to change its mind - they make their final decision tomorrow (13th February) at 7pm at the Town Hall. If you are interested in the future of the Leisure Centre please come along to lobby the Executive.
Thursday, February 08, 2007
Harriet's New Website Launched
.jpg)
Last week Harriet Harman, the MP for Camberwell and Peckham, launched her new website at the House of Commons. You can find Harriet's updated site at http://www.harrietharman.org/
Harriet is still the only woman who has officially declared that she is seeking to become Labour's next Deputy Leader, although others remain in the wings.
Harriet is a great representative for Camberwell and Peckham and has taken the lead on so many issues which affect the lives of working people. South Camberwell will become part of her constituency at the next General Election.
I hope that Harriet's bid to become Deputy Leader is successful. She has shown time and again what a great campaigner she is and has been a great support to Southwark's Labour Group.
Monday, January 29, 2007
Another Council Assembly
Last Wednesday saw the first Council Assembly of 2007 - and as I have not posted for over a month it seems appropriate to catch up with events from that evening.
Three deputations raised important issues about services in our community from violent crime to post office closures. Residents from Camberwell came to address Council Assembly about their fears for the increase of violent crime in the area. Camberwell Community Council Chair Ian Wingfield proposed an excellent motion following the deputation which called on the Council to publish its Violent Crime Strategy. Although there appear to be a number of action plans in place there is currently no strategy - and whilst the objects of any strategy may be fairly apparent it is important that residents of Camberwell and the borough generally should be reassured that the Police and Council are working together for a common goal.
Teresa Priest led a deputation of users and supporters from the Maudsley Emergency Clinic. The South London and Maudsley NHS Trust have taken the decision to close the clinic which provides a 24 hour emergency service for those suffering from mental health crises and has proposed that they receive treatment at the Kings College Hospital A & E department. The decision has been endorsed by the Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt. It was quite apparent from the deputation that the service provided by the Clinic is unique and provides a real life-line to its users. There has been widespread cross-party support for the campaign to keep the Clinic with all local MPs and Councillors backing Teresa and her team. Cllr David Noakes worked hard to preserve this cross-party support and his motion received unanimous support.
As I said during the course of the debate, it makes me angry that at a time when there is record investment going into the health service the only headlines which we seem to read about concern department closures and staff redundancies. I hope that the Government has got its priorities right, because when a Clinic such as the the the Maudsley's emergency department is forced to close alarm bells must start ringing.
The meeting gave rise to two examples of absolute hypocrisy from the Conservatives, and particularly veteran councillor Toby Eckersley, who has been put in charge of the Council's finances under the unpopular Tory/LibDem coalition. For years Toby has argued that the Council should work harder to improve its council tax collection rate, and in 2004 proposed that it should rise to 97.5% - a level it has remained at since. The anticipated collection rate determines the amount of money the council budgets for in the forthcoming financial year. So what an amazing turnaround that on Wednesday Toby should be proposing a cut in that collection rate to 96% - effectively condoning the failures of Southwark to collect its council tax. A Labour amendment to maintain the rate at 97.5% was defeated.
But perhaps the biggest hypocrisy of the evening, and perhaps the most shameful vote, concerned changes to the Council's constitution to vary the management structure. Last October announcements were made which effectively deleted the role of Strategic Director of Housing Management. The announcements were poorly handled and the whole restructuring had the impression of being drawn up on a post-it note. Permanent measures became interim, and consultation which had originally been deemed unnecessary was suddenly found to be required good practice! In fact, the changes required amendments to the Constitution, with the Constitution providing that all changes having to be considered first by the Council's Standards Committee. Amazingly although the Standards Committee had not met to consider these changes the proposals were brought to Council Assembly. Shame-faced officers and Executive members sat silently as their unconstitutional proposals were introduced, but proceeded to vote them through nevertheless. Cllr Eckersley has always been a supporter of the rights of backbench councillors and the importance of the constitution, but he was amazingly silent on this subject. Isn't it curious how hypocritical politicians become when they hold Executive office!
Cllr Richard Thomas made the telling comment after the vote that now the Council could get on with delivering services for its residents. Well said Richard, but it is equally important that the democratic process is followed - otherwise why should we bother with elections at all?! It is no good for council officers simply to do whatever they want with no regard to the political impact of their actions - or for politicians to let those officers get away with it.
Three deputations raised important issues about services in our community from violent crime to post office closures. Residents from Camberwell came to address Council Assembly about their fears for the increase of violent crime in the area. Camberwell Community Council Chair Ian Wingfield proposed an excellent motion following the deputation which called on the Council to publish its Violent Crime Strategy. Although there appear to be a number of action plans in place there is currently no strategy - and whilst the objects of any strategy may be fairly apparent it is important that residents of Camberwell and the borough generally should be reassured that the Police and Council are working together for a common goal.
