With all that has been going on in the mayoral election, one of the most important issues that I was involved in while at the East London Advertiser, the successful campaign to save Bancroft History Library and Archives (we won a press award for it), has slipped under my radar.
When he was council leader, Lutfur Rahman changed his mind about the need to save the old Vestry Hall in Mile End despite a desire by a coterie of councillors led by Josh Peck and Denise Jones to sell it to Queen Mary University. Lutfur’s was a welcome decision.
Earlier this year, I understand that a senior council officer (I will name her once I get confirmation) promised that £350,000 of section 106 money from a Telford Homes development in Bethnal Green would be used to fund Bancroft’s leaking roof.
In August, the council’s strategic development committee decided to use that Telford Homes s106 cash to bail out the failing Rich Mix arts centre. Councillors on the committee agreed to transfer £500,000 as a first instalment, with the possibility of another £1.5m to come.
The Save Bancroft Library campaign tell me that this means the £350k promised to repair the history archives has been ditched, diverted to Rich Mix instead. If so, that is a disgrace.
Some 14 councillors had objected to the decision to help Rich Mix and they included Lutfur Rahman and many of those who now back him. It is to their credit.
I’ve just put the following question to Helal Abbas:
Under your mayoralty, would the local history library and archives remain at the Bancroft vestry hall?
His answer was this:
Yes, it will.
This suggests that Bancroft is safe whoever wins.
My next question to him is whether the building itself will remain under council ownership so that the downstairs section, which is currently empty, will be also be used for an expanded archive and history service – something that will protect the multicultural heritage of our borough.
I’ll update later.
UPDATE – 8.15pm, Tuesday October 19
Abbas has just called me to discuss Bancroft. Here’s what he said:
“I guarantee that Bancroft will remain in council ownership under my mayoralty. But I can’t make any commitment on funding at the moment because we don’t know yet what our finances will be. What I will commit to is trying to source funding for the building, either from the council budget, or section 106 money or through some kind of sponsorship. I want the library and archives to be a place of excellence and a resource for my children and for all other children in the borough. Our shared heritage is vitally important to our community.”
I then asked whether s106 money had been diverted from Bancroft to Rich Mix at cabinet meeting in July. Here’s his answer:
“The s106 money from the Telford Homes development was for Bethnal Green and that’s why it is going to Rich Mix under very strict criteria. When Lutfur was leader, he had the chance to put Bancroft into the s106 pool, but he didn’t.”
I have a problem with the first part of this. The details of the s106 agreement for that development can be seen on p47 of this document.
Point 4 of the document states:
“£2,093,098 for cultural, social and community products and for the provision of work space offsite.”
There is no restriction on where that money can be allocated, although, arguably, the phrase “work space off site” could be a valid interpretation.
As I mentioned above, I’m told that £350k of s106 was agreed by senior council officer Heather Bonfield earlier this year. If anyone has the minutes for the relevant minutes of the Bancroft Steering Group, please email me them.
Trial by Jeory 
When I started reading the article I was quite happy thinking this is a good article to highlight the corruption that has been happening only be dissapointed by the ending!
Have you forgotten that under the current leadership of Helal Abbas, money is being diverted to Rich Mix centre?
Helal Abbas is a known liar and cannot be trusted. If he has been the person behind diverting the cash that was allocated for the Bancroft Library do you think he really will redivert it back to Bancroft Library? This sounds like another cheap ploy to win over readers to Abbas? This is a very disingenous article!
Have you forgotten that it was under Abbas’s leadership the money was diverted from Bancroft to Rich Mix? I hope this is not a cheap ploy to win over votes for Abbas
The ownership question is crucial, without the answer the library is not safe.
Ask Abbas how the council’s plans for major expansion of the university campus will later effect the library. Ask him whether he has his own views about the importance of the library and archives. Ask him if he has any principles.
All the information on the Rich Mix and the library confirms the fundamental dirtiness of property-politics-big money activities in Tower Hamlets. Only someone who thinks there needs to be real reform will be a worthy mayor.
I’ve asked him and I’m awaiting his reply. Who, in your view, would be a worthy mayor among the list of candidates?
none of them, of course
‘yes it will’ said Cllr Abbas. Well I’m glad that alleviates your fears Mr Jeory. Politicians are always as good as their words.
Thanks for that advice. At least it’s a better answer than, “No, it won’t.” He’s now on the record as having made a public commitment.
I’ve not been critical of your analysis on things to date as it’s seemed to me to be fairly factual, balanced and logical. But I have to say I think you’re naive in this case.