Teresa Priest led a deputation of users and supporters from the Maudsley Emergency Clinic. The South London and Maudsley NHS Trust have taken the decision to close the clinic which provides a 24 hour emergency service for those suffering from mental health crises and has proposed that they receive treatment at the Kings College Hospital A & E department. The decision has been endorsed by the Health Secretary Patricia Hewitt. It was quite apparent from the deputation that the service provided by the Clinic is unique and provides a real life-line to its users. There has been widespread cross-party support for the campaign to keep the Clinic with all local MPs and Councillors backing Teresa and her team. Cllr David Noakes worked hard to preserve this cross-party support and his motion received unanimous support.
As I said during the course of the debate, it makes me angry that at a time when there is record investment going into the health service the only headlines which we seem to read about concern department closures and staff redundancies. I hope that the Government has got its priorities right, because when a Clinic such as the the the Maudsley's emergency department is forced to close alarm bells must start ringing.
The meeting gave rise to two examples of absolute hypocrisy from the Conservatives, and particularly veteran councillor Toby Eckersley, who has been put in charge of the Council's finances under the unpopular Tory/LibDem coalition. For years Toby has argued that the Council should work harder to improve its council tax collection rate, and in 2004 proposed that it should rise to 97.5% - a level it has remained at since. The anticipated collection rate determines the amount of money the council budgets for in the forthcoming financial year. So what an amazing turnaround that on Wednesday Toby should be proposing a cut in that collection rate to 96% - effectively condoning the failures of Southwark to collect its council tax. A Labour amendment to maintain the rate at 97.5% was defeated.
But perhaps the biggest hypocrisy of the evening, and perhaps the most shameful vote, concerned changes to the Council's constitution to vary the management structure. Last October announcements were made which effectively deleted the role of Strategic Director of Housing Management. The announcements were poorly handled and the whole restructuring had the impression of being drawn up on a post-it note. Permanent measures became interim, and consultation which had originally been deemed unnecessary was suddenly found to be required good practice! In fact, the changes required amendments to the Constitution, with the Constitution providing that all changes having to be considered first by the Council's Standards Committee. Amazingly although the Standards Committee had not met to consider these changes the proposals were brought to Council Assembly. Shame-faced officers and Executive members sat silently as their unconstitutional proposals were introduced, but proceeded to vote them through nevertheless. Cllr Eckersley has always been a supporter of the rights of backbench councillors and the importance of the constitution, but he was amazingly silent on this subject. Isn't it curious how hypocritical politicians become when they hold Executive office!
Cllr Richard Thomas made the telling comment after the vote that now the Council could get on with delivering services for its residents. Well said Richard, but it is equally important that the democratic process is followed - otherwise why should we bother with elections at all?! It is no good for council officers simply to do whatever they want with no regard to the political impact of their actions - or for politicians to let those officers get away with it.
Wednesday, January 10, 2007
Council Assembly
The Council Assembly on 6th December truly was a marathon event - finishing after 1 am. It is probably not the best way in which to conduct democratic debate, but we were left with no choice after the Mayor ruled that our emergency motions on the recent changes to housing management should only be considered after the end of the usual business.
There were no great shocks in the outcome of any of the votes: Cllr Humphreys survived our censure motion and the LibDems quickly fell into line behind their Tory bosses. We received really superb deputations from SETAA which provides adult education learning and skills advice in Peckham, and the Southwark Pensioners Forum. I was particularly pleased that we adopted the Southwark Pensioners Manifesto, the result of a great deal of work and commitment by Charlie Cherrill and his colleagues. It is worth noting that 3 of the 5 members of the deputation are South Camberwell residents - our Ward helping to lead the way again!
Perhaps the most emotive debate came after the deputation from the Newington Reference Library Campaign. I have set out the concerns of the campaigners in an earlier entry, but it was truly startling to see again last night the way in which the LibDems have lost touch with the concerns of people who should be their core constituents in Walworth and Newington. For standing up for the residents of the borough who want to see improved access for ALL to the reference library, the Labour Group was condemned for "pandering to local campaigners" by the current Leader of the Council! He went on to describe his many happy hours studying in "The Bod" when he was at University - that's the Bodleian Library for those of us without an Oxford degree! - completely missing the fact that his plans for the Newington Reference library will deny many people in Southwark the opportunity to experience some of the joys of learning by browsing through the shelves of books currently available.This really is a case where the need to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act must be balanced with needs of the current library users. It really does seem that the DDA is being used as an excuse to close a large section of the library to members of the public.
Perhaps the most worrying aspect of the debate on Newington Library and the other issues which we discussed last night was the complete lack of humility exhibited by the Tories and LibDems. Despite the fact that no party won an outright mandate to run the borough in last May's elections the Tory/LibDem coalition who run the Executive seem to demonstrate no appreciation of this fact and appear to take pride in their confrontational style of politics - turning their anger and posturing against members of the public who are only doing their best to have their voice heard. Perhaps the attitude of the Tory/LibDem coalition was summed up best by my colleague Cllr John Friary - "ill-informed; hypocritical; conceited and condescending"
There were no great shocks in the outcome of any of the votes: Cllr Humphreys survived our censure motion and the LibDems quickly fell into line behind their Tory bosses. We received really superb deputations from SETAA which provides adult education learning and skills advice in Peckham, and the Southwark Pensioners Forum. I was particularly pleased that we adopted the Southwark Pensioners Manifesto, the result of a great deal of work and commitment by Charlie Cherrill and his colleagues. It is worth noting that 3 of the 5 members of the deputation are South Camberwell residents - our Ward helping to lead the way again!
Perhaps the most emotive debate came after the deputation from the Newington Reference Library Campaign. I have set out the concerns of the campaigners in an earlier entry, but it was truly startling to see again last night the way in which the LibDems have lost touch with the concerns of people who should be their core constituents in Walworth and Newington. For standing up for the residents of the borough who want to see improved access for ALL to the reference library, the Labour Group was condemned for "pandering to local campaigners" by the current Leader of the Council! He went on to describe his many happy hours studying in "The Bod" when he was at University - that's the Bodleian Library for those of us without an Oxford degree! - completely missing the fact that his plans for the Newington Reference library will deny many people in Southwark the opportunity to experience some of the joys of learning by browsing through the shelves of books currently available.This really is a case where the need to comply with the Disability Discrimination Act must be balanced with needs of the current library users. It really does seem that the DDA is being used as an excuse to close a large section of the library to members of the public.
Perhaps the most worrying aspect of the debate on Newington Library and the other issues which we discussed last night was the complete lack of humility exhibited by the Tories and LibDems. Despite the fact that no party won an outright mandate to run the borough in last May's elections the Tory/LibDem coalition who run the Executive seem to demonstrate no appreciation of this fact and appear to take pride in their confrontational style of politics - turning their anger and posturing against members of the public who are only doing their best to have their voice heard. Perhaps the attitude of the Tory/LibDem coalition was summed up best by my colleague Cllr John Friary - "ill-informed; hypocritical; conceited and condescending"
Thursday, November 30, 2006
LibDems want Hairdressers to Fight Crime!
Seriously - you could not make it up! I laughed out loud today when I read in Southwark News that the current Leader of the Council proposed using hairdressers in the battle against violent crime in the borough. Well it has been another difficult week for him!
So is Cllr Stanton proposing that we have crack patrols of hair stylists ready to shampoo and set at the scene of a serious incident? Can we look forward to a short back and sides from elite barbers when we are next threatened at knife-point?
Sadly not! His proposal for their part in the fight against crime is that they should be used to spread the word about how safe Southwark is!
As my colleague Cllr Paul Bates observes in the Southwark News, "Many residents of the borough will find the leader of the council's statments that hairdressers are the answer to crime a little bizarre". Quite!
One of Southwark's new crime-fighters in action!
So is Cllr Stanton proposing that we have crack patrols of hair stylists ready to shampoo and set at the scene of a serious incident? Can we look forward to a short back and sides from elite barbers when we are next threatened at knife-point?
Sadly not! His proposal for their part in the fight against crime is that they should be used to spread the word about how safe Southwark is!
As my colleague Cllr Paul Bates observes in the Southwark News, "Many residents of the borough will find the leader of the council's statments that hairdressers are the answer to crime a little bizarre". Quite!
One of Southwark's new crime-fighters in action!
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
Albrighton Centre Chaos
Work to refurbish and expand the Albrighton Centre on East Dulwich Estate should have begun in early 2007 and have been completed by the Summer. The work would have extended the centre with the addition of an extra floor providing much needed additional space. The precise extent of the works has been carefully considered by the members of the East Dulwich Estate Project Team ('EDERPT') at many meetings over recent years.
So it was a truly awful surprise to hear at last night's meeting that a structural survey of the Centre has revealed that an extensive steel frame will now need to be built around the Centre as the current structure cannot bear the weight of the additional floor, and that the works will now take 12 months!
To a layperson like me it does seem that the cart may have been put before the horse in this case - why a structural survey was not carried out earlier is incredible.
The impact of this news is significant. If the Project Team had known originally that adpaptation works were going to take up to 12 months they may well have decided on a new-build project for the Albrighton - which would provide better value for money and have taken only 8 months. However, the Team decided to support the adaptation route as it would mean a quicker delivery - 6 months - and demonstrate some early physical regeneration of this Estate to its many residents who have become so disillusioned with the process since it first began in 1998.
I am personally very disappointed by this development and will be working together with my fellow councillors, EDERPT and excellent officers like Tony Hunter to find a way to get this project back on course as soon as practicable, with a solution which meets the needs of the East Dulwich Estate.
So it was a truly awful surprise to hear at last night's meeting that a structural survey of the Centre has revealed that an extensive steel frame will now need to be built around the Centre as the current structure cannot bear the weight of the additional floor, and that the works will now take 12 months!
To a layperson like me it does seem that the cart may have been put before the horse in this case - why a structural survey was not carried out earlier is incredible.
The impact of this news is significant. If the Project Team had known originally that adpaptation works were going to take up to 12 months they may well have decided on a new-build project for the Albrighton - which would provide better value for money and have taken only 8 months. However, the Team decided to support the adaptation route as it would mean a quicker delivery - 6 months - and demonstrate some early physical regeneration of this Estate to its many residents who have become so disillusioned with the process since it first began in 1998.