All he’s done is to make a commitment to keep the local history library and archive at Bancroft Library. He’s made no commitment to maintain the building or allocate funding to maintain it (which seems to be the point of the s106 funding).
He could meet the commitment he’s made to you by leaving the archive to rot in the building. How easy it will be then to turn round in due course and claim that in light of funding cuts requiring drastic reassessments of council funding priorities and in light of the decaying standard of the fabric of Bancroft Library and the increased cost of bringing it up to standard he has decided that it is more cost-effective for the archive to be moved/sold off and the building sold off/knocked down.
I seriously hope he doesn’t but I can see this one coming down the track.
You’re right to raise those concerns and I will put them to him.
And I refer you to numerous other examples where this has happened across the country in the Rotten Boroughs and Piloti columns in Private Eye.
Your next question to Councillor Helal Abbas, Leader of the Council, about Bancroft Library should not be just about his intentions for the “downstairs section” of the Library building, but his intentions for the upstairs. Looking at the Save Bancroft Library website there is this from the 4th September, just 6 weeks ago:
“LAUNCH OF PETITION TO SAVE THE VESTRY HALL READING ROOM”
Save it from what? What has happened to this public library room under Councillor Abbas’ current control of Bancroft Library?
Looking forward to Councillor Abbas’ response..
I’ve updated the post above for Abbas’s position on ownership and funding
that was observation, this is advice ‘better the Devil you know…’
Thank you Ted and Councillor Abbas – “SPONSORSHIP” – for our Library.
And those sponsors would be, Ted?……
The same people who wanted to ‘sponsor’ our Library in 1990?
And ‘sponsor’ our Library again in 2008?…Queen Mary University?
Queen Mary University whose people said in March 2008 (deep into their ‘sponsorship’ negotiations):
“Mr Mxxxxx Sxxxxx enquired if local elections were to take place in Tower Hamlets that could change the political complexion and local Ward Members. Agreed that it would be beneficial for a written offer to be submitted as soon as possible.”
The “political complexion” that was “beneficial” to them being the coterie led by Joshua Peck (QMUL alumnus) and the “local Ward Members” “beneficial” to them including Cllr Clair Hawkins (QMUL alumna).
An OFF-MARKET sale to the old alma mater, too. Is it not WRONG to dispose of a public asset in an off-market sale? (Ted – your professional opinion as an ex-accountant?) A secret sale of a listed public building to your alma mater for a knockdown price of £1.2m. Sweet.
So now it’s being called “SPONSORSHIP.” Because as Queen Mary University said themselves, their acquisition of our Library is merely another “postponement” (QMUL Minutes.) We postponed them in 1990* and we postponed them in 2008, both times with the help of the East London Advertiser. With or without the ELA, we will do it again.
Call it “SPONSORSHIP” or “PARTNERSHIP WORKING ON THE HOUSING OF COLLECTIONS” (Heather Bonfield, Council Minutes) – we now know what is in store for Bancroft Library under Helal Abbas.
Thank you, Ted. NO THANK YOU, Councillor Abbas.
* 27/7/1990 report in the ELA: “The Archives would remain in the building under the SUPERVISION of Queen Mary College.”
So add “SUPERVISION” to “SPONSORSHIP” and “PARTNERSHIP WORKING” as the euphemisms for the ownership/occupation/lease of all or part of our Bancroft Library. What could that mean for the upstairs Vestry Hall Reading Room, former Adult Lending Library considering that under Councillor Abbas, the Council decided to make this Lending Library/Vestry Hall Reading Room into a ‘room for hire’?
The Rich Mix Centre, Bancroft Library and Section 106 funds
The timeline for the £350,000 sec106 funds is documented on the Save Bancroft website.
The website shows that the sec106 funds (from PA/07/02193) were actually diverted away from Bancroft Library TWICE. The first time was in July and then in August. Councillor Abbas was Leader on both occasions that the funds were diverted.
Cllr Abbas states to Ted that the sec106 agreement for PA/07/02193 was strictly “for Bethnal Green.” Cllr Abbas was at the Cabinet meeting on 7 July 2010 where his Cabinet agreed to give it to the new Idea Store Metro, to be built at WATNEY STREET MARKET. That is quite some distance from Bethnal Green – and certainly further than Bancroft Road! The amount to be given to the new Idea Store Metro: £1,101,000 million.
In the Agenda for this Cabinet meeting, it says:
“*S106 already triggered. Ref. PA/07/02193. Available to deliver cultural products.”