I am personally very disappointed by this development and will be working together with my fellow councillors, EDERPT and excellent officers like Tony Hunter to find a way to get this project back on course as soon as practicable, with a solution which meets the needs of the East Dulwich Estate.
Cllr Danny McCarthy
Labour is now the largest political group on Southwark following the decision of Cllr Danny McCarthy, a councillor in Cathedrals Ward since 2002, to resign from the LibDems. Danny cites as his principal reason for resigning the fact of the alliance between the Tories and LibDems in which the LibDems have given up the crucial portfolios of housing and resources. However, from conversations which I have had I know that Danny has been greatly hurt by the vicious way in which he has been treated in recent weeks by his erstwhile colleagues in the LibDem group. It seems that the vicious personal side of the LibDems which was so evident when Charles Kennedy was forced out as Leader of the LibDems nationally is alive and well amongst Southwark LibDem members.
In a truly amazing outburst the current Leader of the Council has called on Danny McCarthy to resign his seat and stand for re-election in a by-election. This outburst is amazing because as Danny has rightly observed, no one in Southwark voted for the Tory / LibDem coalition in charge at the Town Hall, and if Cllr Stanton is so concerned about the wishes of the voters perhaps he should put that coalition to the test in a public vote. After the chaos in the borough's housing department, the £120 million call-centre in meltdown and the Thatcherite Tories being given a free rein to slash council budgets, I am fairly confident what the public reaction would be!
Danny will sit as an independent councillor for the time being, but I hope that we will be able to meet his ambitions and welcome him back into the Labour Party in the near future.
So the current state of the parties is Labour - 28; LibDems - 27; Tories - 6; Green - 1; Independent - 1
Monday, November 27, 2006
Debate.....what debate?
After the public meeting we held on the changes to housing management in the borough my colleagues and I submitted a request to the Mayor for a Special Council Assembly to discuss the motions we were proposing. Although we regard the issue as urgent the Mayor (no doubt under political orders)has ruled that the Special Assembly will take place AFTER the regular Council meeting on 6th December. This means that our motions will not be debated until around midnight!
The issue of housing management is of concern to very many tenants and leaseholders across the borough. This is confirmed by the fact that 2 Area Housing Forums have rejected the changes and very many individuals have been in touch with myself and my colleagues to express their anger over the way in which this process has been handled by the Executive.
As a Group we have never said there should be NO changes to the way housing is managed in Southwark. What we do say is that any changes should only have been introduced after a period of consultation with tenants, leaseholders, officers and councillors. I still think that it is amazing that we will have no dedicated Director of Housing in Southwark, despite the fact that we are the country's biggest landlord.
So the decision to delay the debate on our motions until midnight is another example of this Tory/LibDem Executive trying to stifle discussion of an important issue and exclude the wider public from the decision-making process. If the changes which Cllr Humphreys and his LibDem colleagues are proposing are so robust and cannot be properly criticised why will they not debate them at a proper hour - or better still on another day at a time when the public can attend.
The issue of housing management is of concern to very many tenants and leaseholders across the borough. This is confirmed by the fact that 2 Area Housing Forums have rejected the changes and very many individuals have been in touch with myself and my colleagues to express their anger over the way in which this process has been handled by the Executive.
As a Group we have never said there should be NO changes to the way housing is managed in Southwark. What we do say is that any changes should only have been introduced after a period of consultation with tenants, leaseholders, officers and councillors. I still think that it is amazing that we will have no dedicated Director of Housing in Southwark, despite the fact that we are the country's biggest landlord.
So the decision to delay the debate on our motions until midnight is another example of this Tory/LibDem Executive trying to stifle discussion of an important issue and exclude the wider public from the decision-making process. If the changes which Cllr Humphreys and his LibDem colleagues are proposing are so robust and cannot be properly criticised why will they not debate them at a proper hour - or better still on another day at a time when the public can attend.
Tuesday, November 14, 2006
Southwark's Housing Crisis
Last night I spoke at a packed public meeting which was called to discuss the recent changes to housing management in the borough. Although the council is the landlord of nearly 60,000 properties we no longer have a dedicated housing department, which has effectively been abolished and its responsibilities scattered amongst various other departments of the Council such as Environment, rubbish collection and Social Services.
What is perhaps more astonishing about the changes is that they were introduced without any warning, discussion or consultation - even by the Executive who are supposed to make these sorts of decisions!
Only two Executive members seem to have known anything about the changes before they happened - the current Leader Cllr Stanton and his 'A-list' Tory Deputy, Cllr Humphreys. Neither of these seems remotely concerned or apologetic for the outcry which their changes have incurred, with Cllr Humphreys arrogantly determined to press on with "Phase 2" of his Thatcherite plans for Southwark's housing.
Last night's meeting was absolutely united in its oppostion to the changes and the manner in which they had been introduced. At the conclusion of the meeting I indicated that the Labour Group would be calling a Special Council Assembly meeting to discuss the changes. I hope that this will take place within the next 10 days - it certainly cannot wait until the next Council Assembly on the 5th of December.
With tenants and leaseholders experiencing serious ongoing problems with the £100 million Call Centre; with one of the borough's major repairs contractors going bust without warning or explanation leaving jobs unfinished, and with the latest changes to the ex-Housing Department, it really does seem that the shaky Tory/LibDem coalition in charge at the Town Hall has lost its grip.
What is perhaps more astonishing about the changes is that they were introduced without any warning, discussion or consultation - even by the Executive who are supposed to make these sorts of decisions!
Only two Executive members seem to have known anything about the changes before they happened - the current Leader Cllr Stanton and his 'A-list' Tory Deputy, Cllr Humphreys. Neither of these seems remotely concerned or apologetic for the outcry which their changes have incurred, with Cllr Humphreys arrogantly determined to press on with "Phase 2" of his Thatcherite plans for Southwark's housing.
Last night's meeting was absolutely united in its oppostion to the changes and the manner in which they had been introduced. At the conclusion of the meeting I indicated that the Labour Group would be calling a Special Council Assembly meeting to discuss the changes. I hope that this will take place within the next 10 days - it certainly cannot wait until the next Council Assembly on the 5th of December.
With tenants and leaseholders experiencing serious ongoing problems with the £100 million Call Centre; with one of the borough's major repairs contractors going bust without warning or explanation leaving jobs unfinished, and with the latest changes to the ex-Housing Department, it really does seem that the shaky Tory/LibDem coalition in charge at the Town Hall has lost its grip.
Tuesday, November 07, 2006
Newington Reference Library
Last night I attended a public meeting to discuss proposed changes to Southwark's only reference library, which is based in the Newington Library on the Walworth Road. In a well-intentioned attempt to make the library accessible to all and compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act the Council have proposed that the library situated on the first floor of the building should be closed and partially re-sited to the ground floor.
The public can currently have access to 8,500 books in a remarkably light and airy library on the first floor. Under the proposed changes the number of available books would be reduced by approximately 80% and access to the available remainder would be in comparatively cramped conditions on the ground floor.
Cllr Stanton, the currrent Leader of the Council, argued that the alternative to these proposals would invovle the installation of a lift from the ground to the first floor at a cost of £400,000 which the Council could not afford. Although users would not be able to browse through all of the books they would be able to ask library staff to retrieve a particular book if they wished.
Those who attended the meeting and use the library were uniformly opposed to the proposals. Part of the joy of browsing through books in a library is finding a book which you did not know existed. This would be lost under the current proposals and I have no doubt that people would be deterred from using the library as they presently do.
I do not think these proposals have been thought through, and the users of the library should not be placed in the position of having to effectively argue against DDA compliance in order to retain their current reference facilities.
Also I am not sure that the options are as limited as presented by the Council. There are many government and public buildings which are DDA compliant but which have not installed major passenger lifts. It really is time to look again at these proposals and find a solution which suits all users and potential users of the library.
The current proposals can be found here
Tuesday, October 31, 2006
Camberwell Grove Update
At last night's Camberwell Community Council Andrew Downes, of the Council's Transport Group, gave an update on the collapsed rail tunnel in Camberwell Grove, which is causing the road to be blocked at its mid-point.
Apparently the tunnel is constructed of brick and iron beams. One of the iron beams has a crack in it which could cause a catastrophic failure if action is not taken. Repairs to iron beams such as this are normally carried out before the beam has actually cracked, but in the case of the Camberwell Grove tunnel matters have gone one stage further already! Andrew informed us that Network Rail intend to carry out the repairs to the tunnel in February 2007 with the intention of those repairs being completed in March 2007.
Even when Camberwell Grove is re-opened it will still be subject to a 7.5 ton weight limit which will need to be strictly enforced. This will have to be done by some width restriction measures being taken on the approach to the bridge in order to ensure that no over-weight vehicles can pass. A long term solution to the problem will only be brought about with a complete replacement of the tunnel - which will cause major disruption to Camberwell Grove and trains on the line to and from Denmark Hill.
So we can expect Camberwell Grove to re-open to vehicles with new width restrictions on the road in March/April next year.
Apparently the tunnel is constructed of brick and iron beams. One of the iron beams has a crack in it which could cause a catastrophic failure if action is not taken. Repairs to iron beams such as this are normally carried out before the beam has actually cracked, but in the case of the Camberwell Grove tunnel matters have gone one stage further already! Andrew informed us that Network Rail intend to carry out the repairs to the tunnel in February 2007 with the intention of those repairs being completed in March 2007.
Even when Camberwell Grove is re-opened it will still be subject to a 7.5 ton weight limit which will need to be strictly enforced. This will have to be done by some width restriction measures being taken on the approach to the bridge in order to ensure that no over-weight vehicles can pass. A long term solution to the problem will only be brought about with a complete replacement of the tunnel - which will cause major disruption to Camberwell Grove and trains on the line to and from Denmark Hill.
So we can expect Camberwell Grove to re-open to vehicles with new width restrictions on the road in March/April next year.