So that answers Ted’s question on the other criteria; Idea Stores – our replacement libraries – are therefore “cultural products”.
The second time the sec106 funds were diverted was on August 2nd 2010, again under Abbas’ Leadership, when the money went to the Rich Mix Centre.
The background that is not on the Save Bancroft website and disproves Cllr Abbas’ statement that Lutfur Rahman: “..had the chance to put Bancroft into the s106 pool, but he didn’t..” is below:
“‘BRIEFING NOTE ON FUNDING’ – March 3rd 2010
Dear all,
I have been asked to circulate the note below to the steering group on behalf of Judith St John.
Regards,
Tamsin [Bookey]
The purpose of this note is to clarify the status of current funding opportunities available for Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archive which were reported to the Steering Group on 24 February 2010.
1) The Council’s Capital Programme
The Council awarded Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archive £255k from its capital programme for 2009/10 and this is being used for the essential works. A bid for a further £250k was submitted in August 2009 for consideration under the Council’s Accelerating Delivery programme – Cabinet Key Priorities for one-off spending proposals. However, as previously reported, the bid was unsuccessful as the Capital resources were extremely limited. There is currently no further funding earmarked within the Council’s capital programme or the Communities, Localities and Culture directorate for Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archive and at this time we are not anticipating an invitation to bid for any further funding.
2) £350k Phase 2 works to Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archive
It was reported to the meeting that we have identified potential funding of £350,000 of Section106 contributions from the development at 32 – 42 Bethnal Green Road. A Project Initiation Document (PID) for Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archive Phase Two (repair of the roofs) has been prepared, but we are unable to proceed further until work starts on the development site, at which stage the developer will be required to pay the Council the first phase of Section106 funding. We understand that this will be in the near future.
3) £500k: Development of the ex- Peugeot site on Mile End Road
The Section106 agreement related to the redevelopment of the ex-Peugeot site on Mile End Road has not yet been signed. The application was granted at the Strategic Development Committee on 02/02/2010 subject to the execution of a Section106 Agreement. The proposed financial contributions for the Section106 state: “prior to commencement of development, a financial contribution of £500,000 towards the enhancement of the Bancroft Local History Archive and Library”. Securing this funding, however, is dependent on the developer signing the legal agreement within the next 3 months. Although the proposed agreement states “prior to commencement of development” in effect the money is only released to the Council if and when the development starts on site. Once the money is received by LBTH, a PID reflecting the next stage of priority works for Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archive will prepared and release of the money will be sought. However, this is not expected to be in the immediate future.
I hope that this clarifies the situation and as advised at Steering Group meetings we will continue to actively identify and bid for further funding opportunities for Tower Hamlets Local History Library and Archive .
Judith St. John, Head of Idea Store”
The above Briefing Note is copied in its entirety. It was widely circulated (by email) in March – when Cllr Rahman was Leader. So in fact there were two sources in the “s106 pool” when Cllr Rahman was Leader and Bancroft Library was put into the pool for both.
On 24th March 2010, there was also the last Full Council Meeting under Cllr Rahman’s Leadership at which the then Lead Member for Culture, Cllr Rofique Ahmed confirmed the sec106 funds for Bancroft, saying:
“The first phase of renovation of Bancroft Local History and Archives begins on site shortly and S106 funding has been identified for a further two phases, including roof works.”
Councillor Ahmed subsequently signed the Rich Mix Objection letter on 2nd August, along with 13 other Councillors, including Councillor Lutfur Rahman.
Sorry this is long but it fully answers Ted’s enquiry and Cllr Abbas’ statement on the (diverted) sec106 money for Bancroft Library. For anyone interested in even more facts/proof on the sec106 money, here’s some:
1.) In February this year, at a Bancroft Library Steering Group Meeting, members were advised by Judith St John (Head of Idea Stores and Libraries) that she and Tamsin Bookey (Heritage Manager) were making a PCOP (Planning Contributions Overview Panel) Application for this s106 money. The members were asked to agree to the roof being fixed for £323,000 (as opposed the additional strong room as that would be too expensive at £700,000 and the officers wanted to apply to the Heritage Lottery Fund for that work.) The members agreed to the roof works. It was also impressed upon members of the Steering Group that the Heritage Lottery Fund would not fund any roof mending and the leaking roofs would have to be fixed before any application to the HLF.
2.) Members (in a non-Steering Group meeting) with Judith St John and Heather Bonfield on May 18 2010, were updated by Ms Bonfield that the £350,000 for the roofs at Bancroft from the sec106 Agreement for PA/07/02193 was imminent. This meeting was not minuted by LBTH.