Monday, October 16, 2006
Black Business Awards
On Saturday night I had the pleasure of attending the Black Business Awards at the Hilton in Rotherhithe. The event is organised by the Black Business Initiative under the inspirational leadership of Sunny Lambe and is supported by many organisations across Southwark.
The awards prove that with the right support and in the right economic conditions small and medium sized businesses owned and run by black and minority ethnic entrepeneurs can really succeed. The evening also featured and celebrated black entertainment, with the brilliant Gina Yashere acting as host for the evening.
Too often in recent years in Southwark the story about the Council's involvement with BME businesses has been negative. This event simply showed that with a little thought the Council can be a positive force.
It was also great to meet and hear from Tim Campbell, the winner of the first series of The Apprentice. Tim has made a real success of working for Sir Alan Sugar and is hoping to pursue his own business opportunities in the near future.
I presented the award for Social Enterprise to RAP, an organisation working with young people.
The awards prove that with the right support and in the right economic conditions small and medium sized businesses owned and run by black and minority ethnic entrepeneurs can really succeed. The evening also featured and celebrated black entertainment, with the brilliant Gina Yashere acting as host for the evening.
Too often in recent years in Southwark the story about the Council's involvement with BME businesses has been negative. This event simply showed that with a little thought the Council can be a positive force.
It was also great to meet and hear from Tim Campbell, the winner of the first series of The Apprentice. Tim has made a real success of working for Sir Alan Sugar and is hoping to pursue his own business opportunities in the near future.
I presented the award for Social Enterprise to RAP, an organisation working with young people.
Friday, October 06, 2006
Labour Conference 2006
A belated entry following last week's Labour Conference! Overall I think it is fair to say that given the difficulties leading up to conference, it was a highly successful week for the Party, with the mantra of renewal and change on the progressive left being repeated by every speaker.
There were clearly some highlights in the main hall - Tony Blair's valedictory speech reminded everyone yet again of what a superb Leader he has been. Other parties may snipe and sneer about Tony Blair, but the election results he has delivered for the Labour Party are the true testament to his political skills. I thought that Gordon Brown gave an excellent speech which began to explain what his vision for Britain is. He is a politician of substance and has a real record of achievement. I think he will be a welcome contrast to David 'Blair-lite' Cameron.
Bill Clinton's speech on Wednesday morning was also a highlight. His warning to the party that change and progress are the only way forward was a welcome reminder as we consider the future leadership of the party.
And last but not least John Prescott's final speech as Deputy Leader was a real triumph! It is really difficult to imagine any of the current contenders for the Deputy Leadership putting together such a tub-thumping speech! "Traditional values in a modern setting" was once again the core message from Mr Prescott.
Away from the main Hall it was good to see John and Pauline Prescott dancing at the Amicus reception!
And I took advantage of the opportunity to talk to Patricia Hewitt about the "cuts" to Southwark's PCT budget ahead of her meeting with Tessa Jowell and Harriet Harman. She explained to me that the £21 million was effectively being used as a loan to the PCTs who had overspent and that they would be under an obligation to repay the money to Southwark. However, there remain real concerns in the short-term and I told the Health Secretary that it was wrong for Southwark to be penalised in any way for the profligacy of others.
Following the conference I have also written to Ruth Kelly about Southwark's appeal against her decision on the 'Downtown' planning application. I met Ruth Kelly at the conference but for obvious reasons we were not able to discuss the particular issues surrounding 'Downtown'. In my letter I have echoed the views of the campaigners, and asked that she visit the site in any event before making any further decision on this application.
I also met with Ken Livingstone and other London Labour Leaders to discuss the proposed GLA Bill which will give the Mayor increased powers in various areas. I think that this will be the start of a useful discussion with the Mayor.
So on the whole a productive conference!
There were clearly some highlights in the main hall - Tony Blair's valedictory speech reminded everyone yet again of what a superb Leader he has been. Other parties may snipe and sneer about Tony Blair, but the election results he has delivered for the Labour Party are the true testament to his political skills. I thought that Gordon Brown gave an excellent speech which began to explain what his vision for Britain is. He is a politician of substance and has a real record of achievement. I think he will be a welcome contrast to David 'Blair-lite' Cameron.
Bill Clinton's speech on Wednesday morning was also a highlight. His warning to the party that change and progress are the only way forward was a welcome reminder as we consider the future leadership of the party.
And last but not least John Prescott's final speech as Deputy Leader was a real triumph! It is really difficult to imagine any of the current contenders for the Deputy Leadership putting together such a tub-thumping speech! "Traditional values in a modern setting" was once again the core message from Mr Prescott.
Away from the main Hall it was good to see John and Pauline Prescott dancing at the Amicus reception!
And I took advantage of the opportunity to talk to Patricia Hewitt about the "cuts" to Southwark's PCT budget ahead of her meeting with Tessa Jowell and Harriet Harman. She explained to me that the £21 million was effectively being used as a loan to the PCTs who had overspent and that they would be under an obligation to repay the money to Southwark. However, there remain real concerns in the short-term and I told the Health Secretary that it was wrong for Southwark to be penalised in any way for the profligacy of others.
Following the conference I have also written to Ruth Kelly about Southwark's appeal against her decision on the 'Downtown' planning application. I met Ruth Kelly at the conference but for obvious reasons we were not able to discuss the particular issues surrounding 'Downtown'. In my letter I have echoed the views of the campaigners, and asked that she visit the site in any event before making any further decision on this application.
I also met with Ken Livingstone and other London Labour Leaders to discuss the proposed GLA Bill which will give the Mayor increased powers in various areas. I think that this will be the start of a useful discussion with the Mayor.
So on the whole a productive conference!
Sunday, September 17, 2006
Interesting Times for Southwark Labour Members
On Friday Harriet Harman confirmed that she will be a candidate for the Deputy Leadership of the Labour Party when a vacancy arises. Harriet has been the MP for Camberwell and Peckham since 1982 and has been instrumental in raising the number of Labour's women MPs from 17 to 97 and modernising the Labour Party during the 'wilderness years'. At the next General Election parliamentary boundaries will be re-drawn and South Camberwell will become part of Camberwell & Peckham after many years as part of the Dulwich and West Norwood constituency. So we have an interest in Harriet's progress.
Of course, if today's newspapers are to be believed it seems likely that the current MP for South Camberwell, Tessa Jowell, may also be throwing her hat into the Deputy Leadership ring later this week. I have not spoken to Tessa so don't know yet whether there is any truth in this report. However, it is really exciting for Southwark Labour Party members to know that we have such prominent government figures locally who will be helping to shape the next decade of Labour politics.
I agree with Harriet's comments today that the Party should use the forthcoming leadership contest to debate policy and renewal, and should not be afraid of that debate. I hope that members will become engaged with this process. And if you're not a Labour Party member but would like to be involved in that debate - why not join us?
Good Sense on Downtown
Last Wednesday we held our September Council Assembly and debated a number of issues concerning the borough generally - including proposed cuts of up to £20 million to the local Primary Care Trust budget. Southwark has an extremely good record of delivering services on budget, and the Council was united in calling upon Patricia Hewitt, the Health Secretary, to review her decision on this issue. Harriet Harman and Tessa Jowell will be leading a delegation of Southwark and Lambeth MPs to meet the Health Secretary on the 21st of September, so I hope they will have good news to report following that meeting.
Council Assembly also heard from a deputation from the Downtown Defence Campaign. Downtown is an area in Rotherhithe which has a long-established community and relatively low density housing. However, the Liberal Democrat administration in Southwark took the decision to sell land at Downtown to Barratts the builders who submitted an application to build on that land. The DDC was formed to oppose that application and the development of the land and they were delighted when the Council's Planning Committee and the Planning Inspector refused the application. However, our very own Ruth Kelly, Local Government Secretary, overturned the Planning Inspector's decision and gave the 'go-ahead' for building on the land up to 6 storeys high.
The DDC's deputation was supported by a motion from local Rotherhithe councillor Lisa Rajan. During the course of the debate on the motion it became clear that the Council's deadline for challenging Ruth Kelly's decision by judicial review proceedings has to be submitted by this Tuesday, 19th September. The decision on whether to issue proceedings lay with Paul Evans, the Director of Regeneration.
As the debate had centred on the erosion of local democracy the Labour Group decided to propose an amendment calling on the LibDem Tory Executive to hold a special meeting in order to consider taking the decision-making power back from Mr Evans so that the decision to issue judicial review proceedings would lie with the elected representatives of the borough.
I have to say that the LibDems and Tories were caught completely off-guard by our amendment - which was merely reflecting the debate and the legal advice which we had received - and reacted with incomprehensible anger. Cllrs Humphries and Thomas descended into incredibly pompous and partisan attacks on the Labour Group which must have left the Downtown campaigners utterly bewildered.
Although our amendment was rejected good sense has now prevailed - and amazingly, the LibDem Tory Executive will be meeting tomorrow (Monday) to decide whether to issue judicial review proceedings! Had Cllr Humphries taken a few moments to think on Wednesday rather than react in a knee-jerk way, our amendment may have passed. However, at least our objective has been achieved, and I hope that proceedings will be issued.
Council Assembly also heard from a deputation from the Downtown Defence Campaign. Downtown is an area in Rotherhithe which has a long-established community and relatively low density housing. However, the Liberal Democrat administration in Southwark took the decision to sell land at Downtown to Barratts the builders who submitted an application to build on that land. The DDC was formed to oppose that application and the development of the land and they were delighted when the Council's Planning Committee and the Planning Inspector refused the application. However, our very own Ruth Kelly, Local Government Secretary, overturned the Planning Inspector's decision and gave the 'go-ahead' for building on the land up to 6 storeys high.
The DDC's deputation was supported by a motion from local Rotherhithe councillor Lisa Rajan. During the course of the debate on the motion it became clear that the Council's deadline for challenging Ruth Kelly's decision by judicial review proceedings has to be submitted by this Tuesday, 19th September. The decision on whether to issue proceedings lay with Paul Evans, the Director of Regeneration.
As the debate had centred on the erosion of local democracy the Labour Group decided to propose an amendment calling on the LibDem Tory Executive to hold a special meeting in order to consider taking the decision-making power back from Mr Evans so that the decision to issue judicial review proceedings would lie with the elected representatives of the borough.
I have to say that the LibDems and Tories were caught completely off-guard by our amendment - which was merely reflecting the debate and the legal advice which we had received - and reacted with incomprehensible anger. Cllrs Humphries and Thomas descended into incredibly pompous and partisan attacks on the Labour Group which must have left the Downtown campaigners utterly bewildered.
Although our amendment was rejected good sense has now prevailed - and amazingly, the LibDem Tory Executive will be meeting tomorrow (Monday) to decide whether to issue judicial review proceedings! Had Cllr Humphries taken a few moments to think on Wednesday rather than react in a knee-jerk way, our amendment may have passed. However, at least our objective has been achieved, and I hope that proceedings will be issued.
Sunday, September 10, 2006
Dr Ola and the Labour Party
Last Wednesday I was telephoned by our local newspaper, Southwark News, and asked to comment on the news that former LibDem and Labour Councillor Dr Ola had rejoined the Labour Party and was ready to pose for photos with his letter from Tony Blair welcoming him.
A couple of phone calls later, but sadly after the newspaper had gone to print, I was delighted to be able to confirm that Dr Ola would NOT be joining the party. In fact his application for membership had been rejected after representations were made by the local Camberwell and Peckham party. Dr Ola should now have received a letter informing him that his application had been rejected.
Dr Ola had lost any chance of joining the Party after he stood against Labour candidates in the local elections this year - and may well have cost us a seat in Chaucer ward where we came within 8 votes of winning.
But Dr Ola's ill-judged homophobic comments before the local elections also raised a serious question mark over whether he could truly be a member of the modern Labour Party. Whatever one may think of Tony Blair's government, I believe that its radical policies on equalities will be seen as one of its truly lasting legacies - and Dr Ola's comments before the local elections were clearly incompatible with the government's approach.
So I'm pleased to report that Labour remains a consistent and progressive party. I do get concerned that with the rantings of some local bloggers, residents might think that politics is only about personality. It is not and should not be. It's about policy and how policy can change people's lives.
Yesterday I was really inspired by Tony Blair's speech to the Progress conference. His analysis of Labour's need to identify the priorities for the next decade and offer policy positions to deal with those priorities is fundamental. I still think that the main opposition parties struggle to deal with the fact that we are approaching 2007 and not fighting the same battles as 1997. The Tories under David Cameron are working to identify the issues - but seem bereft of any policy response which takes heed of the fact that modern politics should be underpinned by social justice. And I simply do not know where the LibDems are. There seems to be some thinking about progressive taxation but they certainly do not seem to have identifed their political priorities or what they hope to achieve in response to those priorities.
Security and migration; pensions; democratic reform and the fact that everything we do in Britain is affected by and has repurcussions for our near and distant neighbours are some of the real challenges we face. I'm looking forward to the debate within Labour on these and many other policy issues in the months ahead!
A couple of phone calls later, but sadly after the newspaper had gone to print, I was delighted to be able to confirm that Dr Ola would NOT be joining the party. In fact his application for membership had been rejected after representations were made by the local Camberwell and Peckham party. Dr Ola should now have received a letter informing him that his application had been rejected.
Dr Ola had lost any chance of joining the Party after he stood against Labour candidates in the local elections this year - and may well have cost us a seat in Chaucer ward where we came within 8 votes of winning.
But Dr Ola's ill-judged homophobic comments before the local elections also raised a serious question mark over whether he could truly be a member of the modern Labour Party. Whatever one may think of Tony Blair's government, I believe that its radical policies on equalities will be seen as one of its truly lasting legacies - and Dr Ola's comments before the local elections were clearly incompatible with the government's approach.
So I'm pleased to report that Labour remains a consistent and progressive party. I do get concerned that with the rantings of some local bloggers, residents might think that politics is only about personality. It is not and should not be. It's about policy and how policy can change people's lives.
Yesterday I was really inspired by Tony Blair's speech to the Progress conference. His analysis of Labour's need to identify the priorities for the next decade and offer policy positions to deal with those priorities is fundamental. I still think that the main opposition parties struggle to deal with the fact that we are approaching 2007 and not fighting the same battles as 1997. The Tories under David Cameron are working to identify the issues - but seem bereft of any policy response which takes heed of the fact that modern politics should be underpinned by social justice. And I simply do not know where the LibDems are. There seems to be some thinking about progressive taxation but they certainly do not seem to have identifed their political priorities or what they hope to achieve in response to those priorities.
Security and migration; pensions; democratic reform and the fact that everything we do in Britain is affected by and has repurcussions for our near and distant neighbours are some of the real challenges we face. I'm looking forward to the debate within Labour on these and many other policy issues in the months ahead!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
